Brittany Higgins: Lehrmann lawyers refer speech to AFP as rape trial is aborted over juror misconduct

Lawyers for Bruce Lehrmann act on Brittany Higgins’ speech outside court after the jury in his rape trial was discharged, and a new trial date set, due to juror misconduct.

Rape accused Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyers have referred an emotional speech given by Brittany Higgins outside the ACT Supreme Court to the Australian Federal Police and the court.

The trial of former Liberal staffer Mr Lehrmann, accused of raping his colleague Ms Higgins at Parliament House more than three a half years ago, was today aborted and the jury discharged after a juror was found to have engaged in misconduct.

Barrister Steven Whybrow said he understood Ms Higgins and her team were in court when Chief Justice Lucy McCallum discharged the jury and warned those present about making comments or statements that could prejudice the next trial.

“Notwithstanding Her Honour’s admonition, the complainant proceeded to give what appears to have been a pre-prepared speech to the media outside the Court,” he said.

“We have brought these comments to the attention of the Court and the Australian Federal Police, and it is not appropriate for Mr Lehrmann or his lawyers to make any comment as to whether the complainant’s statements might amount to a contempt of court or offences against the ACT Criminal Code.

“I urge all media to show restraint in reporting this matter and in particular in republishing the statements made by the complainant.

“Neither Mr Lehrmann nor his lawyers will be making any further comment on this matter at this stage.”

Mr Whybrow said when he left court, he indicated to the media that it was inappropriate and irresponsible to comment because the date of the retrial had been fixed for February 20 next year.

The AFP declined to comment.

Juror misconduct

Chief Justice Lucy McCallum told the court on Thursday morning that the trial would be aborted after the juror misconduct had emerged.

“It has come to my attention that contrary to directions I’ve given you have undertaken research into the case,” Chief Justice McCallum said.

“That information has made its way into the jury when it ought not to have.

“It may be that no harm has been done but that is not a risk I can take.”

The court heard this prohibited research was uncovered when one of the court officers, who was cleaning the jury room, accidentally bumped one of the juror’s folders onto the floor.

When the officer picked up the folder, which had a clear plastic front, he noticed part of a title of an academic research paper into sexual assault sticking out of the folder.

Justice McCallum said that her associates then identified the article in question.

“The identity of the paper found by my associates has been confirmed in evidence this morning by the juror in question,” she said.

“The subject matter of the paper is indeed sexual assault.

“The juror this morning gave an explanation that the document had not been used or relied upon by any juror.”

However Justice McCallum said she was sceptical about that evidence. “During the course of the trial ... I must have given the jury at least 17 warnings and prohibitions on undertaking any research of their own.

“This is an unexpected and unfortunate outcome in this trial,” she said.

The jury had been deliberating for five days but the trial has now been aborted. A new trial will begin on February 20, 2023.

Ms Higgins was present in the courtroom on Thursday.

Brittany Higgins with her partner David Sharaz arrived at court on Thursday. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Gary Ramage

Justice McCallum reiterated that “the accused is just that.”

“The fairness of his trial will undoubtedly be impaired or at risk if people continue to report about this case with the frequency that has occurred during this trial or at all,” she said.

“I expect after reporting the outcome of today that reporting the matter should fall silent so that the accused can have a fair trial and so that Ms Higgins can have some respite from the intense glare of the media that has been pervasive throughout this trial.

“Any reporting that prejudices the accused right to a fair trial may amount to contempt of court.”

Prosecution lawyer Skye Jerome sought conditions to be imposed on Mr Lehrmann including him surrendering his passport, providing the AFP with his residential address and not contacting the complainant or witnesses.

Mr Whybrow said his client has no intention to contact those people.

He also is not a flight risk and “it is neither necessary nor appropriate to impose those conditions”,” he said.

Justice McCallum granted bail to the accused on the following conditions:

1. He appear for a new trial on February 20, 2023.

2. He is not to contact Ms Higgins, her partner or her parents.

3. To provide the AFP with his residential address and notify them of any changes with at least 48 hours notice.

4. If he plans to leave Australia to provide his proposed itinerary to the AFP at least two weeks before his proposed departure date.

Mr Lehrmann’s defence barrister Steven Whybrow briefly addressed the media outside of the court building. “Everyone is disappointed by what’s happened but it would be inappropriate and irresponsible to say anything at this stage,” he said.

Expected six-week trial fast-tracked

The matter, heard in the ACT Supreme Court before Chief Justice Lucy McCallum, was expected to run for at least a month but was fast-tracked after more than 20 prosecution witnesses were dropped in the final week.

Ms Higgins said that she was raped by Mr Lehrmann in a senior minister’s office at Parliament House in the early hours of March 23, 2019.

The 27-year-old said the assault occurred in the office of their boss at the time, then-defence industry minister Linda Reynolds, after a night out drinking with colleagues in Canberra shortly before the 2019 election.

Mr Lehrmann was fired days after the pair’s after-hours visit to their workplace due to the security breach.

ACT Chief Justice Lucy McCallum. Picture: Canberra Times

In February 2021, Ms Higgins went public with her allegations that she had left a work function with Mr Lehrmann in a taxi – believing they would both be dropped at their respective homes – but she was instead taken to Parliament House where she was sexually assaulted.

She told media outlets at the time that she “woke up mid-rape essentially” on the minister’s couch sometime after security guards had let the pair into the building.

After going public, Ms Higgins made a formal complaint to police and called for the perpetrator to “face the full force of the law”.

Mr Lehrmann, 27, pleaded not guilty to having sexual intercourse with Ms Higgins without her consent and being reckless as to whether she had consented.

Mr Lehrmann has always denied that any sexual activity took place at all.

Liberal Senator Linda Reynolds leaves the ACT Supreme Court in Canberra.

Ms Higgins came under intense scrutiny from defence barrister Steven Whybrow during multiple days of cross-examination.

Mr Whybrow accused Ms Higgins of making up the rape allegation because she was embarrassed and scared that she too would lose her “dream job”.

The Canberra-based barrister also suggested to Ms Higgins that she did not visit a doctor in the days after the sexual assault because it never happened.

Ms Higgins angrily rejected those propositions saying she would not make up a rape allegation.

About 50 prosecution witnesses were expected to be called to give evidence but in the end, the Crown only called 30.