The defamation trial involving Brittany Higgins and Sen. Linda Reynolds could expand to include more allegations against the senator’s former staffer.
Senator Reynolds made a third application to the Washington Supreme Court after a discovery order revealed a conversation that took place between Ms Higgins and her fiancé David Sharaz.
The conversation was a series of WhatsApp messages that showed the couple discussing who should post on social media and on which platform, based on who had the most followers.
The conversation occurred before a social media post was made in January 2023 that was part of the claim against Sharaz and has since been deleted.
The defamation trial involving Brittany Higgins (pictured with fiancé David Sharaz) and Senator Linda Reynolds could expand to include more allegations against the senator’s former staffer.
“There was an argument about which Twitter account was best to post,” Senator Reynolds’ lawyer, Martin Bennett, told reporters outside court.
‘That indicates that they were not acting independently of each other, and we tell the court that that is the argument we want answered.
“There is now a discussion that will be incorporated into Ms. Higgins’ proceedings.”
Judgment was also handed down in the matter involving Mr Sharaz, with his lawyer Jason MacLaurin telling the court his client wanted little to do with the case.
Mr. Sharaz provided a consent order, but asked that an assessment of damages related to the senator’s lawsuit against him be conducted after the trial with Ms. Higgins.
“We agree that an award for damages should be assessed in accordance with the law, the cards can fall as they wish,” Mr MacLaurin said.
Judge Paul Tottle ordered that Sharaz be prevented from making social media posts similar to those that had allegedly damaged Senator Reynolds’ reputation.
Senator Reynolds made a third application to the WA Supreme Court after a discovery order revealed a conversation that took place between Ms Higgins and her fiancé David Sharaz.
The court also heard that amendments had been made to Ms Higgins’ defence.
Bennett argued that the amendments seemed confusing and would be difficult to cross-examine, saying they were almost “schizophrenic.”
He said that while Ms Higgins was told to make a police report, she felt pressured not to do so.
“It’s an area that’s not normally interrogated,” he said.
Bennett said outside court that the senator ordered Ms Brown to file a complaint with the AFP, which was the exact opposite of a cover-up.
He said Ms Higgins’ defense claimed the senator’s asking Ms Brown to make a police report was mishandling the rape allegation.
“That’s the complete opposite,” he said.
“We need to think about whether we rule it out or not, we need to have some certainty of going to trial on the case that has been presented in defense.”
During the proceedings, Judge Tottle did not believe the amendments had the ability to derail or delay the trial.
It was the third time this week that the case has come before the WA Supreme Court, where the senator is suing Ms Higgins and Mr Sharaz over social media posts she says were false and damaged her reputation .
Peace talks to resolve the lawsuit failed to produce any results Tuesday after the court adjourned a three-hour mediation session.
On Thursday, Higgins’ lawyer, Leon Zwier, dropped a bombshell in court by revealing that his client would marry Sharaz in June.
Zwier had asked the court to give Ms Higgins more time to respond to an application by Senator Reynolds, who is seeking a copy of the deed to the Brittany Higgins Protection Trust.
The trust was set up in February last year, after Higgins received a $2.4 million compensation payment from the Commonwealth.
Senator Reynolds wants to know who the administrator is and who to sue if Ms. Higgins cannot pay damages arising from the yet-to-be-determined defamation case.
All parties have been told to make their applications or submissions by June 17 before procedural instructions are carried out the following day.
