Linda Reynolds vs Brittany Higgins: Messages show Reynolds ‘tried to help Lehrmann’s rape defence’

A string of messages between Linda Reynolds and the lawyer who represented Bruce Lehrmann on a charge of rape showed that she was trying to help his defence, according to the legal team for Brittany Higgins.

As the blockbuster defamation claim against Ms Higgins by the former Defence Minister edges towards the end, Rachael Young SC began her closing arguments on behalf of the former staffer.

Ms Young opened up on the outgoing WA Senator — detailing why they say she harassed her former staffer after she alleged she had been raped in Ms Reynolds’ office.

She also sensationally alleged that the former minister for defence also revealed her “partisan attitude in favour of the accused” Mr Lehrmann within 21 messages sent to lawyer Steven Whybrow during the criminal trial in 2022.

Ms Higgins is being sued by the Senator over a series of social media posts that she believes damaged her reputation.

More than 20 witnesses including former prime minister Scott Morrison have given evidence in the WA Supreme Court trial.

The senator alleges Ms Higgins and her now-husband David Sharaz cast her as the “villain” in their “political cover-up fairy tale” that included accusations of ill-treatment, ostracism, bullying, harassment and threatening conduct.

During the trial, Ms Young said her client was courageous in 2021 when she spoke up about her alleged rape and workplace culture two years earlier at Parliament House.

She doubled down on that argument in her closing submissions, saying that throughout the whole saga “the heaviest burden has and will continue to be carried by Ms Higgins — the survivor of a serious crime which has affected every aspect of her life.”

As that burden continued, she was sued by Ms Reynolds over a series of social media posts in 2022 and 2023, which the outgoing Senator says were part of a years-long plan to weaponise Ms Higgins’ rape claim to destroy her and the Morrison government.

Ms Young said starkly that claim was “meritless”, instead arguing the case had instead shown the Senator as an “unreliable witness” who harassed her junior former staff member after she alleged rape.

The Senator’s recall about key matters was labelled “problematic, unreliable, and … self-serving”.

Ms Young also detailed how Ms Higgins was harassed by her former boss over years – beginning with her calling Ms Higgins a “lying cow” in front of her staff as The Project interview where the rape claims were first made public was going to air.

“The senator engaged in a course of persistent activities against Miss Higgins that is engaging in a campaign of harassment,” Ms Young said.

“First by calling her a lying cow, which was then … disseminated widely. Two, by repeatedly backgrounding a journalist by giving her confidential and privileged communications, and by giving public interviews, undermining Ms Higgins.

“And thirdly, by engaging in partisan conduct during the criminal trial of Mr Lehrmann.”

A key part of that campaign, Ms Young said, was the questioning and criticism of the settlement Ms Higgins received from the government.

“Questioning Miss Higgins’ settlement publicly through the media was harassment of Miss Higgins,” she said.

By it, the senator contributed to the public claims and questions raised about whether Miss Higgins ought to have received a settlement at all, or the settlement of the size that she received.

“We say both objectively and subjectively, this is harassment.

“This conduct does not reflect well on the Senator, and importantly — it revealed a desire to publicly harass Ms Higgins by the provision of confidential information.”

Ms Reynolds was also then taken to task for her behaviour during the Lehrmann trial in the ACT Supreme Court, which eventually saw his charges dropped for juror misconduct.

Evidence revealed 21 messages she had sent to Mr Whybrow, ranging from a request for the transcript of the trial to a comparison of Ms Higgins’ outfit to one once worn by Kate Middleton.

“The Senator’s texts can be only sensibly described as attempting to assist the accused.

“What this whole chain identifies ... is the Senator’s position of neutrality is one that ought be rejected. She was clearly in our submission, assisting or attempting to assist.

“There’s no comparable communications with the prosecution.”

The support — or lack of — for Ms Higgins following her initial allegation of rape in 2019 was also detailed by Ms Young.

In those submissions, she picked apart the Senator’s account of what she knew and did in those days in March and April 2019.

The court was told showed that Ms Reynolds “knew or suspected … a sexual assault” had happened in her office — days before she called Ms Higgins into a meeting in the very same office that rape was said to have happened in.

The elements of that knowledge included an internal parliamentary report, which outlined how Ms Higgins was drunk, Mr Lehrmann was seen rapidly leaving, and then she was later found undressed by security.

