Major decision in Brittany Higgins rape case handed down

Brittany Higgins’ case against her accused rapist stayed after accused Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyers pointed to Google searches of speech.

Brittany Higgins’ case against her accused rapist has been delayed because of the spike in publicity prompted by Channel 10 journalist Lisa Wilkinson’s Logie award acceptance speech, where she made reference to the allegations.

Lawyers for the accused, Bruce Lehrmann, argued the case was prejudiced after Ms Wilkinson’s speech and the following public interest. They pointed out Ms Wilkinson’s speech was searched for on Google more than 800,000 times on Monday alone.

The trial was due to start on Monday June 27, but has now been stayed until later this year.

Lehrmann has pleaded not guilty and denies the allegations.

ACT Supreme Court Chief Justice Lucy McCallum made the judgement “regrettably and with gritted teeth”, noting the “corrosive effect” a delay would have on the course of justice.

“The recent publicity does in my view change the landscape because of its immediacy, its intensity and its capacity to obliterate the important distinctions between an allegation that remains untested at law, and one that has been accepted by a jury giving a true verdict according to the evidence in accordance with the respective oaths or affirmations,” Ms McCallum said.

“I have concluded that the trial date of 27 June, towards which the parties have been carefully steering, must be vacated.

“I’m not in a position to say at this stage how long that should be for, I do want this matter to be heard this year.”

Ms McCallum said the trial of the allegation had occurred not in the appropriate “constitutional established forum”, but in the media.

“Your honour, this speech did not need to be made,” defence barrister Steve Whybrow said on Tuesday.

In delivering her judgment, ACT Chief Justice Lucy McCallum said it was “through gritted teeth” she ruled the trial date would need to be vacated.

“Unfortunately, however, the recent publicity does in my view, change the landscape because of its immediacy, its intensity and its capacity to obliterate the important distinction between an allegation that remains untested at law,” she said.

Justice McCallam said she wanted the trial to be heard this year but she was “not in a position to say” when it could go ahead.

Earlier, Justice McCallum said she had made a mistake in not prohibiting publication around the case.

She slammed the media for its reporting of Ms Wilkinson’s speech, and an interview with Jonesy & Amanda on radio, and warned the distinction between allegation and guilt had been “obliterated”.

A judge in the case involving Brittany Higgins has hit out at the media.

“I trusted the press … you were right and I was wrong,” she told the court.

According to the defence counsel, the concern was Ms Wilkinson’s speech – so close to the trial – would impact the impartiality of the jury.

“What concerns me most about this recent round is that the distinction between an allegation and a finding of guilt has been completely obliterated in the discussion on Sunday and Monday,’’ Justice McCallum said.

“The implicit premise of (Lisa Wilkinson’s speech) is to celebrate the truthfulness of the story she exposed.”

She added the unease around the “seamless elision” of the stories of Grace Tame, whose abuser was convicted and served a prison sentence”, and Ms Higgins, whose allegation had not yet been tested in a criminal trial.

“Ms Higgins is treated as being in the same category. She’s not.”

The judge said she was wrong to trust the media.

“She may be – it may be just a temporal difference, and she can speak the same way as Grace Tame. But at the moment her allegation is not in that category.”

The court also heard Ms Wilkinson would be a witness at the trial.

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold said Ms Wilkinson’s speech was a “regurgitation of emotion” and was not a significant departure from her previous comments.

“Might not good journalism include being mindful of the impact of your reporting on criminal proceedings, and remembering to insert the magic word alleged,” Justice McCallum responded.

Mr Drumgold argued the trial did not need to be delayed as the jury could be directed to put her comments, and the media surrounding it, out of their mind.

A new trial date has not yet been set.