Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyers refer Brittany Higgins to the police over TV speech

Bruce Lehrmann’s legal team have referred Brittany Higgins to police over whether her emotional speech after the trial was aborted constitutes contempt of court.

Ms Higgins spoke to reporters outside the ACT Supreme Court on Thursday morning after the jury was discharged, because one brought prohibited documents into the jury room. 

Despite being broadcast on live TV, much of Ms Higgins’ speech could not be published in print for legal reasons. 

In a statement, Mr Lehrmann’s defence barrister Steve Whybrow confirmed he had referred the matter to police.

‘When we left court this morning, I indicated to the gathered media that given this matter was ongoing and a date of 20 February 2023 had been fixed for any retrial, it would be both inappropriate and irresponsible to make any further comment at this stage,’ he said.

Ms Higgins is seen leaving court with members of her legal team after the trial was aborted 

Brittany Higgins fought back tears as she gave an emotional speech outside the ACT Supreme Court on Thursday 

‘I understand the complainant and other members of her support team were all seated in court this morning when the Chief Justice discharged the jury and made strong comments about people making statements or comments that could prejudice a fair 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.

‘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.

Mr Whybrow said neither Mr Lehrmann nor his lawyers will be making any further comment on the matter at this stage.

Mr Lehrmann’s team guides him as they walk past media waiting outside court 

Chief Justice Lucy McCallum on Thursday announced the trial had been abandoned after a cleaner found an academic research report on sexual assault in the jury room. 

Lehrmann, who has pleaded not guilty to allegedly raping Ms Higgins in Parliament House on a drunk night out in March 2019, will now likely face a retrial early next year. 

Fighting back tears, Ms Higgins gave an emotionally charged speech to reporters outside court where she described the justice system as ‘asymmetrical’.

‘I chose to speak up…to speak up and share my experiences with others,’ she said. 

‘I never fully understood the asymmetry of the criminal justice system, but now I do.’

Ms Higgins said she was required to undergo intense questioning and faced public scrutiny in court, while her alleged rapist was not required to give evidence.

While she was cross-examined at length, Ms Higgins said Mr Lehrmann was ‘afforded the choice’ of remaining silent, and ‘sat with his head down in a notebook’.

Bruce Lehrmann leaves the ACT Supreme Court on Thursday with his legal team after his trial was aborted 

‘He never faced one question about his story and the criminal charges,’ she said. 

‘I was required to surrender my telephones, my pass words, messages, photos and my data to him.

She claimed: ‘My life has been publicly scrutinised, open for the world to see. His was not.’ 

Ms Higgins said the hearing had been dubbed the ‘Higgins trial’ in the media over the past few weeks but she ‘doesn’t blame’ publications.

She noted that friends and relatives of the alleged victim in criminal trials are called to the witness stand while the accused has the legal right ‘to say absolutely nothing’. 

Mr Lehrmann was earlier seen leaving court with his lawyer. He did not speak to the awaiting media scrum as he walked out. 

The sensational end to the four-week trial came one what should have been the jury’s seventh day of deliberations. 

Mr Lehrmann’s legal team have confirmed they are seeking advice as to whether Ms Higgins’ speech was in contempt of the court 

In giving her reasons for the mistrial, Justice McCallum said one of the sheriff’s officers had been tidying up as usual after Wednesday’s proceedings when they accidentally bumped one of the juror’s document folders onto the floor. 

When the officer picked it up, they found what was later confirmed to be an academic research paper about sexual assault. 

Mr Lehrmann had pleaded not guilty to one count of sexual intercourse without consent.

Handing down her judgment, Justice McCallum said: ‘It has come to my attention that one of you has undertaken research in relation to issues in the case and that material has entered the jury room which ought not to have. 

‘I have heard an explanation and it may be that no harm has been done but that is not a risk I can take. I have discharged that juror and I have to discharge you all.

Brittany Higgins held hands with her boyfriend David Sharaz as she arrived at the ACT Supreme Court on Thursday – not knowing what was about to occur

‘Can I please convey to you my sincerest gratitude to the hard work you’ve done in this trial.

‘With those remarks, you’re discharged and you are free to leave.’

Justice McCallum described the outcome as ‘unexpected and unfortunate’ and said she gave the just ‘at least 17 warnings’ about the requirements during the proceedings.  

The case is now likely to be re-tried next year, with Justice McCallum flagging the trial will be relisted for February 20, 2023. 

Prosecutor Skye Jerome tried to impose bail conditions on Mr Lehrmann not to contact Ms Higgins, her parents, or David Sharaz. 

He must also tell police where he is living, and notify them of any residential changes.

Ms Jerome requested he surrender his passport, which defence lawyer Steven Whybrow objected to.

Bruce Lehrmann arrives at the ACT Supreme Court in Canberra, Thursday, October 27

Justice McCallum sided with the defence and granted Mr Lehrmann bail, citing the likelihood the new trial would not commence for around four months. 

Rather that confiscating his passport, Justice McCallum ordered he submit any impending international itineraries to police two weeks in advance.  

Justice McCallum reminded the court of the importance of ensuring the accused is given a fair trial. 

‘As I’ve said in court many times, the accused is just that. He is a person who stands accused and may never be convicted of a criminal offence,’ she said.

‘The fairness of his trial will be impaired or at risk if people continue to report about this case with the frequency that has been reported in this trial.

‘After today, reporting of the matter should fall silent so the accused can have a fair trial and so Ms Higgins can have some respite from the intense glare of the media that has been pervasive throughout this trial.’

Justice McCallum praised the legal personnel for their work during their case, saying they all ‘behaved in an exemplary way’.

‘Thank you all for the manner in which you have conducted this trial,’ she said.