Ms Young also said while Ms Reynolds claimed Ms Higgins “never used the phrase sexual assault or rape” — she was still worried enough to think her young staffer should be referred to the Employee Assistance Program.

And worried enough to want the AFP informed.

“No-one reasonably directs the AFP to be informed, unless they are concerned that a crime has happened,” Ms Young said.

“The Senator knew by this time that Ms Higgins’ memory was poor because — as had been observed, she had been very intoxicated.

“She also knew that an intoxicated person might not be able to consent to sexual activity, and she also knew that Mr Lehrmann had been on top of Miss Higgins.

“We say to any reasonable listener, this all would have rung alarm bells.”

She told WA’s Supreme Court that Ms Reynolds’ case was aimed at the wrong target and was attempting to gain damages by a “side wind” — for impacts on her that occurred years before the publications sued upon.

“The heaviest burden has and will continue to be carried by Ms Higgins — the survivor of a serious crime which has affected every aspect of her life, including serious impacts on her mental health,” Ms Young said.

“(So) why are we here?

“The parties are here because Senator Reynolds, feeling distress and upset by the political accountability placed on her … seeks by a side wind to claim damages, following publications made two years later.

“And in that process, besmirched those whom she blames for her political demise.

“Her own evidence — corroborated by her witnesses — demonstrates that the hurt, distress and health issues in 2021 have no relationship with Ms Higgins’ 2023 publications.”

In developing her closings, Ms Young said Ms Higgins’ motive for revealing her rape allegation on The Project in 2021 was “for an altruistic purpose”.

“To ensure that there would be a focus on systemic failings at Parliament House, including the lack of human resources, the way her rape was handled, the lack of follow-up, and the fact that no one had checked in with her about seeing a counsellor,” Ms Young said.

Now, Ms Young said the Senator was instead alleging “a sinister and gratuitous motive”.

“She boldly says that the 2023 publications were actuated by malice … that Ms Higgins, together with Mr Shiraz, planned to in effect destroy the Senator and bring down the Morrison government by weaponising (her) rape allegation.

“We say the Senator faces a significant problem in recovering any damages

“We say it would be inappropriate and irrational to compensate the Senator for hurt, distress and health issues that in effect, arose two years before Ms Higgins even published the impugned publications.

“As Justice (Michael) Lee said in Palmer and McGowan, for a politician to complain about the press is like the ship’s captain complaining about the sea.”

Ms Young argued there was a “possibility of a nil award” of damages, if it was found that much of the damage done to Ms Reynolds pre-dated the publication of the social media posts by years.

IN earlier evidence, Ms Young ridiculed the claim Ms Higgins was targeting the senator in a bid to harm her when she spoke to journalists Lisa Wilkinson on Network Ten’s The Project and Samantha Maiden from News Corp about the alleged mishandling of the incident.

Mr Morrison told the court he feared Senator Reynolds would die amid the political firestorm that followed.

“It was the weaponising of this issue for political purposes to discredit both Senator Reynolds ... and the government and, by extension, myself,” he said.

Senator Reynolds’ parents, Janice and Laith Reynolds, said their daughter was “badly affected by going from a person who was universally loved and respected to becoming a pariah”.

“She was accused of being some kind of monster who deserted a poor young woman who had been raped,” Mrs Reynolds said in a witness statement.

Senator Reynolds claims her suffering has been compounded by Ms Higgins’ social media posts which she says carry imputations that she harassed her former staffer, mishandled her alleged rape, wants to silence sexual assault victims and engaged in questionable conduct during Lehrmann’s aborted criminal trial.

Ms Higgins relies on the defence of truth to justify her harassment claim, with Ms Young reminding the court of the senator’s “disgraceful slur” when she called the former staffer a “lying cow” in front of parliamentary staff.

She also pointed to Senator Reynolds’ conduct during Lehrmann’s trial and said she backgrounded media about Ms Higgins.

The same defence is being employed for Ms Higgins’ rape mishandling accusation, with Ms Young telling the court the senator withheld information from the former staffer but shared it with others, and provided inadequate counselling and work options.

The defence also relies on qualified privilege, fair comment and honest opinion and says Ms Higgins was reacting to and speaking about issues of public interest.

Ms Higgins, who is pregnant, was expected to testify but late in the trial, Ms Young told the court she could win the case without doing so, while also raising concerns about her client’s medical condition.

with AAP