Key PointsMr Lehrmann confronted a legal trial within the ACT Supreme Courtroom final 12 months.It is over a rape allegation made by his former colleague Brittany Higgins.He denies the allegation and pleaded not responsible.
This text incorporates references to rape and sexual assault.
The juror who triggered a mistrial in Bruce Lehrmann’s rape trial was “deeply sorry” for his or her actions, new paperwork reveal.
Mr Lehrmann confronted a legal trial within the ACT Supreme Courtroom final 12 months over a rape allegation made by his former colleague Brittany Higgins.
He denies the allegation and pleaded not responsible.
Through the October trial, jury deliberations had been going for 5 days and jurors had not but reached a verdict.
However ACT Chief Justice Lucy McCallum was compelled to discharge all the jury after it was found a juror had performed their very own analysis in relation to the case and had taken the doc into the deliberation room.
An inquiry into how the territory justice system dealt with Ms Higgins’ allegations has launched the transcript from a non-public listening to the place the chief justice questioned the juror.
The paperwork had been found by sheriff’s officers who tidied the jury room every night time.
The juror admitted they’d performed their very own analysis to “make clear a degree” for themselves.
“I introduced it in to indicate the place the clarification got here from and we agreed that … as a result of it was analysis that it should not be mentioned and I did not, we’ve not mentioned it,” the juror mentioned.
Chief Justice McCallum mentioned regardless of this rationalization, the actual fact the juror had accessed the fabric that was not a part of the proof within the trial and it had been introduced within the deliberation room meant she must discharge all the jury.
The juror mentioned they had been “deeply sorry” for this.
“Can I say I offer you my honest apologies. I wasn’t conscious that … doing this was in any sense a wrongdoing,” they mentioned.
“I used to be simply purely doing, discovering out what it meant, sure phrases, and in case I discussed it to the jury, I wish to guarantee that I wasn’t inventing something.
“Nobody has learn it, nobody is aware of something about it. I simply thought I might point out that.”
Chief Justice McCallum took steps to guard the anonymity of the juror, who mentioned they had been “keen to take the accountability” for the misconduct.
However the chief justice reminded the juror it will be an offence for them to reveal the deliberations and she or he would like to protect their anonymity.
ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold final week advised the inquiry that from his courtroom observations, there was one juror who was holding out however the remainder of the jury was inclined to convict Mr Lehrmann.
Requested if the misconduct within the trial was dedicated by the identical juror who he had perceived as “holding out” from reaching a conviction, Mr Drumgold mentioned it was.
However defence lawyer Steven Whybrow advised the inquiry his workforce believed 10 of the jurors had been in favour of an acquittal and that making an attempt to interpret a jury’s views was “simply guessing”.
In case you or somebody you realize is impacted by sexual assault, name 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or go to 1800RESPECT.org.au. In an emergency, name 000.
