One other Australian soldier has testified he watched Ben Roberts-Smith machine-gun an unarmed disabled man to demise in Afghanistan, telling the federal court docket he turned to a comrade instantly after the taking pictures and stated: “Did we simply witness an execution?”
In additional proof earlier than the federal court docket about an SAS mission on a compound known as Whiskey 108, the soldier, anonymised earlier than the court docket as Individual 24, stated he noticed Roberts-Smith throw the person to the bottom and “instantly put a machine gun burst into his again”.
Individual 24, a former SAS soldier and veteran of a number of excursions of Afghanistan, was subpoenaed by three newspapers to provide proof in Roberts-Smith’s defamation trial.
Roberts-Smith is suing the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Canberra Occasions for defamation over stories he alleges painting him as committing battle crimes, together with homicide.
The newspapers are pleading a defence of reality. Roberts-Smith denies all wrongdoing, together with the newspaper’s claims concerning Whiskey 108.
Giving proof on Monday, Individual 24 stated his patrol had led SAS troops into the village of Kakarak, a identified rebel stronghold in southern Uruzgan province, late within the afternoon of 12 April 2009.
His six-man patrol arrange a safety cordon round a bombed-out compound, given the codename Whiskey 108, whereas different troops assaulted the compound and secured it.
After the compound was secured, Individual 24 says he was standing guard exterior, about two metres from one other soldier, Individual 14, when he noticed Roberts-Smith emerge by a doorway.
Individual 24 stated he noticed Roberts-Smith from side-on and didn't see his face, however recognised him from his dimension, his gait, and his “bodily manner”.
“Mr Roberts-Smith walked out of the compound … at this stage he was holding a person in his hand, it appeared he [the man] had come off the bottom, he was being held by his pants or again of the shirt.”
Individual 24 stated it was clear the person was alive: “He was making a noise as he got here out … a grunting noise.”
“He [Roberts-Smith] marched about 15 metres instantly out – he dropped the person on to the bottom – and instantly put a machine gun burst into his again.”
Individual 24 stated the machine-gun burst was “eight to 10 rounds”.
Individual 24 instructed the court docket the slain man – whose identification has not been revealed in court docket – might need been a “medium-value goal doubtlessly” as an “IED [improvised explosive device] facilitator”. However he was not a “kill goal” on the time of the mission.
“In BRS’s defence, he might need been a kill goal beforehand.”
Individual 24 stated he “didn’t agree with the agenda” of some SAS troopers who have been in search of to undermine Roberts-Smith’s popularity and decorations.
“I nonetheless don’t agree with the very fact BRS [Roberts-Smith] is right here, underneath excessive duress, for killing unhealthy dudes we went there to kill.”
Individual 24 instructed the court docket after the Australian troops assaulted and secured one other compound – Whiskey 109 – his patrol walked again previous Whiskey 108. He stated he noticed the physique of the person with a prosthetic leg. He noticed one other soldier, Individual 6, take away the leg, strap it to his backpack, and take it from the battlefield.
The leg was taken again to the Australian base in Tarin Kowt and used as a macabre celebratory consuming vessel on the SAS troops’ unofficial bar, the Fats Women Arms. The court docket has been proven images of troopers consuming from the leg.
Individual 24 stated he “didn’t have an issue” with folks consuming from the battle trophy prosthetic leg – “it’s black humour” – and admitted he had drunk from it. Roberts-Smith was not pictured consuming from the leg and he denied having executed so in proof final yr.
Roberts-Smith doesn't dispute he shot and killed the person with the prosthetic leg however says the person was legitimately engaged in battle. He was extensively questioned concerning the Whiskey 108 mission when he gave proof on this trial final yr.
Roberts-Smith instructed the court docket he killed the person as a result of he was a risk to Australian troops. Roberts-Smith stated he noticed the person carrying a weapon and operating, and killed him in accordance with troops’ guidelines of engagement.
“He had his hand excessive of the weapon, as a result of he was carrying it down subsequent to his physique like that … hunched over, as in, operating like that along with his shoulders down.”
