Shane Drumgold’s bizarre CCTV claim causes rift with police investigating Brittany Higgins rape allegation
A serious rift developed between Shane Drumgold and police following the DPP’s allegation of ‘missing’ CCTV footage of Brittany Higgins and Bruce Lehrmann.
A bizarre allegation of “disappeared” CCTV footage showing Brittany Higgins and Bruce Lehrmann at Parliament House on the night of her alleged rape caused a serious rift between the chief prosecutor and police investigating Brittany Higgins’ rape allegation.
The Australian understands police were furious that ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold seemed to be suggesting they had deliberately destroyed or deleted video that could have been used in Mr Lehrmann’s rape trial.
Mr Drumgold’s co-counsel, Skye Jerome, told investigators she hoped “nothing unlawful” had happened to the footage.
The police were certain the footage never existed, but Mr Drumgold was insistent that he had personally watched it on a USB drive provided by police but then returned to them.
In a submission to the Sofronoff Inquiry, Mr Drumgold says that in the footage he recalls “Ms Higgins could be seen swaying behind his right shoulder. She moved her right hand to a wall as if to stabilise herself.”
In a separate submission to the Inquiry, Ms Jerome also says she “was sure” she saw the footage, although they watched it on separate occasions.
Ms Jerome says she recalled a woman and a man standing at a gate with a buzzer and walked through the gate.
Her account of what she saw has been partially redacted by the Inquiry.
“I recall that the omitted CCTV footage depicted Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann [redacted] at APH (Australian Parliament House). I recall that Mr Lehrmann stood in front of Ms Higgins who was a little unsteady/shifted her body weight. I recall that I briefly saw the pair [redacted].
If it existed, the footage would have countered the view of police that Ms Higgins’ was not as heavily intoxicated – “10/10 drunk” – as she had claimed.
Ms Jerome says in her statement that police had shown her other CCTV footage and “focused their observations of a sober woman entering Parliament House”.
A clearly annoyed Mr Drumgold complained that the missing footage, although not crucial to the case, would have formed part of the trial brief because it was material to a fact in issue.
Mr Drumgold told the Inquiry on Thursday that he did not think the footage was deliberately deleted.
But that was not the impression of police at the time and the insinuation caused a further breakdown in the already fraught relationship between the investigation team and the DPP.
Police regarded the claim as baseless.
Mr Drumgold said he had sat down in June 2021 going through all the CCTV evidence, which was spread throughout a large number of individual files.
He had plugged the portable USB hard drive directly into a computer, but the drive was locked in such a way that he could not download it.
Mr Drumgold was certain he saw the footage of Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann but when he viewed a compilation of the CCTV evidence in April 2022, the footage was gone.
“I was not able to find the missing footage and formed the view that it should be obtained and included in the trial brief.”
The AFP analysed the USB drive but found nothing.
Ms Jerome asked the AFP team to provide a statement from the Digital Forensic Team who examined the hard drive.
The forensic team said they were unable to fully recover what was on the hard drive as it had been used since it was returned.
Ms Jerome says one of the officers asked her if she suspected something “unlawful” had occurred with the footage.
“I replied that I simply did not know the answer to that question and that I hoped not,” she said in a statement to the Inquiry.
The Parliament House security system, which had quarantined some CCTV footage, did not have the footage in its master copy.
In an email to Ms Jerome, one of the police officers, Det Sgt Fleming was adamant that police had not “misplaced, lost, removed, concealed or deleted the footage”.
Det Sgt Fleming said he had spoken to both police officers who had been responsible for collecting and handling the footage.
“They have both worked extremely hard on the investigation under a high degree of pressure and scrutiny, and having worked with them, I hold them and their level of dedication and integrity in high regard. Any implied thought which suggests that footage has been lost by police should therefore be dismissed.”
If the missing footage existed, it was never recovered. But ill feeling over the mystery would further poison the relationship between the two agencies for the duration of the case and after the trial was aborted. That mistrust has been vented during Mr Drumgold’s evidence to the Inquiry this week where he said, at lowest, police behaviour was due to a “skills deficit”.
More Coverage
Greens mine climate action as price of power
Adam Bandt has unveiled the last of his key demands for Labor to secure the Greens’ support in a hung parliament.
Boost for lymphoma fight on home front
Lorna Hawkey, 84, has spent almost 30 years fighting blood cancer. Valuing independence above all else, she praised a newly subsidised at-home treatment.