‘Bully her to death’: Linda Reynolds’s shock claim on death of Labor’s Kimberley Kitching as during Brittany Higgins defamation trial

Linda Reynolds has broken down on the stand during her defamation trial while recounting a shock “bullying” claim over the death of a Labor senator.

Senator Linda Reynolds is suing her former staffer Brittany Higgins for defamation. Picture: NewsWire / Sharon Smith

Senator Reynolds has begun her final day of evidence in her defamation case against Brittany Higgins.

The senator is suing Ms Higgins and her husband David Sharaz over social media posts the couple shared in 2022 and 2023.

The posts were critical of Senator Reynolds’ handling of Ms Higgins’ allegation she was raped in Parliament House in 2019 by her then-colleague Mr Lehrmann.

He was charged with rape and faced trial in 2022, but the trial was aborted due to juror misconduct.

The charge was dropped and Mr Lehrmann continues to maintain his innocence.

In the Western Australian Supreme Court on Friday, Ms Higgins’ lawyer Rachel Young SC put to the senator that she had brought defamation proceeding against other parties following Ms Higgins’ rape allegations.

Senator Linda Reynolds is continuing to give evidence in her defamation trial against Brittany Higgins. Picture: NewsWire / Emma Kirk

Senator Reynolds confirmed to Ms Young that she took action against the ACT because she was concerned about comments made by the Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold.

The senator settled with the ACT for $70,000 plus $20,000.

The senator confirmed she published a Facebook post in March this year about her action against the ACT, detailing the apology and settlement she received.

The post also said she had initiated further defamation action against other parties.

Senator Reynolds confirmed she had also taken action against Harper Collins, author Aaron Patrick, The Spectator and The Independent, that had all been settled.

SENATOR KIMBERLEY KTICHING BECAME ANGRY WITH REYNOLDS

Senator Reynolds was sobbing as she told the court she carries guilt for privately telling Labor senators what Senator Kimberley Kitching had told her about the anonymous letter.

Senator Kitching had been sent an anonymous letter containing information there had been an incident in Senator Reynolds’ office.

Senator Reynolds had told the court earlier this week that Senator Kitching told her about the letter and that Labor knew about the incident and were going to “rain hell” on her.

But Senator Kitching publicly denied having that conversation with Senator Reynolds, after she privately told Labor senators she knew.

Senator Reynolds said she now wished she had kept her confidence.

“I believe what I said to them caused them to bully her to death, I carry a lot of guilt,” she said.

“I should not have weakened and told them even in private.

“It was very clear how angry she was at me, it wasn’t just tweets, it was in parliament, it was in Question Time.”

Senator Reynolds told the court she believed it had led to Senator Kitching’s death.

Ms Young put to the senator that by privately telling Labor senators about their conversation had ultimately led to bad relationships with her colleagues and her death.

“It did,” Senator Reynolds said.

“It is widely speculated by others I am not the first to come to that conclusion.

“That is when she got angry with me.”

KNOWLEDGE OF ALLEGED SEXUAL ASSAULT

Senator Reynolds on Friday faced intense questioning about whether she knew her staffer had allegedly been sexually assaulted on the night of the security breach involving Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins accessing her office after hours.

Ms Young put to the senator that her suspicions must have been raised because Ms Higgins was found undressed and she was intoxicated.

The senator said she was not made aware of a rape allegation or that anything criminal had occurred.

She told the court she had enough experience not to jump to conclusions about what may have happened on that night.

The senator said there were many possibilities about what could have happened, and she was concerned Ms Higgins could not remember.

But she said she was comforted that Ms Higgins was going to see her doctor.

Senator Linda Reynolds (right) arrives at the Supreme Court in Perth on Friday. Picture: NewsWire / Emma Kirk

“We were happy to hear she was going to the doctor, because she could not remember,” she said.

“As her employers we are not counsellors but can provide assistance.”

The senator denied inviting Ms Higgins’ father to support her daughter at a meeting because she knew what had happened.

Senator Reynolds explained Ms Higgins was facing the prospect she could lose her job over the security breach, and had concerns about what happened on that night.

She said Ms Higgins was relatively new in her office and she thought it was a good thing to do because she knew her father was in Canberra at the time.

Ms Young asked the senator if she normally invited family members to meetings about security breaches and if she had invited Mr Lerhmann’s mother to his meeting.

MEETING WITH MS HIGGINS

Ms Young asked the senator questions about the way she handled the meeting with Ms Higgins after the alleged rape.

Senator Reynolds said there was a wide range of options drunk young people could get up to late at night and she did not jump to conclusions about what may have happened.

