ACT Chair Lucy McCallum concluded the case and directed the jury to ignore significant media interest in the trial for the alleged rape of Brittany Higgins.
The jury begins deliberations in the trial of Bruce Lehrmann, who is accused of raping fellow political staff and colleague Brittany Higgins in the parliament building in the early hours of March 23, 2019.
Chief Justice Lucy McCallum concluded the case and concluded her directive to the jury Wednesday afternoon, instructing them on how they should approach their task of weighing nearly three weeks of evidence heard in the ACT supreme court. He urged jurors to ignore significant media interest in the trial and reminded them that they are not "responsible in this trial for public opinion". "You're going to see the number of reporters in the courtroom every day," McCallum said. "They're practically hanging from the rafters."
He told the jury that their job was to weigh the evidence, using their common sense and life experience, something he described as "the great power of the jury system". They must then decide whether the prosecution has proven that Lehrmann raped Higgins beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury, McCallum said, were protected by anonymity and a violation of public disclosure of every aspect of their judgment.
"To put it in colloquial terms: what happens in the jury room stays in the jury room," he said.
A ballot was used to remove four of the 16 jurors who had followed the entire trial at the end of McCallum's summary. The remaining 12 jurors were told they had to return the verdict unanimously. The jury heard closing submissions from SC prosecutor Shane Drumgold and Lehrmann's adviser, Steven Whybrow, on Tuesday and Wednesday. Sign up for our free morning newsletter and evening email to get your daily news roundup. Drumgold said Lehrmann had brought Higgins back to parliament after a night of drinking in a Canberra bar because it was the best place to make him alone. He described Higgins as vulnerable and very drunk.
Prosecutors say Lehrmann then raped Higgins on the couch opposite their boss's desk, then defense industry minister Linda Reynolds, before leaving the building in a hurry, leaving Higgins in the room alone. She was found naked that morning by a parliamentary security guard, who had been sent for a welfare check after Lehrmann's departure.
Prosecutors have pointed to Higgins' numerous complaints in support of his allegations, made against friends, colleagues, family and police in the days and months following the alleged rape. It said the complaints were consistent and that Higgins "never wavered", despite the "strong political forces" that surrounded him. McCallum told the jury how they came to use such evidence, known as complaint evidence. He said the fact that the allegations had been repeated several times did not make him more reliable. Nor is it independent evidence that the alleged rape took place, as the source remains Higgins.
But the judge said it could be used to judge Higgins' consistency and credibility.
“False and inaccurate statements do not become more reliable with repetition. That said, the evidence of the complaint is capable of providing support for the crown case,” he said. “We seek consistency, jury members, as a badge of honesty. You might consider whether Higgins is consistent in the allegations that he has been sexually assaulted, despite the changing circumstances." Drumgold also accused Lehrmann of lying and provided multiple explanations for why he returned to parliament with Higgins after 1.30am.
He initially told parliamentary security he was there to pick up paperwork, before telling his boss, chief of staff Fiona Brown, he was there to drink whiskey. He then told the police he was there to pick up the keys and work on some quick questions. There is evidence that Lehrmann found Higgins attractive and had tried to kiss him on previous occasions, the court heard.
She was found naked that morning by a parliamentary security guard, who had been sent for a welfare check after Lehrmann's departure. Prosecutors have pointed to Higgins' numerous complaints in support of his allegations, made against friends, colleagues, family and police in the days and months following the alleged rape. It said the complaints were consistent and that Higgins "never wavered", despite the "strong political forces" that surrounded him.
McCallum told the jury how they came to use such evidence, known as complaint evidence. He said the fact that the allegations had been repeated several times did not make him more reliable. Nor is it independent evidence that the alleged rape took place, as the source remains Higgins.
But the judge said it could be used to judge Higgins' consistency and credibility.
“False and inaccurate statements do not become more reliable with repetition. That said, the evidence of the complaint is capable of providing support for the crown case,” he said. “We seek consistency, jury members, as a badge of honesty. You might consider whether Higgins is consistent in the allegations that he has been sexually assaulted, despite the changing circumstances."
Drumgold also accused Lehrmann of lying and provided multiple explanations for why he returned to parliament with Higgins after 1.30am. He initially told parliamentary security he was there to pick up paperwork, before telling his boss, chief of staff Fiona Brown, he was there to drink whiskey. He then told the police he was there to pick up the keys and work on some quick questions.
There is evidence that Lehrmann found Higgins attractive and had tried to kiss him on previous occasions, the court heard. "We can be comfortably satisfied without any doubts about what Brittany Higgins said happened, as she said," Drumgold said.
Lehrmann's defense said that there was no sexual intercourse – either consensual or non-consensual – after Higgins and Lehrmann returned to parliament.
He pleaded not guilty to charges of having sexual intercourse without consent.
Previously, Whybrow accused Higgins of fabricating the allegations after being found naked in the office. He said Higgins was "humiliated" and feared for his dream job.
Lehrmann did not provide evidence during the criminal trial, although he spoke with police in 2021, after the allegations were made public.
McCallum reminded the jury that he was not obliged to provide evidence at trial and had the right to remain silent. "While a defendant has the right to provide or subpoena evidence in a criminal trial, there is no obligation for him to do so," he said. "He is presumed innocent until you are convinced beyond reasonable doubt by prosecutor-led evidence that he is guilty of the offense charged."
"I direct you that the defendant's decision not to provide evidence cannot be used against him in any way during your deliberations." The defense focused its closing filing on attacking Higgins' credibility.
It said he had "made up" the evidence and had been caught doing so. That includes evidence of the dress she wore that night, which she says she kept under her bed for six months, unused and unwashed.
When a photo emerged of her wearing the dress at a birthday party for Reynolds', she admitted that she had worn it and washed it once.
Whybrow also pointed to Higgins' claim that he had gone to a doctor in southern Canberra in the weeks following the alleged rape. There is no evidence that he has done so.
It also raised doubts about the photo showing the bruises on Higgins' leg, which he said was taken after the alleged rape. The court heard there were no traces of photos on Higgins' cell phone prior to 2021 and that he did not mention any bruising to police in 2019.
"He's caught," said Whybrow. "Someone else came and checked the receipt and there is no evidence of this." The defense alleges Higgins initially dropped his complaint with police in 2019 when he realized his job was safe, before a book deal with a $325,000 down payment in 2021 motivated him to start over. Whybrow said he did not need to prove why Higgins made the false complaint, reminding the jury that Lehrmann was presumed innocent.