‘So gross, so sick’: Secret recording of Brittany Higgins and Michaelia Cash
Brittany Higgins covertly recorded Liberal frontbencher Michaelia Cash in 2021, telling her she felt “so gross and sick” over her alleged rape.
Brittany Higgins covertly recorded Liberal frontbencher Michaelia Cash on February 5, 2021, telling her she felt “so gross and so sick” over her alleged rape.
Secret recordings that Ms Higgins made of her conversations with chief of staff Daniel Try and Senator Cash in early 2021 were played to the Federal Court on Tuesday.
In the discussions, the senator calls Ms Higgins “honey” and states she did not know of the alleged rape until 2021. She later tells her to “go hug your cat.”
“Britt, we didn’t know anything. You should have told us,‘’ Senator Cash says.
Ms Higgins has disputed in her evidence given to the court that Senator Cash didn’t know about the allegation and accused her former boss of lying.
In the recording, Senator Cash also suggests taking the issue to Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s top political adviser Yaron Finkelstein - with Ms Higgins’ permission.
Senator Cash then says: “Britt, are you happy... I want to talk off the record completely to Yaron, who’s totally separate from this. He had nothing to do with it at the time, but he is now the person that we need to go to. Are you happy that I do that?”
Ms Higgins, tells her “please don’t let this happen to anyone else” and Senator Cash says she will support her “every step of the way to exit gracefully”.
She also praises her work in the office.
“You are outstanding Britt. You are fabulous.”
Early in the discussion, Mr Try and Senator Cash suggest she can do her job from the Gold Coast and never deal with “another journalist again.”
At the time, in early 2021, Ms Higgins had handed her notice in but the Morrison Government was unaware she was planning to go public with her story.
Senator Cash asked “can we put something to you?”, to which Ms Higgins replied: “Yeah”.
Senator Cash then says, “an offer?”, with Ms Higgins repying “sure”.
“If we relocated your position to Brisbane, so you never had to come back to Canberra again,” the senator said.
There is then some crosstalk, and the word “no” is said.
Ms Higgins then responds: “It’s very kind. No, honestly, I just don’t think I can be connected to politics. I can’t even be connected to anything that happened. It was just. I can’t even explain to you how difficult it was.“
Ms Higgins has previously described the conversation as “the weirdest call of her life”, because she believes that Senator Cash knew in 2019.
The former Liberal staffer then recounts the allegations in detail to Senator Cash.
“I just remember, the last thing I remember was passing out on the couch. And then I remember him assaulting me and that’s the next thing I sort of remember, and I had a struggle with him and he wouldn’t stop. And then he left and I couldn’t get up off the couch,’’ she said.
“And so I was there until the next day. And then apparently another ministerial security guard person found me during their sweeps because they thought it was weird that someone came in and never went out. And I was in fear of my job.”
Senator Cash then asks: “Was that in Linda’s office?”, to which Ms Higgins replies “yeah”.
The senator gave evidence in the criminal trial that she did not know of the alleged rape until February 2021, agreeing it would be “political suicide” to have covered it up
In the covert recording, Senator Cash also says she will support Ms Higgins if she wants to go to the police.
Mr Try says: “If you want to go...”
To which Senator Cash says: “We’ll go with you, Britt, we will do anything we can to support you.”
Mr Try then says: “I think we’ve said this a few times, if you want to go. Absolutely.”
Senator Cash then replies: “Yeah, we will do... Please know that Daniel and I are here to support you.”
Later, Mr Try suggests Bruce Lehrmann wasn’t a senior staffer until recently.
“Brittany, this guy was like a receptionist for (Attorney-General George) Brandis,’’ he says.
Daniel Try recording
In another recording a week earlier, Mr Try refers to “Bruce” by name and Ms Higgins refers to an “assault.”
A tearful Ms Higgins complains to her chief of staff Daniel Try that the incident was handled “weirdly” but she says she has no complaints about how the issue was being handled in Senator Cash’s office.
“I’ve been having PTSD type panic attacks,’’ she said.
“I think it sort of started off, with the Four Corners thing, just sort of like, yeah, just the Bruce assault thing.”
