Accused soldier Ben Roberts-Smith has denied outright essentially the most dramatic homicide alleged towards him – that he kicked an unarmed, handcuffed Afghan civilian off a cliff earlier than ordering him shot – telling a court docket the accusation was false and “outright malicious”.
“It feels such as you’re in a bloody nightmare,” he advised the court docket throughout an excoriating day of proof. “Each time they write it I’m wondering: ‘how am I on this place?’”
The alleged homicide of an Afghan farmer named Ali Jan, within the village of Darwan on 11 September 2012, has change into a centrepiece of a collection of allegations of wrongdoing levelled towards Roberts-Smith in articles printed by three Australian newspapers in 2018.
Within the newspapers’ defence paperwork earlier than court docket, it’s alleged that Ali Jan had been handcuffed throughout an SAS raid on Darwan. As helicopters have been coming to “extract” the Australian troopers, Roberts-Smith allegedly took Ali Jan to the sting of a small cliff and compelled him right into a kneeling place.
Roberts-Smith is then alleged to have “kicked him arduous within the midriff inflicting him to fall again over the cliff and land within the dry creek mattress beneath. The affect of the autumn to the dry creek beneath was so vital that it knocked Ali Jan’s enamel out of his mouth.”
“[Roberts-Smith] directed a soldier underneath his command to kill Ali Jan, which he did.”
The court docket is predicted to listen to later from different troopers who have been in Darwan that day, in addition to from Afghan villagers current and from relations of Ali Jan.
Roberts-Smith advised the court docket the killing by no means occurred, and he had by no means killed an unarmed prisoner.
He stated on the finish of the raid on Darwan on that day, he was following one other soldier – anonymised in court docket paperwork as Individual 11 – strolling alongside a dry creek mattress in direction of the helicopter extraction level.
Individual 11 climbed an embankment and instantly ‘engaged’ – opened fired upon – an alleged “spotter”, a person hiding in a cornfield.
Roberts-Smith stated he climbed the embankment to help Individual 11 and fired “three to 5 rounds” on the man, who was “both taking place or was down”.
The person was killed and, Roberts-Smith stated, was discovered to be in possession of a radio.
Roberts-Smith rejected a query the radio was planted on the person’s physique as a ‘throw-down’, a chunk of compromising tools carried by troopers and positioned on the our bodies of victims as a post-facto justification for his or her killing.
He stated the person was a “spotter” – a ahead scout who experiences troopers’ actions again to militants – and subsequently a professional goal, killed inside the guidelines of engagement.
“He was behaving in a way that was in keeping with enemy spotter exercise … it’s not regular ‘sample of life’ to sit down within the cornfields,” he advised the court docket.
Patrols he had been concerned in had been attacked “4 or 5 instances” as they have been being extracted by helicopter, Roberts-Smith stated.
Requested by his barrister, Bruce McClintock, whether or not any component of the allegation of killing an unarmed ‘PUC’ – ‘individual underneath management’ – was true, Roberts-Smith was categoric.
“There was no kick … there was no PUC.
“I can not imagine a fantastic story like that might, not to mention be believed, and be printed within the paper and be maintained for quite a few years … none of it provides up, none of it is sensible.”
Roberts-Smith additionally denied an additional allegation of homicide, that he killed an unarmed boy, aged between 15 and 18 years previous, who was driving with three males in a Toyota Hilux stopped by an Australian SAS patrol “on or about 21 October 2012”.
The newspapers’ defence paperwork allege the adolescent was “searched and detained by Individual 16 (an SAS soldier) after which handed over to [Roberts-Smith’s] patrol for questioning, along with the opposite occupants of the Hilux”.
“On the time the Afghan adolescent was visibly extraordinarily nervous,” the paperwork allege.
The newspapers then alleged: “One or two days after the mission, Individual 16 stated to [Roberts-Smith], in substance, ‘What occurred to the younger bloke who was shaking like a leaf?’.
“[Roberts-Smith] responded, in substance, ‘I shot that cunt within the head. Individual 15 (one other soldier) advised me to not kill any cunts on that job so I pulled out my 9mm and shot him within the head. It was essentially the most lovely factor I’ve ever seen.”
Roberts-Smith advised the court docket on Friday he by no means stated these phrases, and that the occasion couldn’t have occurred, as a result of he by no means fired his pistol in fight whereas on deployment in Afghanistan.
“I by no means needed to have interaction with my pistol,” he advised the court docket.
Because the allegation was made in court docket paperwork, it has emerged Roberts-Smith was in a unique a part of Afghanistan on 21 October 2012. Australian Struggle Memorial paperwork present that on that date, Roberts-Smith was main a reconnaissance patrol in Char-Chineh, an motion for which he would obtain a commendation for distinguished service.
The “on or about” date has since been amended within the newspapers’ defence to five November of the identical yr.
Roberts-Smith stated the publication – and repetition – of the allegation was acutely hurtful.
“I felt they have been being outright malicious as a result of they knew I wasn’t there however they nonetheless needed to say it.”
Earlier on Friday, Roberts-Smith advised the court docket his Victoria Cross grew to become a cross to bear, saying it “put a goal on my again” for different troopers jealous of his medal.
The embellished former corporal detailed at size his missions in Afghanistan, and the tensions inside the SAS as troopers have been despatched again for repeated deployments in an extended, grinding and expensive conflict.
Roberts-Smith is suing the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Canberra Instances for defamation over a collection of experiences printed in 2018 that he alleges are defamatory as a result of they painting him as somebody who “broke the ethical and authorized guidelines of army engagement” and dedicated conflict crimes together with homicide.
The 42-year-old has constantly denied the allegations, saying they’re “false”, “baseless” and “fully with none basis in reality”. The newspapers are defending their reporting as true.