ACT Police media officer tried to help Bruce Lehrmann by stopping the media from naming him after a court attendance notice was issuedACT Police media officer tried to help Bruce Lehrmann by stopping the media from naming him after a court attendance notice was issuedKangaroo Court of AustraliaOn the day the ACT Police issued Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyers with a Court Attendance Notice (Summons), Friday the 6th of August 2021, I phoned the ACT Police media officer to discuss the issue. ACT Policing is the community policing arm of the Australian Federal Police (AFP).
The response from the media officer was strange, to say the least, although I never wrote about it at the time. But it is very relevant now given the allegations by the prosecutor in the rape trial of the police assisting Bruce Lehrmann’s defence and his call for an inquiry into police and political interference in the alleged rape case prosecution.
The media officer tried to pressure me not to name Bruce Lehrmann at least until the September hearing date even though the Police media officer admitted to me there was no legal basis to stop the media from naming him. All the old media fell into line until the next day. But more on that in a minute as it’s worth having a look at some of the background before I discuss my phone call with the ACT media officer further.
The Guardian published an article on Thursday (8/12/22) titled “Prosecutor alleges police ‘aligned with defence’ in Bruce Lehrmann case and claims ‘inappropriate interference” which says:
The chief prosecutor in the trial of Bruce Lehrmann complained that police officers engaged in “a very clear campaign to pressure” him not to prosecute the alleged rape of Brittany Higgins, saying there was “inappropriate interference” and he felt investigators “clearly aligned with the successful defence of this matter” during the trial.
In a letter sent to the Australian Capital Territory’s police chief in early November, the director of public prosecutions, Shane Drumgold SC, makes a series of extraordinary allegations about police conduct during the politically charged, high-profile case, which suggest a toxic relationship between elements of the two agencies during the investigation and trial.
Drumgold’s letter, obtained by the Guardian through freedom of information laws, alleges Higgins herself felt bullied by investigators. The letter calls for a public inquiry to examine “both political and police conduct” in the case.
and:
During the trial, Drumgold complained that police were regularly meeting with Lehrmann’s defence team during breaks in proceedings, and that the defence team had been asking police directly to conduct further investigations into some issues.
Drumgold said prosecutors discovered this when they received an unsolicited email from one of the investigators on 13 October 2022, outlining some additional points to their evidence. (
Click here to read more)
Police Union response“The federal police union has called for a judicial inquiry into the Lehrmann case, accusing the ACT’s chief prosecutor of smearing the force’s investigation into the alleged rape of Brittany Higgins.”
The union’s president, Alex Caruana, called for a full inquiry, saying it should also assess the conduct of the DPP, the ACT Victims of Crime Commissioner and ACT Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury.
Caruana said the police union would file a formal complaint to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner about the possibility of a Freedom of Information breach by Drumgold. (
Click here to read more)
The ACT Police then leaked their own email to the SMH which said “ACT police chief Neil Gaughan says the force was not consulted before a letter slamming police conduct in the investigation of Bruce Lehrmann, who was accused of raping Brittany Higgins, was released under freedom of information laws.” (
Click here to read more)
There was also a leak last Saturday (3/12/22), with documents from the Police file, to The Australian which attacked the prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann. (
Click here to read more)
There have been calls for ACT Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury and the Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold SC to step aside until there is a public inquiry. But why is no one asking AFP Commissioner Reece Kershaw to also step aside given his documented lies on the matter and involvement in the attempted cover-up?
I have also written about the AFP trying to cover up the rape allegationsOn the 13th of March 2021 I published an article titled “PM Scott Morrison, AFP Commissioner Reece Kershaw and NSW Police Commissioner Mick Fuller conspire to cover-up rape” which says in part:
“AFP Commissioner Reece Kershaw has sent a letter, which was drafted by Scott Morrison, to federal politicians warning sexual assault victims, such as Brittany Higgins, that they need to go to the police and not the media.” (
Click here to read more)
On the 4th of August 2021, I published an article titled “Scott Morrison clears rape allegations against Christian Porter and Bruce Lehrmann in preparation for the next election” which says in part:
“Australian Federal Police Commissioner Reece Kershaw and his boss Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews were caught lying about the progress of the police investigation regarding Brittany Higgins’ complaint about the alleged parliament house rapist Bruce Lehrmann.”
“The ACT director of public prosecutions says the Brittany Higgins investigation is currently back in the hands of the Australian federal police, contradicting both the AFP commissioner, Reece Kershaw, and the home affairs minister, Karen Andrews.” (
Click here to read more)
Now knowing the allegations made by Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold that the ACT Police colluded with Bruce Lehrmann’s defence gives support to my previous articles alleging AFP Commissioner Reece Kershaw was and is up to neck in the cover-up attempt.
My conversation with the ACT Police media officer Friday the 6th of August 2021It’s relevant that the day before I spoke to the ACT Police, I spoke to the NSW Police media officer (5/8/21) regarding the Court Attendance Notice issued to Hillsong’s Brian Houston. When the police issued the media release, they didn’t name Brian Houston but from the details, the media knew who it was. But they had Brian Houston’s age wrong which I checked on Wikipedia, so I phoned the NSW Media Team to make sure it was Brian Houston before I published an article. (
Click here to read more)
All the media published articles and videos naming Brian Houston immediately after they received the NSW Press Release. This sits in contrast to what happened the next day when the ACT Police issued a press release regarding Bruce Lehrmann.