While Ms Higgins refers to the “Bruce assault thing”, Mr Try has insisted he never knew of the rape allegation when questions were lodged in 2019 by The Canberra Times.
The reporter asked about an alleged rape in Senator Linda Reynolds office but did not name Ms Higgins as an alleged victim or Mr Lehrmann.
“I’ve got a new psychiatrist that that helps me. It was really difficult to verbalise it to someone,’’ Ms Higgins said.
Mr Try mentions “Bruce” by name and discusses whether he has a security pass at Parliament House. But he says the issue hasn’t been raised since 2019.
“In terms of the journalist, there’s been absolutely nothing,’’ he said.
“I think, thankfully, in this particular circumstance, the longer time goes on, the less likely it is to be a story of interest,’’ he said.
Mr Try repeatedly asks Ms Higgins if there’s anything he or the office can do to help.
“If you want it out in the open, absolutely,’’ he said.
Wilkinson’s ‘alarm bells’ over Higgins photo
Lisa Wilkinson raised concerns about Brittany Higgins’ account that something “weird” had happened to her phone in text messages with her producer Angus Llewellyn.
The Federal Court has heard that texts between Ms Wilkinson and Mr Llewellyn subpoenaed by Bruce Lehrmann’s legal team flagged the broadcaster’s “alarm bells”.
On January 31, 2021, shortly after a five-hour recorded “pre-interview”, Ms Wilkinson wondered how Ms Higgins would still have a photo of a bruise on her leg from April 2019, when she had mentioned her phone being “wiped”.
The court heard Ms Wilkinson wanted the phone checked out.
“I need to know what Vodafone are saying about her phone going to black... how come she still has the bruise shot? I’m confused on this point,’’ she texted to her producer.
“No worries, thanks, I’ll talk to her,’’ Mr Llewllyn replied.
Mr Lehrmann’s lawyer earlier grilled the Channel 10 producer about the photo of the bruise on Brittany Higgins’ leg that she provided to The Project.
The photo was airdropped from Ms Higgins phone to the phone of The Project producer Angus Llewellyn during a pre-trial discussion in January, 2021.
It was sent after Ms Higgins claimed her phone had been “hacked” and she had lost WhatsApp messages and photographs.
“Did it occur to you at this point how this photo had somehow survived the complete death of her phone?” Mr Lehrmann’s lawyer Matthew Richardson SC asked.
“When she had other screenshots of the WhatsApp messages?”
“No, it didn’t occur to me,” Mr Llewellyn replied.
“You didn’t think it was strange that the one SMS message with (former chief-of-staff) Fiona Brown had survived along with the photograph of this bruise when she said that otherwise all of her photos had gone when her phone completely died. And in the previous week?”
“No I didn’t, because if you look at the timeline, there’s plenty of different photos and contexts and different things,” Mr Llewellyn replied.
“Did it occur to you that it might be important to check when this photograph was taken?”
Mr Richardson said.
“Did you ask to check the metadata?”
“Look, it’s the photograph. I had no reason to believe that it wasn’t anything other than what Miss Higgins told me it was,” Mr Llewellyn said.
Mr Richardson SC also grilled Mr Llewellyn on the fact that the photograph Ms Higgins airdropped to him was dated 8:45am, January 27, 2021.
An exhibit of this photograph has been published by the Federal Court.
Mr Llewellyn said that as he understood it, the photograph was dated that way because Ms Higgins had taken a screenshot on that morning of the image.
But Ms Wilkinson was concerned about Ms Higgins’ fears that the government had wiped her phone and it had “alarm bells ringing”.
She wanted to ensure the phone and the claim were checked before the interview.
“I thought that sounded fanciful,’’ Mr Llewllyn told the court.
“So you thought her idea, Ms Higgins idea about the remote wiping of phones was fanciful. Is that correct?’’ Mr Richardson said.
“I didn’t think the government was going to do it. I thought it was a stuff up not a hack,’’ the producer replied.
But Mr Richardson SC said the claim was “so silly” and, as the producer had himself stated, it raised unanswerable questions.
“You decided, didn’t you, to just bury this issue,” Mr Richardson SC asked.
