logo
Former judge's excuse for leaking confidential material from Bruce Lehrmann inquiry

Former judge's excuse for leaking confidential material from Bruce Lehrmann inquiry

Daily Mail​21-07-2025
A former judge's decision to leak confidential material from an inquiry into Bruce Lehrmann 's criminal prosecution was an attempt at transparency not an act of corruption, his lawyers say.
Walter Sofronoff KC has asked the Federal Court to toss a March finding by the ACT Integrity Commission that the former judge engaged in serious corrupt conduct.
The commission's probe stemmed from Mr Sofronoff's leaks to a journalist.
But the watchdog's adverse finding was a 'serious offence against the administration of justice', Mr Sofronoff's barrister Adam Pomerenke KC said during a hearing on Monday.
Mr Sofronoff was not corrupt, malicious or dishonest, the barrister told Justice Wendy Abrahams.
Rather, he genuinely believed he was acting in the public interest by sending documents like witness statements to the media.
'Even if Mr Sofronoff was wrong in his view, the fact remains that he genuinely and honestly held it,' Mr Pomerenke said.
'At worst it could be characterised as an erroneous attempt to ensure accuracy and transparency in the public discourse.'
Mr Sofronoff chaired a board of inquiry into the ACT's criminal justice system after Lehrmann's controversy-plagued prosecution.
The former Liberal staffer was accused of raping then-colleague Brittany Higgins in a ministerial office at Parliament House in 2019.
A 2022 criminal trial was abandoned without a verdict due to juror misconduct.
Lehrmann lost a defamation lawsuit he brought over media reporting of Ms Higgins' allegations but has appealed a judge's finding the rape claim was true on the balance of probabilities.
The Sofronoff-led inquiry found the ACT's top prosecutor, Shane Drumgold, had lost objectivity over the Lehrmann case and knowingly lied about a note of his meeting with broadcaster Lisa Wilkinson.
Mr Drumgold resigned and launched a legal challenge to the findings in the ACT Supreme Court.
It found the majority of the inquiry's findings were not legally unreasonable, but it struck down an adverse finding about how Mr Drumgold cross-examined then-Liberal senator Linda Reynolds during Lehrmann's criminal trial.
In March, the ACT Integrity Commission also found the majority of the inquiry's findings were not legally unreasonable.
But it found Mr Sofronoff's behaviour during the inquiry gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias and he might have been influenced by the publicly expressed views of journalist Janet Albrechtsen.
Mr Sofronoff repeatedly messaged the News Corp columnist and eventually provided her an advance copy of his probe's final report.
Mr Pomerenke told the Federal Court on Monday the ACT corruption body had admitted it made an error in finding Mr Sofronoff might have engaged in contempt.
The claimed contempt stemmed out of leaks to the media despite directions made to parties during the inquiry to suppress certain documents.
But the notion that the head of an inquiry could be in contempt of himself was 'absurd and irrational', Mr Pomerenke said.
This concession was enough to toss the findings against his client, he told the court.
Any individual error could not be 'disentangled' from the final finding that the former judge engaged in serious corrupt conduct, the barrister said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Bain & Company given £24m of state contracts after UK ban lifted
Bain & Company given £24m of state contracts after UK ban lifted

Times

timean hour ago

  • Times

Bain & Company given £24m of state contracts after UK ban lifted

Bain & Company has been awarded almost £24 million of state contracts since the British government backed down on a ban on the consultancy over alleged state corruption in South Africa. Bain, based in Boston, Massachusetts, and one of the world's biggest management consultancy firms, was given a three-year ban in August 2022 by the Cabinet Office from bidding for government contracts. It was barred over what Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Cabinet Office minister at the time, alleged was 'grave professional misconduct, which renders its integrity questionable'. • Big three consultancies 'rarely worth hiring', say executives The British government's decision followed an inquiry in South Africa into so-called 'state capture' during the presidency of Jacob Zuma, which criticised the role of international firms, including Bain. The company made a legal challenge against the decision of Boris Johnson's government, which it argued was 'based on a flawed process', and pledged to improve its corporate governance. The ban was abruptly lifted in March 2023 after less than eight months; Whitehall sources said a legal challenge could have left the taxpayer with a large bill. An analysis of state contracts by Tussell, the data company, for The Times shows that Bain has since been awarded nine state contracts worth a combined £23.9 million, including with the Ministry of Defence and the Home Office. Lord Hain, a former Labour minister and anti-apartheid campaigner, who lobbied the Johnson administration and current government over Bain, said he was 'very disappointed' it had received any British state contracts. 'I trust that there will be no more. Just because it's apparently legally not possible to ban them is no reason to award them any government work.' Bain was approached for comment on the UK contracts. A government spokesman said: 'Bain colluded with the former government of South Africa to damage state organisations. Whilst decisions on the exclusion of Bain from bidding for UK government contracts were made by the previous government, the government will take strong action against any future supplier misconduct wherever it is found.' Sources said the MoD contracts were awarded through an existing central government management consultancy framework. The government has new powers under the Procurement Act 2023 to take action against suppliers involved in misconduct but they are not retrospective. In October Hain wrote to Pat McFadden, minister for intergovernmental relations, urging a fresh ban on contracts. In his response in January, McFadden said that he had requested legal advice on options to extend a ban but was told 'no legal route existed'. Bain was accused of undermining the South African Revenue Service (Sars) through consultancy work that allegedly benefited Mr Zuma's allies. The management consultancy firm, which was founded in 1973 and operates in 40 countries, has said that it has taken 'significant measures' to strengthen its governance for public sector contracts. 'While there were no findings from two official commissions of inquiry of any illegal actions by Bain, we accepted responsibility for the events at that time and repaid all fees, with interest, to Sars.' Earlier this month, Bain said that it was 'winding down' consulting operations in South Africa and that its Johannesburg office will become a services hub supporting Bain's global operations.

