The 2019 Australian Parliament House assault case against Brittany Higgins – a former parliamentary aide who abused a colleague – goes viral
Brittany Higgins, a former parliamentary aide, alleged that she had been raped by a colleague in Australia’s federal Parliament House in 2019. After she went public with her accusation, many other women came up with similar stories of harassment in a boys club culture in the nation’s capital. A wave of outrage followed, helping to oust the governing conservative coalition in national elections five months ago.
It could be one of the most watched court cases in decades if it goes to trial as expected. Current and former political figures are likely to testify as witnesses.
During Tuesday’s opening arguments, Higgins told police that she and Lehrmann agreed to split a cab home after a night of drinking, but he wanted to go to the parliament building.
Parliament House had a “Don’t ask; Don’t tell” policy that discouraged her from making a report internally, though she did tell her boss and many others about the attack.
Lehrmann has denied the allegations multiple times. He pleaded not guilty to one count of sexual intercourse without consent, which carries a maximum penalty of 12 years in prison.
Why a jury could not unduly perpetrate misogyny: The trial of the former parliamentary staffer Higgin
Across the country, thousands more women took to the streets to protest misogyny, which they say is embedded in everything from coal mines to corporate halls of power.
Michelle Arrow, who studies politics and gender at Macquarie University, described Higgins’ allegations as the “ignition point to a wider conversation.”
The federal election of last spring was consequential as it saw the ruling conservative coalition ousted largely by female candidates and women voters.
The trial and its attendant media attention may also test reform appetite when it comes to the Australian judicial system. Critics say that the laws designed to protect defendants were used to keep the sexual assault trials out of the public eye.
Ahead of opening arguments this week, the judge urged jurors to tune out all coverage and “search their souls about whether they can be impartial,” recusing themselves if necessary.
The high-profile trial of a former Australian parliamentary staffer accused of raping his colleague ended abruptly on Thursday (local time) — and without a verdict — after the judge said a juror consulted outside research against her instructions.
The BBC reported that court officials in Canberra, Australia’s capital city, discovered an academic study left behind by a member of the jury during a “routine tidying” of the jury room.
Lucy MacCallum, who repeatedly warned the jury not to pay attention to the media reports and public discourse on the trial, said that the possibility of undue influence was not a risk she could take. She dismissed the jury after the 12 days of hearing the evidence.
The media reported on days of testimony, including two senators who denied the political motives for initially concealing Higgin’s accusations.
She said that her life is open for the world to see. He was given the option of stay silent in court, but he had to head down in a notebook. He didn’t face a question in court.
Higgins’ comment on #MeToo: “Inappropriate behaviour of the law enforcement bodies in the civil court system”, Arrow told NPR
Lehrmann’s legal team said in a statement they had brought Higgins’ remarks to the attention of the Australian Federal Police as a potential contempt of court violation.
There were a handful of allegations made public in the #MeToo movement in the civil court system, where the person who made the accusations of sexual harassment had to prove their case. The actor was offered a record-setting $2 million reward after an allegation.
“The [defamation laws] have become an instrument for those who have the time and means to pursue legal proceedings,” Arrow told NPR earlier this month.