Mr Llewellyn denied this.
“The very existence of that photograph was contrary to the narrative about a destroyed phone that she was advancing,” Mr Richardson said.
Mr Richardson SC then put a series of propositions to the producer about the bruise photo.
“I’m putting to you, Mr Llewellyn, that you never asked to see an original,” he said.
“You didn’t try to check the metadata? You actually put this photograph to air?”
Mr Llewelyn said he did so because “we had a statutory declaration”.
“I want to suggest that you failed in your obligation to check the credibility of the source, and her evidence in respect of this photograph,” Mr Richardson said.
Mr Llewellyn said he did not agree with this proposition.
Earlier, Mr Richardson asked, “You knew, didn’t you, Ms Higgins was putting forth this photograph as contemporaneous physical evidence of her assault, didn’t you?”
“This is the first conversation we’ve had. This is not a police interview, it’s just a conversation in a hotel room,” Mr Llewellyn said.
“It didn’t occur to you to ask at this point how this photo had somehow survived the complete death of her phone where she had no other screenshots or WhatsApp messages?” Mr Richardson asked.
“No, it didn’t occur to me,” Mr Llewellyn said.
“And you didn’t ask, did you, how it was that that material had survived and everything else had gone?” Mr Richardson said.
“I had no reason to think anything other than what Ms Higgins was telling me was her recollection, and this was a contemporaneous photo,” Mr Llewellyn responded.
“Did you ask to see the original?” Mr Richardson asked.
“I presumed that was the original,” Mr Llewellyn said.
“Did you ask to check the metadata?” Mr Richardson said.
“No. We had Ms Higgins sign a statutory declaration to say that this was contemporaneous. So that is what we did,” Mr Llewellyn said.
Mr Richarson SC also grilled Mr Llewellyn on Ms Higgins’ claim that there was a powerful Liberal Party staff committee known as the star chamber that included Ms Higgins’ former chief of staff Fiona Brown that had power over her employment.
“I want to suggest it was an allegation so implausible that it raises real questions about the reliability of the person making it,” Mr Richardson said.
Producer denies he “coordinated” visit to cops
Ten producer Andrew Llewellyn denied he had “coordinated” a visit between Brittany Higgins and the police to ensure the police complaint was progressing before the story aired.
According to texts read out in court, David Sharaz texted Mr Llewellyn on February 5, and asked: “Is the police the last thing you need from B? This is all getting a bit much for her.”
But Mr Llewellyn denied asking her to do this for The Project.
“From my recollection, there was no need, no essential step, that a police investigation needed to be happening for the story,’’ he said.
Mr Llewellyn said he was hoping to get confirmation that an earlier investigation had occurred.
The Federal Court has previously heard Ms Higgins asked for the police brief on her investigation during this meeting with police. It occurred a week before the story aired.
“Did it occur to you that it was inappropriate for a journalist to be saying to a subject that you need to go to the police because it suits the timetable of our broadcast plan,” Mr Richardson said.
“It was handled very sensitively so now I don’t just don’t agree that it was inappropriate,” Mr Llewellyn said.
“I mean it’s definitely helpful to have confirmation that an investigation of a very serious allegation happened that goes to the gravity of a serious allegation that we’re hearing.”
Secret Cash tape
The Ten producer was also grilled on secretly recorded conversations that Brittany Higgins recorded in a ministerial office of her discussion with Michaelia Cash and her chief of staff Daniel Try.
During her criminal trial, Ms Higgins confirmed she had recorded the call with Ms Cash without her knowledge and described it as “the weirdest call of my life”.
Mr Llewellyn said Ms Higgins had sent him the recording and he had listened to it but he did not use it as he was concerned it was illegally recorded.
“Well, I’m not going to use illegally recorded audio,’’ he said.
Higgins, Sharaz believed government had “hacked her phone”
Earlier, Mr Llewellyn was grilled on a five-hour recording of Lisa Wilkinson and Brittany Higgins and whether or not the Liberal staffer believed the government had “hacked her phone”.
