The 15-minute hearing that changed the reporting of Bruce Lehrmann’s Queensland rape trial
News of Bruce Lehrmann’s Queensland rape case was revealed to have been suppressed for almost three weeks; This follows an attempt by the former federal Liberal party staffer to keep his name out of the press.
Lehrmann’s case took a new turn during a hearing in the Brisbane District Court on March 19, when Judge Deborah Richards made an “extraordinary” order over the press after her legal team misinterpreted an earlier ruling.
This imprint is only now able to report on the hearing, which lasted less than 15 minutes and resulted in the media being unable to publish anything about the rape case, including Lehrmann’s trial date, for almost three weeks.
Lehrmann, who is due to appear in court on November 2, is accused of raping a woman after a drug-filled night at a Toowoomba nightclub in 2021.
He was determined to stand Trial in 2024With the Crown’s case that the complainant did not consent to sex without a condom. The woman had testified in previous hearings that she told Lehrmann to “stop whatever you are doing” and that Lehrmann consoled her by saying “it’s okay, it’s okay.”
Lehrmann will fight the charges; but he refused to confirm to the court whether this would take place in front of a jury or whether his legal team would apply for a judge-only trial, as is their right.
Media lawyers for Nine Newspapers, News Corp Australia and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, which owns this imprint, spoke at a brief hearing last month regarding previously issued orders/suppression orders.
Some media outlets, including this one, had published a brief update on Lehrmann’s case the previous afternoon, detailing upcoming and routine court dates.
Lehrmann’s lawyer, Zali Burrows, a high-profile Sydney barrister who often represents her client in court remotely, told Judge Richards she interpreted the decision not to publish as covering her client’s entire case.
“Miss Burrows,” said Richards. “I guess you really wanted everything to be a no-broadcast order yesterday afternoon.”
Burrows replied: “Yes, it was interpreted that way.”
Richards eventually called for a general decision not to publish the case until the following Wednesday.
Richards advised media organizations that they could make presentations on this date and said, “So nothing about the Lehrmann case will be published until further discussion on Wednesday.”
It was a move described as extraordinary by legal counsel for Nine Newspaper Larina Alick, who spoke on behalf of media organizations opposing the publication ban decision.
He said Lehrmann’s case had been broadcast in the last 24 hours and, in fact, for years.
“There is an element of futility in this decision between now and Wednesday,” he told the court at a hearing in March.
“If a non-publication order is sought regarding what happened in the courtroom yesterday, this is a very confidential and limited order and may be appropriate if this is what is intended to be suppressed.
“But if the application is going to suppress the entire case from that point on, I would think that is extraordinary.”
The judge replied: “It might be extraordinary, I don’t know what the application is yet. But I don’t see any harm in the media not covering it between Thursday and Wednesday. It’s been less than a week.”
Richards clarified that he did not believe the media had breached any order.
“I think Ms. Burrows thought it was a more sweeping order than it actually was,” Richards said.
Richards continued: “As I say, at this stage I do not think it is unreasonable for there to be no publication until Wednesday, when the matter is discussed.”
However, this deadline was ultimately extended due to Lehrmann’s failure to submit application documents by March 23 and subsequently failing to meet the second deadline of April 2.
Therefore, the media remained under a publication ban until Tuesday, April 7.
Last Thursday, just an hour before the court closed for the Easter long weekend, Lehrmann abandoned his application for the repression to continue.
Lawyers for the media organizations asked the judge to order the chambers to lift the crackdown immediately, but reporting restrictions were not lifted until Tuesday afternoon.
This allowed the media to cover the case and Lehrmann’s upcoming dates.
This pressure is not the first in Lehrmann’s case. In the early stages, when Queensland laws changed to allow rape defendants to be named before they appear in court, Lehrmann’s lawyers fought to obtain suppression orders to prevent him being revealed as the “high-profile man accused of rape in Toowoomba”.
Cloe Read is the Brisbane Times’ crime and courts reporter.Connect with: X or email.
