Australia’s most decorated soldier loses multiple defamation claims against

Brisbane, Australia
CNN
 — 

Australia’s most decorated solider lost a multi-million dollar defamation case against three newspapers who accused him of committing war crimes in Afghanistan – including the murder of unarmed prisoners – as a judge ruled their reports met the standards of truth.

The ruling, delivered by Federal Court Justice Anthony Besanko on Thursday, brings a dramatic end to a long-running trial and delivers another blow to the reputation of the nation’s military, already damaged by revelations that emerged during 100 days of testimony.

Besanko found Thursday that The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald, and The Canberra Times established substantial truth in a number of claims about Ben Roberts-Smith, but not all of them. In some cases, he found the papers established contextual truth, which is also a defense under Australia’s Defamation Act. In others, he found that the papers had not established the truth.

In the most damning findings, Besanko said the papers had shown there was substantial truth to the allegation that Roberts-Smith, a former special forces soldier, murdered an unarmed Afghan civilian by kicking him off a cliff and ordering troops under his command to shoot him.

Besanko also found there was substantial truth to claims that Roberts-Smith shot dead a man with a prosthetic leg in Afghanistan with a machine gun, then took the prosthetic leg back to Australia and encouraged his soldiers to use it as a drinking vessel.

The finding of truth for the most serious allegations batters the already damaged reputation of Roberts-Smith, who was awarded Australia’s highest medal for gallantry, the Victoria Cross, and was feted as a hero for his bravery and leadership.

His honors extended beyond the battlefield – in 2013 he was named “Father of the Year,” posing for photos with his young family.

But that reputation began to fall apart after two veteran reporters investigated allegations that he and his SAS units committed war crimes while in Afghanistan.

The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald, and The Canberra Times had relied on a truth defense for a series of articles published in 2018 that painted the elite soldier as a bully and murderer who lied to protect his reputation.

The decision in favor of the papers is being celebrated by supporters of press freedom, who say it will harden the resolve of media companies to pursue high-cost investigative cases in a country with tough defamation laws.

Outside court, Nine’s managing director of publishing James Chessell said the ruling was a vindication of the journalists and newsrooms who support public interest journalism.

“Most importantly, it is a vindication for the brave soldiers of the SAS who served their country with distinction, and then had the courage to speak the truth about what happened in Afghanistan,” Chessell said.

The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald are published by Nine, a CNN affiliate. The Canberra Times published the same stories but has since changed ownership.

Peter Bartlett, a partner at law firm MinterEllison, who represented that papers and the journalists, said the result was a validation of the truth defense.

“Never has Australia seen a media defendant face such challenges from a plaintiff and his funders. This is an enormous and epic win for freedom of speech and the right for the public to know,” he said in a statement.

Roberts-Smith, a former SAS soldier, wasn’t in court to hear the verdict. The day before the ruling, local media published photos of him beside a pool in Bali, Indonesia.

Despite his absence, a large media contingent gathered at the Federal Court in Sydney to hear the verdict, which was broadcast from the court and aired live on national television.

The journalists behind the stories – Nick McKenzie and Chris Masters – are multi award-winning investigative reporters known for their rigorous attention to detail. After the ruling, McKenzie tweeted one word:…