Linda Reynolds returns to witness stand

Senator Reynolds has begun her final day of evidence in her defamation case against Brittany Higgins.

The senator is suing Ms Higgins and her husband David Sharaz over social media posts the couple shared in 2022 and 2023.

The posts were critical of Senator Reynolds’ handling of Ms Higgins’ allegation she was raped in Parliament House in 2019 by her then-colleague Mr Lehrmann.

He was charged with rape and faced trial in 2022, but the trial was aborted due to juror misconduct.

The charge was dropped and Mr Lehrmann continues to maintain his innocence.

In the Western Australian Supreme Court on Friday, Ms Higgins’ lawyer Rachel Young SC put to the senator that she had brought defamation proceeding against other parties following Ms Higgins’ rape allegations.

Senator Reynolds confirmed to Ms Young that she took action against the ACT because she was concerned about comments made by the Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold.

The senator settled with the ACT for $70,000 plus $20,000.

The senator confirmed she published a Facebook post in March this year about her action against the ACT, detailing the apology and settlement she received.

The post also said she had initiated further defamation action against other parties.

Senator Reynolds confirmed she had also taken action against Harper Collins, author Patrick Collins, The Spectator and The Independent, that had all been settled.

EVIDENCE IN BRUCE LEHRMANN TRIAL

Senator Reynolds said evidence she gave in the criminal trial was based on a statement she gave to Australian Federal Police and her memory.

The senator confirmed she met with the Mr Drumgold and Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Steven Whybrow in briefing sessions before the trial, and that she read her AFP statement before going into the trial to give evidence.

She said she had not reviewed a report by the Department of Parliamentary Services about the night of the security breach before going into the trial.

Ms Young put to the senator that she said in the trial she became aware of the security guards checking on Ms Higgins on the night of the security breach and her office being cleaned from an article published on news.com.au and watching The Project interview.

The senator said there was discussion about steam cleaning in the trial, and that when she denied knowing that her office had been cleaned, she was referring to it being steam cleaned.

The senator said perhaps she should have been more specific in her evidence about steam cleaning.

The senator said during her evidence in the criminal trial she recollected there were checks on the night of the security breach, but not necessarily that they were conducted by security guards.

The senator said she did not have a copy of the DPS report when she gave evidence, but was relying on her memory and the statement she gave the AFP.

“I was being honest about what I recollected at the time,” she said.

STITCHED UP’: REYNOLDS

On Thursday, the senator had faced intense questioning from Ms Young over information she leaked to a journalist.

Senator Reynolds told the court on Thursday she thought Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus had “stitched her up” by acting “corruptly” in regards to how Ms Higgins’ compensation claim against the government was handled.

The senator said she was incredibly angry with the Attorney-General for locking her out of mediation talks between the Commonwealth and Brittany Higgins.

She said it had denied her an opportunity to defend allegations made by Ms Higgins that she had mishandled her rape allegation, which she thought could have been easily defended.

The mediation was to settle Ms Higgins’ personal injury claim involving her rape allegation, that included the way it had been mishandled by her employer.

The court was shown several emails the senator had sent The Australian journalist Janet Albrechtsen from her personal Gmail account.

One email contained confidential information about Ms Higgins’ claim, others pointed to information about Ms Higgins and Mr Sharaz, and referred to the senator’s allegation of corruption.

Reynolds said she was never upset about a settlement amount or Ms Higgins initiating the claim, but with how the Commonwealth dealt with it.

“I believe the Attorney-General manipulated the law to muzzle me, I saw it as government corruption,” she said.

“Everything in this article was about the process of how (the claim) was handled, it was not about Ms Higgins.

“It was about what the government did and the process they took, in my mind it was corrupt which is clearly what I said and what was expressed.

“It was not about Ms Higgins, I could not make that assessment – I was frozen out, I do not know what allegations about me were settled.

“It was about the allegations she made publicly, and in the draft, in my mind they were defendable allegations.

“I had numerous discussions with Ms Albrechtsen, it was not about the alleged rape, it was about the subsequent allegations about me and Ms Brown.”

The trial continues.