A former comrade of ex-soldier Ben Roberts-Smith has been pressured to defend his service report and courtroom proof throughout a cross-examination the place he was accused of being jealous and throwing Roberts-Smith “underneath a bus”.
The nameless SAS soldier generally known as Individual 14 served eight deployments in Afghanistan together with missions alongside Roberts-Smith.
Earlier in his proof, Individual 14 refused to reply questions on whether or not he had been a supply for journalists and media studies. On Tuesday, the choose listening to the defamation case, justice Anthony Besanko, didn't compel him to reply.
In his proof final week, Individual 14 advised the courtroom that in April 2009 he helped type a protecting cordon across the compound Whiskey 108 – a identified rebel base within the village of Kakarak.
He advised the courtroom he noticed in fading mild a soldier carrying a Minimi machine gun – and carrying the distinctive face paint solely worn by Roberts-Smith’s five-man patrol – throw a “darkish determine” to the bottom outdoors the compound earlier than firing a one-second burst of machine-gun fireplace into the determine.
Individual 14 later examined the slain physique who had a prosthetic leg. He mentioned in a while that mission he noticed Roberts-Smith carrying a Minimi machine gun – a particular and strange weapon.
Individual 14 additionally mentioned that, in 2012, he witnessed Roberts-Smith order a member of the Afghan nationwide military, via an interpreter, to homicide a captive and unarmed man. The killing was carried out.
Beneath cross-examination, Individual 14 defended his proof, debating with barrister Arthur Moses SC, performing for Roberts-Smith, over his recollections of missions in Afghanistan.
Moses and Individual 14 debated whether or not a determine thrown to the bottom and shot throughout a raid on a village in 2009 was carrying “darkish” or “black” clothes and whether or not the prosthetic leg was “beige” or “white”.
Roberts-Smith earlier advised the courtroom he killed the person with the prosthetic leg however he was an rebel working outdoors the compound and carrying a weapon – and was, due to this fact, a reliable goal killed throughout the legal guidelines of warfare.
Moses mentioned Individual 14’s model of occasions was a fiction: “It didn’t occur did it?”
“It 100% occurred,” Individual 14 mentioned.
“You will have come right here to throw Mr Roberts-Smith underneath the bus any method you'll be able to, haven’t you?” Moses mentioned. “No,” was the reply.
Individual 14 conceded he had drunk alcohol from the prosthetic leg after it was souvenired by one other member of the SAS and brought to the troopers’ on-base bar known as the Fats Women Arms.
Requested why he drank from the leg, Individual 14 advised the courtroom: “It helped me decompress, let off steam, bond … [it is a] high-tempo life, you by no means know when your final day is coming.”
Individual 14 was additionally pressured to defend his personal service report over an alleged combat with a feminine US officer in Afghanistan throughout a celebration on the allied forces Tarin Kowt base.
He advised the courtroom he had been formally reprimanded and prevented from occurring a deployment to Afghanistan over a tough drive containing images from his Afghanistan service that he mentioned was stolen from his home by his estranged spouse.
He had been in the course of a divorce, he advised the courtroom, when his spouse had allegedly damaged into his dwelling and stolen the exhausting drive. Individual 14 alleged in courtroom his spouse tried to blackmail him for $50,000 – threatening to leak the pictures to the media.
Individual 14 reported the lack of the exhausting drive to his superiors and a senior officer needed to “negotiate” for the return of the information, the courtroom heard. He later accepted a cost of disobeying a lawful basic order.
This cost meant he was not allowed to tour Afghanistan in 2010. On that mission, throughout a battle at Tizak, Roberts-Smith stormed machine gun posts for which he was later awarded the Victoria Cross, Australia’s highest navy honour.
Individual 14 was requested whether or not he resented “the truth that Mr Roberts-Smith was awarded a VC?”
“No,” he mentioned.
Pressed once more on whether or not he resented Roberts-Smith being awarded a VC for actions on a tour he wasn’t allowed to go on, Individual 14 replied: “No.”
“However you have been upset about not having the ability to go on that tour?” the barrister requested. The soldier replied: “100%.”
Roberts-Smith is suing the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Canberra Instances for defamation over a collection of studies he alleges are defamatory and painting him as committingwar crimes, together with homicide. The newspapers are pleading a defence of reality. Roberts-Smith denies all wrongdoing.
In his proof, Roberts-Smith advised the courtroom that successful the VC had made him a goal for rumours, hostility and spiteful undermining from different troopers. The medal, he mentioned, “put a goal on my again”.
Individual 14 mentioned he had not undermined Roberts-Smith and had a strong working relationship with him. He “had his doubts” in regards to the veracity of Roberts-Smith’s quotation for the VC however he stored them to himself.
On Monday, Individual 14 declined to reply questions on whether or not he had spoken to journalists about his navy service or whether or not he was a supply for media reporting. He sought a certificates defending him towards self-incrimination.
However the choose dominated he wouldn't be compelled to reply these questions.
Moses had argued that whereas journalists have been protected against figuring out sources, witnesses weren't entitled to the identical safety. The trial continues.
Post a Comment