A high-ranking detective has denied trying to kibosh the Bruce Lehrmann case and subsequently feeling "disappointed" when one-sided views failed to convince his boss there was insufficient evidence to proceed.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
"To be honest, it's kind of offensive that you keep saying it was disappointing to me because it wasn't," Detective Superintendent Scott Moller told counsel for the ACT's top prosecutor on Tuesday.
Cross-examination grew fiery at times as Mark Tedeschi KC, representing Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold SC, challenged Detective Superintendent Moller at an inquiry into Mr Lehrmann's case.
The inquiry is examining how police, Mr Drumgold and the ACT Victims of Crime Commissioner handled the aborted case of Mr Lehrmann, who denies raping fellow former Liberal Party staffer Brittany Higgins.
The charge levelled at Mr Lehrmann was discontinued last year after juror misconduct caused a mistrial.
On Tuesday, his second day on the witness stand, Detective Superintendent Moller acknowledged there was "certainly a fracture" in the relationship between police and prosecutors working on the case.
He described how he and the investigators working underneath him had believed there was insufficient evidence to charge Mr Lehrmann.
On the other side of the equation was Mr Drumgold, who was said to be "dismissive" of police concerns and determined to take the case to trial before he had even seen a brief of evidence.
"The team were of the view that Mr Drumgold ... had a position he was going to prosecute this matter no matter what," Detective Superintendent Moller told the inquiry, expressing concerns the top prosecutor had "lost objectivity".
In June 2021, two months before Mr Lehrmann was ultimately charged, Detective Superintendent Moller wrote an executive briefing for his boss, Commander Michael Chew, seeking advice on what to do next.
He defended this document on Monday, telling the inquiry it was "a little bit unfair" to criticise it for focusing heavily on his concerns about Ms Higgins when it included a link to the full brief of evidence.
Challenged further by Mr Tedeschi on Tuesday, he repeatedly objected to the suggestion he had acted in an attempt to "convince" Commander Chew not to charge Mr Lehrmann and put an end to the case.
"These were the pertinent things that were in my mind at the time," he said of the contents of his report, which raised concerns about Ms Higgins' credibility and described her as having been "manipulative".
Commander Chew ended up directing that Detective Superintendent Moller provide Mr Drumgold a brief of evidence for advice, and the top prosecutor ultimately recommended that Mr Lehrmann be charged.
Detective Superintendent Moller said the referral to Mr Drumgold was "a great decision" because, at that stage, he had simply wanted to progress the case "one way or another".
READ MORE:
Once police received Mr Drumgold's formal advice, Detective Superintendent Moller said he became comfortable with proceeding by charging Mr Lehrmann.
Detective Superintendent Moller acknowledged some investigators had been "concerned for the presumption of innocence", and worried about whether Mr Lehrmann should be put before a court.
But he denied that they had shown resentment towards Mr Drumgold when the case progressed on his advice, insisting his staff had remained "absolutely professional" and were "committed to the prosecution".
In his evidence, Mr Drumgold has claimed police aligned themselves Mr Lehrmann's lawyers in the hope of an acquittal once the case reached trial.
Mr Tedeschi's cross-examination of Detective Superintendent Moller continues.
