Brittany Higgins has launched a scathing attack on Bruce Lehrmann‘s defence lawyer after he tweeted about her criminal trial.
Ms Higgins took to Twitter on Saturday night to attack a post Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Steven Whybrow wrote on December 7 last year, where Mr Whybrow spoke of a number of elements of the case that were heard in court during the rape trial two months prior.
Mr Lehrmann was accused of raping Ms Higgins in Parliament House in 2019. He had pleaded not guilty during a jury trial in the ACT Supreme Court in October, but the hearing was aborted due to misconduct by a juror.
The sexual assault charge was dropped by the ACT’s Director of Public Prosecutions on December 2 due to concerns about Ms Higgins’ mental health. Mr Lehrmann has continually denied the allegations against him.
Five days after the charge was dropped, Mr Whybrow used Twitter to respond to a question about Mr Lehrmann’s case.
The question Mr Whybrow was responding to has since been deleted – so the context of his tweet is unknown – but that didn’t stop Ms Higgins from rounding upon his response over the weekend.
Mr Whybrow’s tweet said: ‘Because politicians didn’t get cleaners in (an agreed fact). Because there was no complaint before Tuesday 1pm (Brittany Higgins’ own evidence).’
Brittany Higgins (pictured left, outside court in Canberra) launched an attack on Bruce Lehrmann’s defence lawyer on Saturday – four months after he wrote it
Referring to a tweet by Mr Whybrow in December, Ms Higgins wrote on Saturday: ‘So weird the defence counsel is casually tweeting about the Lehrmann case’
‘There are no cameras inside minister’s offices. Footage arriving and leaving was played,’ he wrote.
‘Agreed – media crickets… Facts vs good story.’
When Ms Higgins shared the old tweet on Saturday, she said: ‘So weird the defence counsel is casually tweeting about the Lehrmann case.’
‘Honestly, what on earth is this?’
About 45 minutes after the tweet was shared, Mr Whybrow’s account was changed from public to private so users who did not follow him could not see the tweet she was referring to.
Ms Higgins then commented on her own post: ‘Hahah. The defence counsel Steve Whybrow has now made his tweets private.’
‘Don’t worry. I took screenshots,’ she said, above a screenshot of Mr Whybrow’s tweet from December.
Mr Whybrow’s tweet pointed to a number of elements heard in court the October trial – including that a cleaner was asked to do a routine clean of the ministerial suite where Ms Higgins was allegedly raped, the morning after the alleged assault.
Read Related Also: Snow Plow Accident: Where Is Jeremy Renner Now? Know If He’s Alive Or Dead
The court heard the cleaner did not ‘destroy evidence’ by steam cleaning the carpet or the couch where Ms Higgins slept.
The court also heard that Ms Higgins did not complain of any alleged assault before 1pm on Tuesday, March 26 – three days later. CCTV played before the court showed Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins leaving Parliament House at different times.
Steven Whybrow changed his Twitter profile to private after Ms Higgins’ post. She then posted a screenshot of his December post
Steven Whybrow was Bruce Lehrmann’s defence lawyer during his rape trial. He is also representing Mr Lehrmann in his defamation case against Channel 10, news.com.au and Lisa Wilkinson
Some Twitter users wrote messages of support for Ms Higgins in the comments, but others asked why she re-tweeted Mr Whybrow’s post from four months ago.
‘I’m confused about the “bombshell”,’ one user said.
‘It was a tweet from last year, after DPP dropped the charges. Not related to [defamation] case. This is old news so why the song and dance now?’
In February, Mr Lehrmann filed defamation lawsuits against Channel 10, Lisa Wilkinson, and news.com.au over two stories where Ms Higgins alleged a ‘male colleague’ had raped her in 2019.
The broadcast and online article were published on February 15, 2021.
He was not named in the broadcast or article, but his statement of claim argues his identity would have been known in political circles.
Mr Lehrmann’s interlocutory hearing on Thursday was about why it took him two years to file the defamation lawsuit.
Applicants normally have 12 months after publication to file a defamation case, but Mr Lehrmann’s case was filed two years later.
Mr Whybrow is Mr Lehrmann’s barrister in the defamation trial. His legal team have argued that it was unreasonable for him to launch the case any earlier.
The interlocutory hearing will return to the Federal Court in Sydney on Thursday.
Mr Lehrman is pictured outside the Federal Court in Sydney on Thursday morning
