Bruce Lehrmann jury can’t agree on rape verdict

The jury deciding the fate of the man accused of raping Brittany Higgins will continue its deliberations after telling the judge it was unable to reach a unanimous verdict.

Bruce Lehrmann outside the ACT Supreme Court in Canberra. Picture: Gary Ramage

The jury deciding the fate of the man accused of raping former ministerial staffer Brittany Higgins will continue its deliberations after telling the judge it was unable to reach a unanimous verdict in the high-profile case.

At 2.50pm on Tuesday, ACT Chief Justice Lucy McCallum notified all parties that court was reconvening.

Within minutes Mr Lehrmann, flanked by his legal team, returned to the courtroom to find out whether the jury had reached its verdict on whether he was guilty of sexual intercourse without consent, and recklessness towards whether Ms Higgins was consenting.

Mr Lehrmann – wearing a navy suit, gold watch and brown RM Williams – sat on a rust-coloured seat to the right of his counsel with his gaze fixed on the judge. The sound of furious typing could be heard as Justice McCallum spoke.

Justice McCallum revealed that she had received a note from jurors stating that “we are unable to agree” on what must be – by law – a unanimous verdict.

Ultimately, Justice McCallum told the jurors, she would only discharge them if she was satisfied there was no likelihood of them agreeing on a verdict.

“You have told me in a note that you are unable to reach a unanimous verdict,” she said.

“I have the power to discharge you from giving a verdict but I should only do that if I‘m satisfied after examining one or more of you that you are not likely to agree and that means that there’s no likelihood of genuine agreement after any further deliberation.”

Justice McCallum said judges were usually reluctant to discharge a jury because experience has shown her that juries can often agree if given more time to consider and discuss the issues.

“But if after calmly considering the evidence and listening to the opinions of other jurors, you cannot honestly agree with the conclusions of other jurors, you must give effect to your own view of the evidence,” she said.“You also have a duty to listen carefully and objectively to the views of each and every one of your fellow jurors.

“You are all equals in the jury room. You should calmly weigh up one another‘s opinions about the evidence and test them by discussion.”

She told the conflicted jurors that it did not matter if they did not agree as to “why that particular verdict should be given” and that it was acceptable that they “may take different paths to a unanimous decision”.

“However, experience has shown that often juries are able to agree in the end if they are given more time to consider and discuss the evidence,” she said. “So, in the light of what I have already said, I ask you to retire, again, to see whether you can reach a verdict in this trial.”

Ms Higgins alleges Mr Lehrmann raped her inside Senator Linda Reynolds’ office at Parliament House in March 2019. The 27-year-old was last year charged with sexual intercourse without consent and has pleaded not guilty. He also denies that any form of sexual activity took place.

Just minutes after returning to the jury room yesterday, the group sent another note to the judge. When proceedings reconvened five minutes later, Justice McCallum said the jurors had indicated they “want to go home and come back fresh tomorrow”.

Former Liberal staffer Bittany Higgins (left).