Brittany Higgins, Bruce Lehrmann and Lachlan MurdochLachlan Murdoch

Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer and Lachlan Murdoch should be charged with conspiring to intimidate Brittany Higgins

Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer Steve Whybrow has attempted to intimidate Brittany Higgins by making a frivolous and vexatious complaint about her to the Federal Police and the ACT Supreme Court and then issued a press release making sure the media reported it.

The rape trial of Bruce Lehrmann for the alleged rape of Brittany Higgins was aborted on Thursday (27/10/22) after a juror was found to have done their own research into sexual assaults during the course of the trial and taken the research into the jury room.

After Justice Lucy McCallum aborted the trial Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer Steve Whybrow told the media outside the court he would not be answering any questions as the matter is still afoot and it would inappropriate to do so. Brittany Higgins read out a prepared statement to the media complaining about the trial process etc as per the below video.

Not long after Brittany Higgins’ statement to the media Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer Steve Whybrow issued the below statement:

“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.”

“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 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.

“Neither Mr Lehrmann nor his lawyers will be making any further comment on this matter at this stage.” (Click here to read more)

Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer Steve Whybrow wants the media to report his statement that he had made a complaint to the court and police about Brittany Higgins, but he doesn’t want the media to report what Brittany Higgins said.

Why did Steve Whybrow want the media to report that he had made a complaint to the court and police? What was his motivation?

Firstly, there is no contempt of court by Brittany Higgins and there is no criminal offence that the police could charge her with given her statement as per the below video. That means Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer Steve Whybrow has made a false complaint to the police and he wanted the media to report it in an attempt to intimidate Brittany Higgins and maybe influence future jury members as the matter is now set down for February 2023 for hearing.

Secondly, Steve Whybrow has not identified what exactly Brittany Higgins said and how it would be in contempt of court and what alleged ACT crimes have been broken. (Just for the record the ACT does not have its own police force and the Federal Police do the local policing in the ACT so that is why Steve Whybrow made the complaint to the Federal Police.)

The below video has Steve Whybrow’s and Brittany Higgins’ comments after court and further analysis by me.

The fact that Steve Whybrow’s complaints to the court and police on behalf of his client Bruce Lehrmann were made public almost immediately after they were made, and promoted heavily by Lachlan Murdoch’s News Corp, it is clearly an attempt to pervert the course of justice and have the rape charge against Bruce Lehrmann dropped by intimidating Brittany Higgins.

Right on cue the next day the front page of Sydney’s The Daily Telegraph 28th of October 2022 as per below. Lachlan Murdoch once again attacks a woman who has embarrassed his puppets at the Liberal Party.

Lachlan Murdoch has previous form of using his media to silence people by intimidation. In August 2022 I published an article titled: “Lachlan Murdoch, who is the world’s best-known online stalker of women and children, sues news publisher Crikey for defamation” – (Click here to read the article) which said in part:

Lachlan Murdoch, billionaire Fox News and News Corp owner, is one of the most morally and ethically bankrupt business person the world has ever seen and he is currently trying to hide some of his crimes by suing the relatively small Australian news publisher Crikey.

What makes Lachlan Murdoch such a sick person is that he uses journalists employed by his companies as a dog pack to relentlessly attack anyone and everyone that he thinks is a threat to his business interests and this includes attacking women like former Australian of the Year Grace Tame and children like climate activist Greta Thunberg.

One of Lachlan Murdoch’s highest profile attack dogs is Andrew Bolt and below you can see he doesn’t hold back in attacking Grace Tame in January this year:

Andrew Bolt doesn’t miss Grace Tame, and he doesn’t hide why he is attacking her. He is attacking her because she embarrassed Scott Morrison who has handed more than $100 million to Murdoch’s News Corp via jobkeeper, rural media grants and the infamous $40 million to Fox Sports for more coverage of women’s sports.

Andrew Bolt’s attack on Grace Tame was not isolated as Lachlan Murdoch has had his whole dog pack attacking Grace Tame ever since she started criticising Scott Morrison. News Corp’s Peter Van Onselen also obeyed Lachlan Murdoch’s orders to attack Grace Tame in the media and he was backed up by another News Corp propagandist in Samantha Maiden. (Click here to read more)

Based on News Corps’ recent attack on Brittany Higgins, Lachlan Murdoch has obviously directed his attack dogs to go after her as well.

Closing arguments:

Did Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer Steve Whybrow make a complaint to the court and police given Senator Linda Reynolds contacted him via text during the rape hearing to coach him about certain text messages between Brittany Higgins and another former Reynolds staffer, Nicole Hamer that that may be “revealing” to the defence?

