Rape trial jury discharged over juror’s act

Chief Justice Lucy McCallum has set the date for the new trial for February 20, 2023, with conditions for Mr Lehrmann being set out before the court.He is not allowed to contact Ms Higgins, her partner David Sharaz, parents Kelly Higgins or Matthew Higgins and must advise the AFP of his residential address.If Mr Lehrmann decides to travel overseas during this time he must also provide his itinerary to the AFP two weeks prior to his travel.The 12-person jury had, so far, been unable to decide whether Mr Lehrmann is guilty or not guilty of one count of sexual intercourse without consent against Ms Higgins in the early hours of March 23, 2019.Mr Lehrmann has pleaded not guilty to the charge, which allegedly occurred on a couch in the office of Senator Linda Reynolds.The judge discharged the jury of eight women and four men in the trial Thursday morning after one juror acted inappropriately.“It has come to my attention that one of you has, contrary to directions, undertaken research in relation to an issue in the case,” Chief Justice McCallum said.“That material has entered the jury room which ought not to have.“I have had an explanation and it may be no harm has been done but that is a risk I can’t take.”Chief Justice McCallum told the jury that juror had been discharged and she had made the decision to now discharge the rest of the group as well.“Sometimes there is a mishap which…results in a miscarriage of a trial. That’s what’s happened here.”In handing down her orders, Chief Justice McCallum revealed how it came to her attention that research material outside of the evidence provided in the courtroom had entered the jury room.She said when cleaning the jury room following a day of deliberations, one of the court officers accidentally bumped a folder containing documents onto the floor.When the officer picked them up he noticed part of the title page of an academic research paper, “the source of which suggested the topic of the paper might be sexual assault”.The Judge said the content of the research paper included discussion around the unhelpfulness of attempting to quantify the prevalance of false complaints and a deeper analysis around false sexual assault complaints.“The juror in question this morning gave an explanation, suggesting the document had not been used or relied upon by any juror,” Chief Justice McCallum said.She said under the circumstances that claim was regarded with some scepticism, which is why the decision was made to discharge the jury. Ms Higgins arrived at the ACT Supreme Court this morning as the jury was set to continue deliberations for a sixth day.On Tuesday afternoon, the group sent a note to ACT Chief Justice Lucy McCallum informing her they hadn’t been able to reach a decision.“You have told me in a note you are unable to reach a unanimous verdict,” she told the jury.Chief Justice McCallum said that experience has shown juries can “often reach a verdict if given more time”.She directed the jury to go back out and continue their deliberations to see whether they can reach a unanimous agreement.About 10 minutes after the jury were directed to continue their deliberations, the group informed the judge they wished to go home and return tomorrow morning.“Members of the jury, I have been told you would like to go home now and return tomorrow with fresh minds,” Chief Justice McCallum said.The court heard the Judge has the power to discharge the jury from giving a verdict but should only do that if after examining one or more of the jurors she is satisfied that they are not likely to agree.“That means there is no likelihood of genuine agreement after any further deliberations,” Chief Justice McCallum said.The jury were told the only expectation of them is that they remain true to their oath and to consider the evidence fairly.She also reminded the group they have a duty to listen carefully to the arguments of the other jury members.“You are all equals in the jury room,” she said.Chief Justice McCallum said members of the jury may take different paths that lead them to the same conclusion.“I remind you of the direction I gave you in my summing up, your verdict, guilty or not guilty, must be a unanimous one,” she said. Via news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site https://www.news.com.au