Police had sent the confidential notes to Lehrmann’s defence team as part of an unredacted brief of evidence in 2021.
Drumgold said in a statement tendered before the inquiry that he was trying to work out whether the actions of police in assessing if the confidential notes had been seen by the defence could be put down to “unsophisticated corruption or atomic level stupidity”.
Drumgold conceded that he possibly shouldn’t have read the documents either,and was focused on assessing the damage that could be done should they fall into the wrong hands,admitting that when he told Higgins the notes had been sent to the defence team he didn’t mention he’d seen them too.
“I didn’t turn my mind that I was in breach of the Evidence Miscellaneous Provisions Act. I’ve conceded several times that in retrospect it probably did apply in those circumstances,” Drumgold told the inquiry.
His evidence from the witness box of the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal on Tuesday came as other material tendered to the inquiry revealed allegations that a senior police officer told Lehrmann’s barrister during the trial he would resign if a guilty verdict was returned and;a police investigative review mentioned an allegation Lehrmann had put his hand on the thigh of another ministerial staffer.
Sofronoff also asked Drumgold whether he believed he had breached the Victims of Crime Act’s prohibition upon disclosure by reading the counselling notes,to which Drumgold replied,“potentially”.