On the 15th of February 2021 Brittany Higgins did 2 interviews, with News Corp and Channel 10, where she claimed she was raped at parliament house in 2019. Other media picked up on the story but no media named Bruce Lehrmann.
On the 17th of February 2021,
True Crimes News Weekly published an article naming Bruce Lehrman as the alleged rapist. On the 19th of February 2021 I published an article titled “
Scott Morrison refuses to deny the alleged parliament house rapist is Bruce Lehrmann who previously worked for Senator Linda Reynolds“.
True Crimes News Weekly and this website continued to write articles naming Bruce Lehrmann as the alleged rapist under investigation. But the old media refused to name him even after the ACT police said they were investigating the alleged rape and all the old media knew Bruce Lehrmann was the alleged rapist and there was no legal basis not to name him.
On Friday the 6th of August 2021 the ACT Police issued a media release stating they had served a summons on a 26-year-old man’s lawyers for an alleged sexual assault of a woman in Parliament House in March 2019. The media named Brittany Higgins but again refused to name Bruce Lehrmann.
Eg: The SMH wrote “Police have charged a 26-year-old man with raping former government adviser Brittany Higgins in Parliament House two years ago.” (
Click here to read more)
True Crimes News Weekly and I both published on social media stating Bruce Lehrmann had been charged and we both came under attack from old media for naming him. The same old media who the day before were happy to name Brian Houston.
I phoned the ACT Police media officer to see if there was any issue in naming Lehrmann. I asked if there were any legal restrictions in naming Lehrmann and the police officer said there weren’t which is exactly what I expected him to say.
But the police officer added that he was aware of my website and that “you are the only one who has named him” and said words to the effect “we don’t know what Lehrmann’s lawyers will do when it goes to court”. He was implying they might apply for a suppression order and he was singling me out by saying that “you are the only one who has named him”.
The reality was True Crimes News Weekly was the first to name Lehrmann I think the police media officer would have known that but he wanted to put pressure on me by saying I was the only one.
I decided I wouldn’t take down anything I had already published but I wouldn’t post anything more naming Lehrmann until his first court date in September 2021. I even did a quick video saying as much which I posted on Twitter. But I thought about it and realised I had been sucker-punched by the police officer and approximately 20 minutes later I took down the video.
The following day (Saturday the 7th of August 2021) the old media started naming Lehrmann and I published an article on Sunday the 8th of August 2021 titled “Old media forced to name Brittany Higgin’s alleged rapist Bruce Lehrmann after running a Liberal Party protection racket for months”. (
Click here to read the article)
The phone call with the ACT Police media officer was odd but with recent allegations by the Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold of the ACT Police working with Lehrmann’s lawyers and trying to stop him from being charged, it is obvious to me in hindsight that the ACT Police media officer was trying to help Lehrmann and his lawyers.
There are numerous questions that the ACT Police media officer needs to answer. But the obvious one is:
What influence did the ACT Police, or someone associated with the police, have in the old media refusing to name Lehrmann for almost 6 months after police announced he was under investigation and media refusing to name him for almost 24 hours after the police said he was charged with rape?
The ACT Police media officer tried to talk me out of naming Lehrmann so it’s almost certain he had some influence on the old media not naming him and that fits well with Shane Drumgold’s allegations.
People attacking Brittany HigginsLiberal Party trolls, Murdoch propagandists and a few nutters are attacking Brittany Higgins on social media and all of them ignore the blatant lies that Bruce Lehrmann told the police. He said he went back to the Parliament House office because he had urgent work to do. But he told his boss Fiona Brown that he went back to drink whisky.
Asked about the inconsistency, Lehrmann told police: “There was no alcohol, I didn’t have any alcohol.” (
Click here to read more)
Brown told the court there was “no urgent work” justifying the after-hours visit. “The [department of parliamentary services] report said that they said they were there for urgent work purposes,” she told the court on Tuesday. “There was no urgent work purpose.” (
Click here to read more) That means Lehrmann lied to the police and his boss Fiona Brown.
Lehrmann couldn’t get his lies straight and then he left Brittany Higgins naked on the lounge to go home to his girlfriend which goes a long way to explain why Lehrmann refused to hop on the witness stand.
Brittany Higgins lawsuitBrittany Higgins’ lawyers have said they are suing the government and Senators Michaelia Cash and Linda Reynolds. I published the below video on Tuesday the 6th of December titled “Anthony Albanese and Labor now own the outcome of the Brittany Higgins rape allegations civil claim” calling for a public inquiry into the matter.
Bruce Lehmann’s defamation threatsBruce Lehrmann has reportedly retained lawyers to look at suing for defamation. I can’t see that happening as it would be a huge minefield for him. There are too many unanswered questions that he would be forced to answer and he had the opportunity during the trial to answer those questions but he chose not to.
This matter will not go away until there is a public hearing to deal with widespread cover-up and interference in the administration of justice.
[For full article including videos use link above]