The pre-interview was not the broadcast interview but an earlier discussion conducted between Ms Higgins, her fiance David Sharaz, Ms Wilkinson and Mr Llewellyn.
Ms Higgins initially suggested her phone had been “wiped” as she prepared to go public with her story and she had lost WhatsApp records and photographs.
“And that night, my phone completely died, and I was like, that’s fine,” Ms Higgins said on the 10 recording.
“I’ve got another device, I’ll just back it up, and all my WhatsApps are gone. All my conversations were gone, all my photos were gone. Which was weird.”
Mr Llewellyn was also asked about notes from a conversation with Ms Wilkinson which suggested Ms Higgins believed that “software” was on her phone. She also suggested she might visit Vodafone, her telecommunication provider, to check.
“Is it fair to say that what Ms Wilkinson was saying to you was that Ms Higgins had told her that she had had a blank when retrieving messages after software had been put on her phone by either the (Michaelia) Cash or the (Linda) Reynolds office?,” Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson SC asked.
Mr Llewellyn said he formed the early view it was more likely to be operator error and “a stuff up” between phones and backing things up.
“They were really suggesting, both Ms Higgins and Mr Sharaz, that the government had hacked her phone,” Mr Llewellyn said.
Mr Llewellyn said he left the claim out of the story because he had “no proof” of any phone hacking.
Bombshell recording of Higgins’ lawyer
Bruce Lehrmann’s barrister Steve Whybrow will subpoeana Sky News for the bombshell tape of Brittany Higgins’ lawyer discussing her cross examination.
Ms Higgins’ lawyer Leon Zwier was secretly recorded last week at a Sydney bar discussing with her fiancee David Sharaz how she could answer cross examination questions about her secret $2.4 million payout.
Justice Michael Lee confirmed on Tuesday morning that he had received notification that Bruce Lehrmann’s legal team planned to seek a copy of the audio published by the media outlet of the conversation.
However, he also indicated there may be legal arguments under the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 with regard to whether or not the audio was legally obtained.
“There’s a prohibition, of course, on using any device to record a private conversation,’’ he said.
Mr Whybrow said he wished to issue a quick service subpoena to Sky News for a copy of the tape “before we can go anything further”.
Channel 10’s barrister Matt Collins KC and Lisa Wilkinson’s barrister Sue Chrysanthou SC both complained that Mr Whybrow had contacted Justice Lee’s chambers about the matter without informing them and Justice Lee reminded parties that he preferred all discussions to occur in open court.
Mr Zwier has strongly denied that he was coaching his client through her fiancee David Sharaz – which is strictly prohibited during cross examination.
In audio obtained by Sky News’ Sharri Markson, the pair are heard talking with Ms Higgins’ friend Emma Webster at the Park Hyatt hotel in Sydney at 9.30pm last Monday - the night before her testimony.
An unknown person sitting at a nearby table secretly recorded the conversation and it was later obtained by Sky News.
The witness was not connected with the case according to the media outlet and the group did not speak quietly enough to avoid being overheard.
The discussion caught on tape included how privilege could apply to answers given in Court and what Justice Michael Lee thought of Ms Higgins.
“She should say, privilege, your honour, I’m told by my lawyer I don’t have to discuss legal advice, that’s what she should say,‘’ Mr Zwier said at one point.
“She doesn’t have to waive legal professional privilege.
“All she has to say is I was so enraged, I was just so enraged … I didn’t know if I’d be well enough or not well enough, it was just a gut reaction.
“It’s not about money, she should just say it’s not about money.
News.com.au does not suggest that Mr Zwier intended his advice to be passed onto Ms Higgins and there is no evidence to suggest that Mr Sharaz did so.
Witnesses are given strict instructions during cross examination that they are not to discuss their evidence with any other person.
Mr Zwier told news.com.au in a statement that his remarks were not intended to be passed on to Ms Higgins.
“All my private conversations with David Sharaz and Emma Webster were on the common understanding that Brittany was under cross examination and no one was to talk with her about the substance of her evidence or the manner in which she was giving it,” he said.
Justice Lee issued a warning to Ms Higgins during her cross examination and to Bruce Lehrmann if they took a break about not discussing their evidence during cross examination.