Brittany Higgins, Bruce Lehrmann: Rape suspect missed 6 phone calls from ex

The trial of the man accused of raping Brittany Higgins in the Capitol is nearing an end after prosecutors closed the case Monday afternoon.

Bruce Lehman He has been accused of sexually assaulting a former liberal staffer in the office of Senator Linda Reynolds in the early hours of March 23, 2019.

He pleaded not guilty to one count of sex without consent.

of trial It is expected to close later this week after more than a dozen witnesses have been removed from the potential witness list.

On Tuesday, the prosecution filed an agreed-upon statement of fact, which was read to the ACT Supreme Court by Chief Justice Lucy McCallum.

As one of the 11 facts agreed upon, the jury heard that in the early hours of March 23, 2019, Mr. Layman’s girlfriend had repeatedly attempted to call him regarding the alleged assault. rice field.

The court heard that the defendant missed six calls from his then-girlfriend between 2:16 and 2:18 am.

Among other facts agreed, there was no evidence that Mr. Lehrmann or Mr. Higgins accessed the Capitol’s computing network between 1:30 a.m. and 2:40 a.m. on March 23, 2019. includes.

Another fact filed said Ms. Higgins called her ex-boyfriend and former colleague Ben Dillaway at 10:39 p.m. on March 22, 2019, but did not answer her call. I’m here.

Dillaway then texted Higgins at 8:09 am the next morning, and she texted back at 8:17 am.

Attorney General Shane Drumgold opened closing arguments and warned jurors not to be distracted by “side issues” as they make their decisions.

If Claims Are Fake, Brittany Is ‘A Quite An Actor’

Attorney General Shane Drumgold told jurors that if Brittany Higgins fabricated the rape allegations, she would be “a good deal of an actor.”

The prosecution today closed his case by telling jurors, “When you walk into the jury room, your first job is to work your way through all the rubble to find out the essence of the case.”

Dragold said the nature of the case would have to determine whether Higgins fabricated the rape allegations, and that media interviews and questions about the book deal were “akanishin.”

Prosecutors said Higgins was a “truth witness” who told a coherent story and evidence suggesting it wasn’t a lie.

“If so, it was elaborate,” he said.

Mr. Drumgold said Mr. Higgins told everyone, including close personal friends, colleagues at work, the police, and even his own mother thought he was weird.

“She took an oath,” he said.

“We submit that she didn’t flinch. If this is a hoax, she’s quite the actor as well.”

Mr. Drumgold said that if the jury did not believe she had fabricated the story, “you must give a guilty verdict. say.”

“If you agree, the only verdict you can return is a guilty verdict.”

Higgins was ‘completely unconscious’ when sex began

When referring to whether Higgins was able to consent to sexual intercourse while in the Capitol, Dragold said it was “clearly she was very drunk” and was “inconsistent as a result”. Stated.

A jury heard that Higgins was “completely unconscious when the sex began.”

Drumgold pointed to evidence that Higgins said he never thought he’d had so much alcohol in his life.

He said it showed her credibility as a witness.

“She could say, ‘Oh, I’ve never drank that much and never squalled,'” Drumgold said in court.

Higgins at a ‘fork in the road’

Higgins faced a “fork in the road” weeks after the alleged assault, the court said.

Drumgold directed jurors to present evidence from Army Aide Nikita Irvine, in which she said in court that she spoke with Higgins on Wednesday or Thursday following the assault charges. rice field.

When speaking with Irvine, Drumgold said the former Liberal Party official had “already expressed her concerns about the election,” and spoke of the implications if her allegations became public.

A few weeks later, when Ms. Irvine spoke with Ms. Higgins again, she was informed that she would not proceed with the police complaint.

“She told Ms. Irvine that she had no choice but to accept her decision,” Drumgold said.

“This is clear evidence that she was at a crossroads, according to our filing.”

Drumgold said this could mean continuing his dream job at the Capitol or going the other route and filing a police complaint.

Higgins’ Right to Fear

Brittany Higgins had a “right to fear” about making rape allegations as a young man in a world of powerful political forces, Chief of Public Prosecutions, Shane Drumgold, told the court.

