Police handling of Bruce Lehrmann, Brittany Higgins case to be probed by integrity commission

The integrity commission will examine the police investigation into Brittany Higgins’ complaint, amid revelations two investigators took stress leave due to extreme pressure.

The Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity will examine the police investigation into Brittany Higgins’ complaint after bombshell claims some police aligned themselves with Bruce Lehrmann’s defence team.

ACT Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury confirmed the referral on Friday after telling local radio the war of words was “concerning”.

He did not rule out a separate inquiry into the bitter stoush that has also included calls for the Director of Public Prosectutions Shane Drumgold to stand aside.

“I am aware the matter has been referred to Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity,” he said. “As such, it is not appropriate to comment further at this time.”

It comes amid revelations the pressure over the case was so extreme that two investigators took stress leave during the investigation as furious cops warn the current furore could put “lives at risk.”

The Australian Federal Police Association is now calling for the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold and the ACT Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury to stand aside pending an independent judicial inquiry into Operation Covina – the codename for the investigation.

It follows claims the police didn’t want Bruce Lehrmann charged and that the DPP Shane Drumgold has “smeared” the AFP, by releasing an explosive letter in which Canberra’s top prosecutor accused police of “interference in the criminal justice process” and asked police not to contact Brittany Higgins.

Mr Lehrmann, who has always maintained his innocence, pleaded not guilty to the charge and is now considering civil “legal remedies” including defamation against media outlets.

Want to stream your news? Flash lets you stream 25+ news channels in 1 place. New to Flash? Try 1 month free. Offer available for a limited time only >

The integrity commission will examine the police investigation into Brittany Higgins’ complaint. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Gary Ramage

The Australian Federal Police Association President Alex Caruana told news.com.au that the DPP needed to stand aside pending a full inquiry while claiming the letter posed a threat to police safety.

“Look, I think that the DPP should certainly stand aside during the investigation but I think the ACT Attorney-General (Shane Rattenbury) needs to stand aside,’’ he said.

“He’s been briefed just as often as the DPP. He’s the chief lawmaker in the ACT. He’s been briefed on the lack of evidence.

“It’s quite clear the judicial system is broken here in the ACT. So let’s go. Let’s have an independent inquiry. Our members, ACT police officers, get stood down when there’s an inquiry.”

The police association said police wanted a full judicial inquiry.

“The police officers in this case were hand-picked and very seasoned investigators. It wasn’t their first rodeo,’’ Mr Caruana said.

“Calling into question their integrity, and then subsequently releasing that info under freedom of information not only drags their name through the mud … it also puts at risk their personal security and safety. Organised crime gangs in Australia are very sophisticated. We have police officers currently where crooks are turning up at their house. The fact (the DPP) has done that without consulting the chief police officer or the members involved is a rookie error.”

The integrity commission probe into police comes after bombshell claims some police “aligned” themselves with Bruce Lehrmann’s defence team Picture: NCA NewsWire / Gary Ramage

News.com.au has confirmed that the police complaint includes the allegation the pressure was so extreme that more than one officer involved in the case went out on stress leave.

“There was grandstanding going on. There was pressure being applied. There was pressure from the community, the public and politicians,’’ Mr Caruana said.

“We are not suggesting a crime hasn’t been committed or has been committed. We are saying in this particular investigation, there wasn’t enough evidence to prove one way or the other. They’ve been telling the DPP that for a long time.

“In the policing world we often say there’s three sides to every story. There’s your side, there’s their side and then there’s the truth in the middle. Police find the evidence.

“Throughout the investigation, ACT police members were very upfront about the fact there were gaps in the evidence. If the evidence isn’t there, it isn’t there.”

Police also want an investigation into the fast turnaround of a freedom of information request that the DPP’s information officer approved within days to release the bombshell letter the DPP sent to the ACT’s chief police officer.

The freedom of information laws in the ACT states that the “respondent must take reasonable steps to consult with the relevant third party before deciding to give access to the information”.

Australian Federal Police Association president Alex Caruana. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Gary Ramage

In the letter Mr Drumgold, writes to the ACT police chief Neil Gaughan, after the trial was aborted following juror misconduct.

“I am of the view that at the conclusion of the trial, there should be a public enquiry into both political and police conduct in this matter,” the DPP wrote in the letter released following a freedom of information request by The Guardian over the weekend.

“There has now been over one-and-a-half years of consistent and inappropriate interference by investigators, firstly directed towards my independence with a very clear campaign to pressure me to agree with the investigators’ desire not to charge, then during the conduct of this trial itself, and finally attempting to influence any decision on a retrial.

“Then when charges resulted, the [investigators’] interests have clearly aligned with the successful defence of this matter rather than its prosecution,’’ he said.

In the DPP’s extraordinary letter, he also accuses police of “bullying” Ms Higgins and asks in the letter that police not contact Ms Higgins or other witnesses.

“This includes no further contact with defence or other prosecution witnesses, no contact with the complainant, and prohibiting attendance at court beyond formal evidence if required,” he wrote.

The letter was first obtained by The Guardian under freedom of information laws.

During the trial the tensions between the DPP and police became increasingly evident with the prosecutor telling the jury during his closing that Ms Higgins was “right to be scared” about handing her life over to police.

The letter does not suggest any complaints with the conduct of Mr Lehrmann’s defence team, only the conduct of police.

A spokesperson for ACT Policing confirmed that an “inquiry was underway in relation to this matter”.

“As such it would be inappropriate to provide any further comment in relation to any aspects surrounding this matter including commentary about the letter from the ACT DPP,” the spokesperson said.

“ACT Policing will continue to work cooperatively with the Office of DPP to ensure the safety and security of the Canberra community.”