Bruce Lehrmann makes legal bid for Brittany Higgins documentary footage

Former Liberal staffer Bruce Lehrmann has asked a court to order the company behind a film involving Brittany Higgins to hand over raw footage.

The application was heard today in Toowoomba District Court, where Mr Lehrmann is expected to stand trial charged with two counts of rape alleged to have occurred in Toowoomba, west of Brisbane, in October 2021.

Mr Lehrmann has not yet been required to enter a plea in relation to the Toowoomba rape charges but has indicated he will plead not guilty.

The Toowoomba matter is not connected to any of his other proceedings in other jurisdictions.

Mr Lehrmann's defence lawyer, Zali Burrows, made an application in May seeking material created for the film Silenced, including any raw or b-roll footage and the film's international production schedule.

The court was told by the barrister appearing for the filmmaker that the film included interviews with Brittany Higgins, and references to Mr Lehrmann's criminal proceeding in the Australian Capital Territory and his defamation case against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson, but did not touch on the charges Mr Lehrmann was facing in Toowoomba.

Social media promotion

Appearing by video link, Ms Burrows today said Ms Higgins's promotion of the film on her personal social media account could "likely confuse the potential jury pool" selected in Queensland for Mr Lehrmann's case in Toowoomba.

She told the court Ms Higgins had previously made statements on her social media about the Toowoomba case, including a "direct press statement she made to the victim in this matter".

During the proceedings, Judge Deborah Richards asked Ms Burrows whether she understood the subpoena application was not "going to stop Brittany Higgins from posting on social media".

Ms Burrows said her client wished to understand if Ms Higgins's interview "alluded to her experience" and possibly linked it to the Toowoomba matters.

"In the film, it could come across as, 'Yes, I am a victim, I have been raped and he got away with it in the Canberra trial, I'm pretty upset by it and he shouldn't be allowed to get away with it in this trial'," Ms Burrows told the court.

"We understand there is a wealth of information on the internet [referring to Mr Lehrmann].

"Sometimes that can go out of people's mind, but this is rehashing it again, this film will be viewed as the advocacy of Ms Higgins influencing the jury pool."

Ms Burrows said her client was not opposed to the film being released, but feared its broadcast, whether on Netflix or elsewhere, could lead to unfair trial for her client.

"It's just the timing, he does not want it aired prior or during his trial," she said.

Footage would be 'futile'

Representing the film-maker, barrister Dauid Sibtain SC told the court the film didn't contain anything that "could be seen as a pointer or suggestion" to the Toowoomba matter.

Mr Sibtain, who also appeared by video link, said there was "no legitimate forensic purposes" for handing over any footage to Mr Lehrmann's legal team.

"It wholly concerns Mr Lehrmann's criminal proceeding in the Australian Capital Territory … and wholly concerns Mr Lehrmann's defamation proceedings and observations about those two proceedings and nothing more," he said.

"What this film does concern are other proceedings that have been reported on openly."

Mr Sibtain said the basis of Ms Burrows's argument surrounding Ms Higgins's "commentary" on social media had "nothing to do with" his client.

He said any application granted would be "futile" in aiding Mr Lehrmann's case.

"The subject matter of the film goes beyond Mr Lehrmann's dealing with Ms Higgins, it includes other case studies in jurisdictions," Mr Sibtain said.

"What has been said about Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins does not go beyond what has been the subject of wide public scrutiny and commentary.

He told the court the film had already been screened three times during the Sydney Film Festival and invited Ms Burrows to watch it at another screening in Newtown on Friday.

"This court should not use its process to compel us to produce it," Mr Sibtain said.

Judge Richards has reserved her decision.

Email address