Essentially the most senior SAS officer referred to as to offer proof by Ben Roberts-Smith in his defamation trial has contradicted one other of Roberts-Smith’s key witnesses over the dying of a person throughout a 2009 raid on an Afghan compound.
Particular person 81, a serving senior officer within the SAS and a 25-year veteran of the navy, is the ultimate of 40 witnesses referred to as in Roberts-Smith’s year-long defamation trial.
Roberts-Smith, a Victoria Cross winner, is suing three Australian newspapers over stories he alleges defame him as a struggle felony and assassin. He denies all wrong-doing. The newspapers are defending their reporting as true.
The federal courtroom heard on Wednesday that Particular person 81 was the troop commander throughout a 2009 deployment and ordered SAS troops to raid a compound often called Whiskey 108 within the village of Kakarak in southern Afghanistan on Easter Sunday.
It's alleged by the newspapers of their defence that two males had been killed after being found hiding in a crude hand-dug tunnel in Whiskey 108. The newspapers allege an aged man was shot by a “rookie” trooper on the orders of Roberts-Smith and his patrol commander, whereas the opposite man, who had a prosthetic leg, was shot to dying with a machine gun by Roberts-Smith.
Roberts-Smith has denied the allegations as unimaginable, telling the courtroom “there have been no males within the tunnel”.
He has beforehand mentioned he shot and killed the person with a prosthetic leg, whom he found working and armed, outdoors the compound. The person was an rebel, lawfully killed inside the legal guidelines of struggle, Roberts-Smith mentioned.
The aged man, in line with Roberts-Smith, was killed outdoors the compound by one other Australian soldier, unknown to him, however whom he credit with saving his life.
Particular person 81 informed the courtroom he heard no engagements at Whiskey 108, and was not informed of any insurgents being killed. He testified that after the SAS troops stormed and secured Whiskey 108, he entered the compound with different members of the troop headquarters.
He informed the courtroom he noticed Afghan civilians contained in the bombed out compound.
He mentioned he noticed “physique elements” within the rubble, amongst “rocket paraphernalia”.
After the compound was declared “cleared”, a “rendezvous assembly”, often called an RV, was referred to as between patrol commanders and the troop commanders to plan for the following goal.
Particular person 81 mentioned with Whiskey 108 secured, he was making ready his orders for the Australian troopers to maneuver to a neighbouring compound, codenamed Whiskey 109.
Arthur Moses SC, appearing for Roberts-Smith, requested Particular person 81: “Did you see any engagements within the Whiskey 108 compound after the compound was declared cleared?”
Particular person 81: “No.”
Moses: “Do you recall listening to any engagements whilst you had been within the compound?”
Particular person 81: “No.”
Moses: “Do you recall listening to stories of any engagements?”
Particular person 81: “No.”
This proof contradicts certainly one of Roberts-Smith’s different witnesses – his patrol commander, Particular person 5 – who informed the courtroom that throughout the RV assembly, he heard gunshots outdoors the compound and ran out to research.
Particular person 5 informed the courtroom he found Roberts-Smith participating and killing an rebel, later found to be the person with the prosthetic leg.
Particular person 5 mentioned he requested Roberts-Smith if he was all proper: “He mentioned ‘yep’. They simply engaged two squirters to the north.”
Particular person 5 informed the courtroom he requested if the boys had been “KIA” – killed in motion. When that was confirmed, he mentioned he returned to the troop commander’s assembly.
Moses requested Particular person 5: “If you went again to the RV assembly, did you say something to Particular person 81 or anyone else?”
Particular person 5: “I knowledgeable Particular person 81 there have been two KIA on the north-west nook of the compound.”
Particular person 81 informed the courtroom he by no means heard any engagement whereas inside Whiskey 108 and was by no means knowledgeable about an engagement, nor of any enemy combatants killed in motion.
Particular person 81 testified he was informed concerning the tunnel however he wasn’t informed anyone was discovered inside.
The tunnel at Whiskey 108, and whether or not there was anyone found inside, has emerged as a essential rivalry in Roberts-Smith’s sprawling and sophisticated defamation motion.
Whereas it's not disputed that at the very least two Afghan males had been killed by Australian SAS troops throughout their raid on Whiskey 108 on 12 April 2009, at situation is whether or not the boys had been rebel targets legitimately killed, or whether or not they had been prisoners who had been unlawfully killed.
The argument has cut up the Australian SAS troops who had been there: Roberts-Smith and 5 different troopers have mentioned there have been no males within the tunnel. An additional 5 have mentioned there have been males pulled from the tunnel.
A sixth soldier, Particular person 4, who's alleged within the newspapers’ defence to have shot useless the aged man on Roberts-Smith’s orders, refused to testify on grounds of self-incrimination.
Even members of the identical patrol have given irreconcilable proof. Six members of 1 patrol subpoenaed to offer proof had been cut up three-three over whether or not anyone ever got here out of the tunnel.
Particular person 81 stays within the witness field, earlier than Justice Anthony Besanko.
Post a Comment