Brittany Higgins’ birthmark photo was challenged in court during Bruce Lehrman’s trial

Brittany Higgins told the court she assumed the photo of the bruise on her leg was from an alleged sexual assault she suffered.

In cross-examining Ms. Higgins on Friday, Bruce Lehrman’s attorney, Steve Whybrow, said that until 2021, when she offered it to journalists, no reference to a photo of a bruise found on her phone device inspection was made. I suggested to her that she didn’t.

“Do you think the pictures of the bruises and your claim that they were injuries sustained during the assault are a hoax?” Wybrow said.

Higgins replied, “Okay. I completely refuse.”

Further witnesses are expected to present evidence at this week’s trial, including expert Peter Reed, who AFP Senior Constable Emma Fritzell told the Supreme Court that he investigated Higgins’ phone calls in May 2021.

Bruce Lehrmann was indicted on August 6, 2021 on one charge of sexual intercourse without consent.

He pleaded not guilty and told police in an interview conducted in court that it simply “never happened.”

Court says Brittany Higgins reluctant to hand over phone

Ms Higgins conducted her first Chief of Evidence interview with an AFP officer in Queensland on 24 February 2021.

Senior Constable Emma Frizel told the court that Higgins did not hand over the phone to police until May 26, 2021, even though he was asked for it in February 2021.

Higgins said his reluctance to surrender the phone on February 24, 2021 was due to what he said about the “flow of information” between the police and the Capitol when he gave a police interview that same day. He told the court that it was because he learned she pissed her off.

“Mr Higgins was referring to a media article or something that appeared in the media that morning in relation to Minister Dutton,” Frizel told the court.

“As a result, she was worried about the flow of information.”

Peter Dutton revelation ‘frightened’ Brittany Higgins

Higgins told the court on October 7 that she was “horrified” after discovering that her contacts with the police had been reported to Home Secretary Peter Dutton before the story finally spread.

She discovered this on February 24th. That was the day she was supposed to tell the police and turn over her phone.

“Before I make a formal statement to the police, the potential lawsuit, which I do not know, is politically sensitive, such as a politically sensitive matter within the jurisdiction of the police, has been filed by the Home Secretary. There was a provision that they would be reported to ,” she said.

“Peter Dutton came out and said that he knew the baseline information for my complaint before I conducted the chief evidence interview. I was very, very scared.

“So I was seeking legal advice to know my rights because I was terrified.”

Three months later, AFP conducted a second police interview in Canberra on 26 May.

At that meeting, she agreed to give her cell phone to the police to download all her messages and photos to her device.

Police searched Brittany Higgins’ phone

Police then searched Higgins’ phone on July 9.

On July 14, Higgins provided two more phones.

“Did you give Peter Reed those two extra phones on July 22, 2021?” asked Whybrow.

“Yes, yes,” replied Ms. Frizel.

Mr. Reid will present the evidence this week.

“You mean you couldn’t find any evidence that the photos were taken in March or April 2019?” Mr Whybrow asked Senior Constable Frizel.

“I couldn’t find any images of the injuries at the time,” Fritzell said.

When Whybrow asked, “Did it show up in the data until January 21st?” she agreed.

Court said Higgins failed to mention bruises to police on April 1, 2019

During cross-examination last week, Whybrow told Higgins that he had not told police about the bruise when he first spoke to them on April 1, 2019.

Her first meeting with police came two days before she said the photos were taken around April 3, 2019.

Ms Higgins told the court she saved the photo of the bruise because she later remembered police had asked her to keep the photo.

Whybrow didn’t mention the bruises when she first spoke to two AFP officers on April 1.

“You didn’t say anything about having a big bruise on your leg, did you?” he asked.

“I don’t remember the police. Not at that point,” Higgins replied.

When she spoke with Detective Herman on April 8, Whybrow said, “I don’t think I mentioned anything about the big bruises on my leg?”

Higgins said he believed he thought so and asked to keep all the relevant photos, but admitted that he didn’t specifically ask for the photos of the bruises to be kept.

Did you mention to anyone else that you had a bruise on your leg before January 2021?

“I don’t think it’s true. I don’t know to whom specifically I disclosed it, but I think it came out when I was relaying the events of the assault.”

During cross-examination, Mr Whybrow said that although he gave the evidence about five days later, if he had obtained it on April 3, 2019, what you said would have happened the night of the incident. Said it would be in about 12 or 13 days. The 22nd?

“Yes. I just remember it was a budget week, I don’t specifically remember the actual date itself,” she replied.

lost WhatsApp messages

During cross-examination, Ms. Higgins also said she lost some materials in returning government equipment.

“No, no, I lost all my WhatsApp when I migrated my phone, so I lost all my WhatsApp because I don’t own the device, just like when I migrated my phone and gave all my devices back to the government.” ” she said.

“I didn’t realize I hadn’t backed up WhatsApp, so I had no concerns. I’m not ashamed of these communications.

“But I don’t have them anymore.”

trial continues

Brittany Higgins’ birthmark photo was challenged in court during Bruce Lehrman’s trial

Source link Brittany Higgins’ birthmark photo was challenged in court during Bruce Lehrman’s trial

Back to top button