Was It a Case of HeToo?

Today, in questions everyone already knows the answer to: is water wet? Does fire burn? And, was the ACT chief prosecutor’s pursuit of rape allegations too politically motivated?

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold has been prone to gibbering about “political conspiracies” supposedly between the Australian Federal Police and the Morrison government — claims he now admits were mistaken. On the other hand, the rest of us have good reason to suspect he might have been attacking the mirror.

During the first week of the Sofronoff board of inquiry into the ACT’s criminal justice system, Drumgold admitted to many errors and misjudgments during his handling of the prosecution and trial of Lehrmann, as well as events after the mistrial.

He admitted to potentially misleading the court, and for paying insufficient attention to the presumption of innocence.

How did this happen? What drove Drumgold to make so many errors and misjudgements?
No-one can seriously deny that, from the moment they were made, Brittany Higgins’ allegations of rape were a political whirlwind. By the admission of her boyfriend, Higgins deliberately manipulated public appearances, and played games with police investigating the matter, to maximise pressure on the government. These included not just her notorious interview on The Project but a star appearance at a feminist rally in Canberra.

It’s high time we turned the question of political interference in the prosecution of Lehrmann on its head and asked whether the DPP’s judgment was affected by the political whirlwinds that engulfed this national scandal.

These forces were amplified by the politics of the #MeToo movement, where advocates have given, and continue to give, short shrift to principles of due process, the presumption of innocence and a fair trial. That background is beyond question.

Labor in opposition ruthlessly exploited the rape complaint in order to embarrass the government. We know that Higgins and her boyfriend David Sharaz were in contact with Labor politicians Katy Gallagher and Tanya Plibersek.

This was before Lehrmann being charged, raising the question of how far these potent political forces extended.

The political pressure worked, too. Then-PM Scott Morrison apologised to Higgins in parliament, blatantly undermining the rock of our criminal justice system, the presumption of innocence. Morrison’s only, abject, excuse could be that everyone else was doing it, too. Not just the media and Labor, but even apparently at the highest levels of the justice system.

The question on many people’s minds is: Why did Drumgold make so many profound errors of judgment? Was Drumgold ill-suited to exercise the power and duties that attach to a DPP, a position where a person is entrusted with the solemn, careful task of administering justice?

Others may ask whether the roiling political forces, fuelled by federal Labor and the media, to weaponise a rape allegation also ensnared Drumgold in some way, affecting his judgment, from time to time, as minister of justice.

The list of Drumgold’s errors and bad calls is extensive and blatantly leans one way.

What on earth explains the long list of rash and ill-conceived decisions by the DPP? Was it #MeToo zealotry? Did political pressures ensnare him? Incompetence?

Any mix of these possible factors is a dangerous concoction in the hands of a DPP who exercises the power and authority of the state against individual citizens […]

One of the most important tasks for Walter Sofronoff KC will be determining the motivations of the DPP, especially when poor decisions were made. That means answering questions as to what role, if any, political forces played in the poor decisions by the DPP during this debacle.

The Australian

When politics and ideology override the impartial administration of justice, the results are never good. We saw that in the Soviet show trials and we saw it in the excesses of McCarthyism. We saw it in Jim Crow America and we’re seeing it again in Joe Cracker America.

And we’re seeing it, again and again, in the era of “MeToo” witch-hunting.