She told the court they discussed the security breach first, then she asked Ms Higgins about her memory and what had happened.

Ms Higgins told her she had been drunk, she was sorry and could not remember much, Senator Reynolds said.

She said she asked Ms Higgins if she had the EAP helpline number and mentioned if she did want to talk to the police, Ms Brown could take her there.

The senator denied she told Ms Higgins this was something women go through and if she was going to report the matter to police, to tell her first.

Ms Young questioned why she did not discuss the contents of the DPS report with Ms Higgins.

Brittany Higgins’ lawyer Rachael Young has grilled Senator Reynolds on Friday. Picture: NewsWire / Sharon Smith

She said it wasn’t on her mind to talk about the DPS report in that meeting and that she thought Ms Brown had discussions around what happened with Ms Higgins.

The senator said she could remember saying to Ms Higgins that she was her boss and wasn’t the right person to have discussions about intimate matters.

“I said again the AFP are far better placed to put her in touch with people who could walk her through the process to remember,” she said.

“I was saying I am not the right person, I am not a trained counsellor, I am no way skilled or experienced to have those conversations.

“I felt very strongly she should use the avenue of the police in the building to help her remember.”

The senator denied asking Ms Higgins if there was any contact or if Mr Lehrmann had touched her without consent.

“I would not dream of asking any employee those questions, I am not trained to ask those questions,” Senator Reynolds said.

“I would still do the same thing today if I had a young staff member in distress, I would refer them to a counsellor or anyone who could provide that advice.”

MEETING WITH ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Senator Reynolds said the first time she was told about an allegation of rape was at a meeting with then AFP Assistant Commissioner Leanne Close, who advised her Ms Higgins had decided to proceed with a sexual assault complaint.

The senator was questioned about notes from the assistant commissioner, which stated ‘min pointed to the couch’ and ‘found out through the DPS report.’

Questions were put to the senator that she told the assistant commissioner they had become aware of the incident on Tuesday and it happened on her couch on Saturday.

Senator Reynolds told the court that the notes from the assistant commissioner were not the entire conversation, but a summary of what had been said.

She continued denying knowing about the sexual assault before they had met.

“This is what I had been told by Assistant Commissioner Close, I was actually addressing Fiona Brown that it was on the couch,” Senator Reynolds said.

“I do not recall the assistant commissioner telling me that Ms Higgins thought she had been drugged.

“What she did say was that the appropriate actions was to allow Ms Higgins agency and we should support her with anything she needed.

“She said it was important that Brittany come to us, and that is what we did.”

PERTH TRIP

Senator Reynolds became emotional when she told the court she had not seen herself as Ms Higgins’ counsellor, but had tried to give her agency.

Senator Reynolds told the court Ms Higgins was the only staff member in her office to be given choices of where she would like to work ahead of the 2019 election campaign.

During the time in Perth, Senator Reynolds said she saw Ms Higgins often at work and did not visit with her after hours.

She told the court she had general chats with Ms Higgins but did not think it was appropriate for her to provide counselling support.

“She seemed engaged at functions and events,” she said.

“I spent quite a bit of time with her on the campaign trail as her boss.

“I was glad she was getting support from a sexual assault counselling team.”

EVIDENCE IN BRUCE LEHRMANN TRIAL

Senator Reynolds said evidence she gave in the criminal trial was based on a statement she gave to Australian Federal Police and her memory.

The senator confirmed she met with Mr Drumgold and Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Steven Whybrow in briefing sessions before the trial, and that she read her AFP statement before going into the trial to give evidence.

She said she had not reviewed a report by the Department of Parliamentary Services about the night of the security breach before going into the trial.

Ms Young put to the senator that she said in the trial she became aware of the security guards checking on Ms Higgins on the night of the security breach and her office being cleaned from an article published on news.com.au and watching The Project interview.

Brittany Higgins’ lawyers, Rachael Young and Kate Pedersen arrive at the WA Supreme Court. Picture: NewsWire / Sharon Smith

The senator said there was discussion about steam cleaning in the trial, and that when she denied knowing that her office had been cleaned, she was referring to it being steam cleaned.

The senator said perhaps she should have been more specific in her evidence about steam cleaning.

The senator said during her evidence in the criminal trial she recollected there were checks on the night of the security breach, but not necessarily that they were conducted by security guards.

The senator said she did not have a copy of the DPS report when she gave evidence, but was relying on her memory and the statement she gave the AFP.

“I was being honest about what I recollected at the time,” she said.

The trial continues.

Originally published as ‘Bully her to death’: Linda Reynolds’s shock claim on death of Labor’s Kimberley Kitching as during Brittany Higgins defamation trial