Individual 24 is the third soldier to provide comparable – although not an identical – proof that they noticed an Australian soldier shoot an Afghan man at Whiskey 108, with two saying they believed it to be Roberts-Smith.
Different troopers have given proof they noticed a person with a prosthetic leg who was found hiding in a secret tunnel contained in the compound and brought into custody of Australian troops earlier than being “marched off” by Roberts-Smith.
A soldier anonymised earlier than the court docket as Individual 41 beforehand instructed the court docket he was additionally standing guard exterior the compound when he noticed Roberts-Smith “frog-marching” an Afghan man “by the scruff of his neck”.
“He [Roberts-Smith] had his machine gun in his proper arm … he then proceeded to throw the Afghan male down on to the bottom. The Afghan male landed on his again. [Roberts-Smith] then reached down and grabbed him by the shoulder and flipped him on to his abdomen. Then I noticed him decrease his machine gun and shoot roughly three to 5 rounds into the again of the Afghan male.
“After he’d executed that, he regarded up and noticed me standing there, and checked out me and stated ‘are all of us cool, we good?’
“I simply replied, ‘yeah mate, no worries’.”
Underneath cross-examination, Individual 41 denied mendacity concerning the incident however conceded he hadn’t reported what he had allegedly seen to his commanders.
“I simply wished to maintain quiet about the entire thing,” he instructed the court docket. “I used to be a brand new trooper, on my very first journey with the SAS, I simply wished to toe the road. It’s the unwritten rule – you associate with no matter occurs.”
One other soldier, Individual 14, who was standing subsequent to Individual 24, beforehand instructed the court docket the sunshine was fading when he heard heavy footsteps to his proper.
“As I turned my head to my proper, there have been three Australian troopers and a black object, which was just like a human, that was thrown to the bottom.”
Individual 14 stated the particular person made a thudding, “expulsion of air” noise as they hit the bottom.
“Then a soldier raised their Minimi F89 Para and fired an prolonged burst. It was loud, like a ‘BRRRRRT’ for one second.
“That particular person turned and walked away out of sight again into Whiskey 108.”
Individual 14 stated he stated to a different soldier: “What the hell what that?” He stated he didn't recognise the soldier who fired on the time.
However Individual 14 stated the soldier who shot the person was sporting a particular new camouflage paint, worn by just one SAS patrol in motion that day, the five-man group of which Roberts-Smith was a member.
Individual 14 instructed the court docket that, on the conclusion of the mission, he noticed Roberts-Smith carrying the distinctive Minimi weapon on the troops’ lay-up level.
“I noticed who had the Para Minimi [machine gun],” he stated. “It was Ben Roberts-Smith.”
Underneath cross-examination, Arthur Moses SC, appearing for Roberts-Smith accused Individual 24 of giving false proof.
“I wouldn’t, in a court docket of regulation, give that proof if it was false; I’ve simply sworn an oath, Mr Moses,” Individual 24 replied.
“You're right here to inform a narrative?”
“I'm right here to inform the reality, Mr Moses, and you might be getting the reality.”
Individual 24 was medically discharged from the SAS. He stated previous to leaving the navy, the mission at Whiskey 108 was the topic of “a lot speak” inside the regiment.
“But it surely has all the time been veiled, very veiled,” he stated. “It’s one thing folks didn’t wish to discuss,” he stated.
Moses raised the query of whether or not Individual 14 could have perjured himself final month when he instructed the court docket he had solely spoken along with his spouse and his lawyer over a weekend when he was in the course of giving proof.
Individual 24 instructed the court docket on Monday he phoned Individual 14 after Individual 14’s first day within the witness field “to see how he was going”, although stated they didn’t talk about his proof. Individual 14 reportedly stated it was “robust” and that Moses “went at him like a rabid canine” throughout cross-examination.
Individual 24 stays within the witness field. The trial, earlier than Justice Anthony Besanko, continues.
Post a Comment