Families of murder victims 'relieved' as Government backs parole ban for killers who hide bodies
Families of murder victims 'relieved' as Government backs parole ban for killers who hide bodies

Daily Record

timean hour ago

  • Daily Record

Families of murder victims 'relieved' as Government backs parole ban for killers who hide bodies

Suzanne Pilley and Arlene Fraser's families met with Justice Secretary Angela Constance to press for an amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform Bill. The families of Suzanne Pilley and Arlene Fraser say they feel 'relieved' after the Scottish Government signalled support for changes to the parole system targeting killers who refuse to reveal where their victims are buried. ‌ Speaking in Glasgow on Wednesday following a meeting with Justice Secretary Angela Constance, the families issued a joint statement welcoming the move. ‌ They also urged the minister to push ahead with the reforms without delay. ‌ The meeting was requested by the families to discuss an amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform Bill currently going through the Scottish Parliament. The amendment would mean that when a convicted murderer r efuses to reveal the location of their victims remains, this 'must' be taken into account when considering parole. ‌ Under current legislation, the parole board rules dictate that this 'may' be taken into account. The changes have sometimes been referred to as 'Suzanne's Law' – named after Suzanne Pilley, who was murdered by her colleague David Gilroy in 2010. However, the Scottish Government has not used this term and says decisions on parole are for the independent parole board. Gail Fairgrieve, sister of Suzanne Pilley, and her mother Sylvia Pilley were joined by Carol Gillies – who is Arlene Fraser's sister – in Glasgow on Wednesday. ‌ Arlene Fraser vanished in 1998, with her husband Nat Fraser being convicted of her murder in 2012. The joint statement said: 'Today we met with Justice Secretary Angela Constance to seek assurances that this important amendment will go through in the Bill. ‌ 'We are relieved that she reaffirmed her support of the amendment and spoke of her commitment for the intent and substantive content of amendment 260 to remain unaltered. 'We'd like to thank her for meeting with us and discussing the impact that this change will have. 'We hope that this change in law will provide not only us, but with other families in our position, with a measure of comfort and confidence that they can get the justice that we all so badly deserve.' ‌ It continued: 'With the next stage due on return from summer recess, we urge ministers to ensure that this legislation is enacted as soon as possible – we have already been under unimaginable strain and pressure for so many years leading up to this moment.' The SNP minister said: 'I am grateful to the families of Suzanne Pilley and Arlene Fraser for meeting with me today. ‌ 'They have suffered heartbreaking losses, compounded by not knowing the final resting place of their loved ones. My deepest sympathies remain with them. 'In March, I supported an amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform Bill that will mean the Parole Board, when making decisions about release, must take account of whether a prisoner has information about the disposal of a victim's remains, but has not disclosed it. 'At today's meeting, I reiterated my firm commitment to this change, which will become law if the Bill is passed in Parliament.' Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'.

US appeals court upholds SEC 'gag rule' over free speech objections
US appeals court upholds SEC 'gag rule' over free speech objections

Reuters

timean hour ago

  • Reuters

US appeals court upholds SEC 'gag rule' over free speech objections

Aug 6 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Wednesday upheld the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's so-called "gag rule," rejecting a claim it illegally silences defendants who want to criticize the regulator after settling civil enforcement cases. In a 3-0 decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the rule was not unconstitutional on its face, but could violate the First Amendment depending on how it is applied. The rule, reflecting SEC policy dating to 1972, often requires settling defendants to say at least that they neither admit nor deny the regulator's allegations. Twelve petitioners sought to void the rule, including eight people whose SEC settlements triggered it. One, former Xerox chief financial officer Barry Romeril, took a similar case to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 in an appeal backed by billionaire and longtime SEC critic Elon Musk, but that court refused to consider it. In Wednesday's decision, Circuit Judge Daniel Bress said that while some defendants find the rule coercive, they remained free not to settle, and instead to speak out against the SEC. He also said the SEC had an interest in deciding how to try its own cases, including by giving defendants different options, knowing that scrapping the rule could lead to fewer settlements. "Provided that any limitation on speech remains within proper bounds, and given the background ability to waive First Amendment rights at least to some extent, the SEC has an interest in giving defendants the option to agree to a speech restriction as part of a broader settlement agreement," Bress wrote. The judge said challenges to applying the rule could still be brought before the SEC brings enforcement cases, while judges consider settlements, or when the SEC reopens settled cases because of alleged breaches. Lawyers for the 12 petitioners did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The SEC had no immediate comment. The petitioners, including the nonprofit New Civil Liberties Alliance, had been appealing from the SEC's decision in January 2024 not to amend the rule. SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce dissented, opens new tab from that decision. She found "scant factual basis" for the rule, and said prohibiting denials of wrongdoing "prevents the American public from ever hearing criticisms that might otherwise be lodged against the government, let alone assessing their credibility." The 9th Circuit heard the appeal in Honolulu, Hawaii. The case is Powell et al v SEC, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-1899.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store