Brittany Higgins has launched a scathing attack on Bruce Lehrmann‘s defence attorney immediately after he tweeted about her legal demo.
Ms Higgins took to Twitter on Saturday evening to assault a post Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Steven Whybrow wrote on December 7 past 12 months, wherever Mr Whybrow spoke of a variety of factors of the case that ended up read in court docket throughout the rape demo two months prior.
Mr Lehrmann was accused of raping Ms Higgins in Parliament Residence in 2019. He experienced pleaded not guilty during a jury trial in the ACT Supreme Court docket in Oct, but the listening to was aborted because of to misconduct by a juror.
The sexual assault demand was dropped by the ACT’s Director of General public Prosecutions on December 2 because of to fears about Ms Higgins’ psychological overall health. Mr Lehrmann has regularly denied the allegations in opposition to him.
5 times right after the cost was dropped, Mr Whybrow used Twitter to reply to a issue about Mr Lehrmann’s scenario.
The dilemma Mr Whybrow was responding to has considering the fact that been deleted – so the context of his tweet is mysterious – but that didn’t end Ms Higgins from rounding on his reaction around the weekend.
Mr Whybrow’s tweet claimed: ‘Because politicians didn’t get cleaners in (an agreed reality). Because there was no criticism right before Tuesday 1pm (Brittany Higgins’ individual evidence).’
Brittany Higgins (pictured still left, outside court in Canberra) introduced an assault on Bruce Lehrmann’s defence law firm on Saturday – 4 months soon after he wrote it
Referring to a tweet by Mr Whybrow in December, Ms Higgins wrote on Saturday: ‘So strange the defence counsel is casually tweeting about the Lehrmann case’
‘There are no cameras inside of minister’s places of work. Footage arriving and leaving was played,’ he wrote.
‘Agreed – media crickets… Specifics vs superior story.’
When Ms Higgins shared the previous tweet on Saturday, she said: ‘So weird the defence counsel is casually tweeting about the Lehrmann circumstance.’
‘Honestly, what on earth is this?’
About 45 minutes following the tweet was shared, Mr Whybrow’s account was adjusted from public to private so end users who did not comply with him could not see the tweet she was referring to.
Ms Higgins then commented on her possess submit: ‘Hahah. The defence counsel Steve Whybrow has now created his tweets private.’
‘Don’t be concerned. I took screenshots,’ she stated, over a screenshot of Mr Whybrow’s tweet from December.
Mr Whybrow’s tweet pointed to a number of factors listened to in court docket the Oct demo – such as that a cleaner was asked to do a schedule cleanse of the ministerial suite exactly where Ms Higgins was allegedly raped, the early morning following the alleged assault.
The court docket heard the cleaner did not ‘destroy evidence’ by steam cleansing the carpet or the couch the place Ms Higgins slept.
The courtroom also heard that Ms Higgins did not complain of any alleged assault prior to 1pm on Tuesday, March 26 – three days later on. CCTV played right before the courtroom showed Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins leaving Parliament Home at various periods.
Steven Whybrow adjusted his Twitter profile to personal after Ms Higgins’ publish. She then posted a screenshot of his December write-up
Steven Whybrow was Bruce Lehrmann’s defence lawyer during his rape demo. He is also symbolizing Mr Lehrmann in his defamation circumstance against Channel 10, news.com.au and Lisa Wilkinson
Some Twitter users wrote messages of guidance for Ms Higgins in the responses, but many others asked why she re-tweeted Mr Whybrow’s write-up from 4 months in the past.
‘I’m confused about the “bombshell”,’ just one user claimed.
‘It was a tweet from past calendar year, following DPP dropped the costs. Not connected to [defamation] situation. This is outdated news so why the track and dance now?’
In February, Mr Lehrmann submitted defamation lawsuits versus Channel 10, Lisa Wilkinson, and information.com.au around two tales exactly where Ms Higgins alleged a ‘male colleague’ had raped her in 2019.
The broadcast and online short article were published on February 15, 2021.
He was not named in the broadcast or short article, but his statement of assert argues his identity would have been regarded in political circles.
Mr Lehrmann’s interlocutory hearing on Thursday was about why it took him two years to file the defamation lawsuit.
Candidates commonly have 12 months soon after publication to file a defamation scenario, but Mr Lehrmann’s situation was filed two a long time afterwards.
Mr Whybrow is Mr Lehrmann’s barrister in the defamation trial. His lawful group have argued that it was unreasonable for him to launch the case any earlier.
The interlocutory listening to will return to the Federal Court docket in Sydney on Thursday.
Mr Lehrman is pictured outdoors the Federal Court in Sydney on Thursday morning