In closing remarks to the jury, Drumgold said that former Defense Minister Linda Reynolds decided to contact defense attorney Steve Whybrow for the record. He said it was clear that political forces were at work.

He sparked Higgins’ horror on February 24, 2021 when he discovered that Peter Dutton had been briefed by AFP about her complaint before the media reported it.

“We’re saying she was right to be scared,” Drumgold said.

“She was right to move slowly and carefully.”

Drumgold said there were “powerful political forces” at work.

“Suffice it to say that there were clearly powerful political forces at work in the immediate aftermath of the incident, during the election and even after,” he said.

“These forces were at work for almost two years when she was working for Senator Cash.”

After the morning break, Drumgold added that he was not suggesting that the defense was part of those units.

“I said it was clear there were strong political forces at work here,” he said.

“I am not suggesting that defense counsel is part of those political forces.”

Instead, he said it went to some of the motives of other witnesses.

Accused of being ‘attracted’ to Brittany, court said

The court had heard that Mr. Lehrmann was attracted to Mr. Higgins leading up to the night of the alleged assault.

“I know the answer is yes,” Dragold said when bringing the question to court whether the defendant was attracted to Higgins.

He pointed to Nicole Hammer’s evidence, and she said in court that Lehrmann commented that Higgins was “cool” before being hired by Senator Linda Reynolds.

He also said in a second police interview that Ms. Higgins told authorities that at some point in March 2019, Ms. Lehrmann tried to kiss her after a work event, but she refused. pointed out that

The jury was also asked to consider why Lehrmann entered the Houses of Parliament that night.

Drumgold suggested it was “the most convenient place to leave a drunken and highly vulnerable petitioner alone.”

“Hopefully she doesn’t resist or remember,” the court said.

‘Not about #metoo’: Prosecutors warn jurors

Drumgold warned jurors “not to get distracted by side issues or red herrings.”

In his closing argument, Mr. Drumgold moved the jury as to what the lawsuit against Mr. Lehrman was not.

He said it wasn’t a question of political parties, workplace culture or whether the Capitol responded appropriately to reports of security breaches.

“This is certainly not about other women’s experiences in Congress, and it’s not about the metoo movement,” he said.

“This incident concerns what happened on Saturday, March 23, 2019, on the sofa in the room.”

The jury said what Higgins said and did two years after her 2020 assault charge could “impact the credibility of what she said and did in 2019.” I hear it goes against common sense.

Drumgold then denounced the defense’s arguments during the trial, including telling jurors that Higgins signed his name upon entering the Capitol.

Prosecutors said it was “not clear.”

He also attacked the defense by telling the court that it was “abnormal” for police to conduct two taped interviews with plaintiffs.

“This was clearly put forward as something that should be used to reduce reliability,” Drumgold said.

“As a matter of law, the mere fact that police conducted a second interview cannot affect the credibility of the first interview.”

Senator grilling in the witness box

On Monday, jurors heard Higgins’ former employers, Senator Reynolds and Michaela Cash.

Senator Reynolds was questioned about the text messages he sent to Lerman’s attorneys when Higgins’ cross-examination was underway, and was asked to send copies of the former employee’s evidence to the attorneys.

She said in court that she didn’t know it was inappropriate to do so.

In Senator Cash’s evidence, she told the court she didn’t know about Ms. Higgins’ assault allegations until February 5, 2021.

When prosecutors asked whether Mr. Higgins’ allegations made public at the time could be “politically harmful,” the senator said “absolutely not,” adding that “political I don’t understand the connection,” he told the court.

The court also gave Senator Cash chief of staff Daniel Try, senior detective constable Sarah Herman, Qld liberal MP Samuel O’Connor and AFP a task to extract data from Higgins’ phone call. I also heard the testimony of Mr. Peter Reed, the person who was arrested.

The trial continues today.

Brittany Higgins, Bruce Lehrmann: Rape suspect missed 6 phone calls from ex

Source link Brittany Higgins, Bruce Lehrmann: Rape suspect missed 6 phone calls from ex

Back to top button