Did Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer Steve Whybrow make a complaint to the court and police about Senator Linda Reynolds contacting him via text asking for copies of the transcript of Brittany Higgins’s evidence so she could prepare her evidence for her turn in the witness stand?

Steve Whybrow obviously told the prosecutors about Linda Reynolds’ conduct because they raised it in court when Linda Reynolds gave evidence. But why didn’t Steve Whybrow make a formal complaint to the court or police about Linda Reynolds’ attempts to pervert the course of justice given he has made complaints against Brittany Higgins?

Linda Reynolds’ husband/partner was also in the court, even though they live in Perth, when Brittany Higgins gave evidence which was a few days before Linda Reynolds gave evidence. Was Steve Whybrow aware of it and if so, did he refer that to the court and police? And if not, why not? The only inference that can be drawn is that he was there so he could coach Linda Reynolds on what evidence Brittany Higgins gave in court before Linda Reynolds had to give evidence.

The trial has become a national scandal and Justice Lucy McCallum needs to take action for contempt of court against Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer Steve Whybrow, Lachlan Murdoch, his attack dogs at News Corp and Senator Linda Reynolds. If Justice McCallum fails to do so her reputation and the reputation of the court will be trashed for many years to come and will likely become an example used at law schools on how not to run a court case.

Declaration: I know Justice Lucy McCallum as she was the defamation list judge (2014-2019) at the NSW Supreme Court when Kerry Stokes was running his SLAPP lawsuits against me. She handed down a couple of interlocutory judgments in my matters but no final judgments. I’m no fan of hers, but that’s another story.

Please use Twitter, Facebook, email and the other buttons below and help promote this article.

Kangaroo Court of Australia is an independent website and is reliant on donations to keep publishing so please click on the Patreon button below and support independent journalism.

If you would like to support via PayPal use the button below or for other donation options click here to go to the Donations page.

Thank you for your support.

For the KCA t-shirt shop click here.

9 replies »

  1. Description of the Australian legal system in one word: a ‘shambles’…. confidence in our judiciary, very low….. confidence in AFP being impartial…very low….

  2. Welcome to the wonderful reality of anyone (especially women) that make sexual abuse claims. I’m living with mental illness and if I was raped tomorrow, my chances of even being believed by the police is incredibly slim and it definitely wouldn’t make it to court. The victims entire life is up for scrutiny at trial however very little of the accused is usually allowed to be revealed. This is the incredibly biased system we live under and it’s no wonder that people rarely come forward to report rape crimes – they end up more traumatised than ever and there is often no conviction.

    • This country’s legal system is a disgusting disgrace. That a young woman’s character can be trashed for reporting a rape is not justice.
      No mention that the venue, regularly frequented by Liberal apparatchiks has ignored the Responsible Service of Alchohol laws allowing the victim to become so obviously intoxinated & vulnerable is disgusting.
      These types of cases should dispense with the accused’s right to not be questioned on oath in the witness box. It says much about the ethics of the Liberals & their supporters about the way their lackeys are allowed to behave.

  3. Definitely bullying. Whatever the outcome, this case has highlighted as never before, the totally unsatisfactory nature of the normal criminal justice trial by jury is for sexual assault cases. In this day and age of media saturation in our lives, its almost impossible for jurors to “put out of their minds” anything they see or hear. System ripe for reform. Jurors could also bring items into the jury room, on purpose, to sabotage a trial.

  4. I believe that dozens of trials have had jurors take in to the jury room material they should not have. I sat on a jury where 2 jurors brought in newspaper articles about the charge. We all exhorted them to put them away, so no one else knew what they were about. The charged person was found guilty, and we discovered at sentencing that they had already spent over a year in custody when, for $5K, they could have been out on bail. As a side interest, the judge sent the prosecutor away to do some work on precedents as the term they were asking for was too low.

  5. Which ever solicitor or lawyer is most prolific in talking convincing garbage wins(plenty of dollars too) in the current judicial system. A total farce.

  6. Two drawbacks with the present system of rape trials:
    1.The victim gets re-traumatised with the drawn-out proceedings and offensive cross-examination
    2. Other victims see how the first victim is treated and decide not to withstand a trial. Another possible rapist walks away.

  7. IMHO:
    1. It is just plain BULLYING … now a more regular modern day embedded and ritualised practice … mainly, it would seem in the professions.
    2. It reminds me of carrion hovering and picking over carcasses.
    3. It would be best if they share with their wives, grandmothers, mothers and daughters, in detail, what they do for a living
    I am truly sickened !

Leave a Reply