Ben Roberts-Smith’s lawyer has told a judge that the war veteran was an exceptional soldier who was the subject of a sustained newspaper campaign to create the belief that he was a war criminal.
Key points:
- Each side has been assigned four days for a closing address
- Roberts-Smith’s lawyer said newspaper articles were based on “rumors and rumors.”
- The war veteran says he has been portrayed as a war criminal and a harasser
After more than 100 days since it began, closing filings have begun in the case of defamation of the recipient of the Victoria Cross against The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Canberra Times and three journalists.
He claims he was falsely portrayed in 2018 articles as a war criminal, a harasser and a perpetrator of domestic violence.
Veteran’s lawyer Arthur Moses SC began by telling Judge Anthony Besanko that the procedure had been called “many things,” including the “trial of the century,” a “trial for war crimes for power,” and a ” attack “on the press. freedom.
“It’s none of that,” Moses told the Sydney Federal Court.
“This has been a case of how Mr Roberts-Smith, the most decorated Australian soldier and a man with a great reputation for courage, skill and decency in the soldier, had that reputation destroyed by respondents.”
Roberts-Smith served in the SAS between 1996 and 2013, including multiple deployments in Afghanistan.
Arthur Moses told the court that Ben Roberts-Smith’s reputation had been destroyed. (AAP: James Gourley)
“As the evidence showed, Mr. Roberts-Smith was an exceptional soldier: highly organized, a leader, witty, and exceptionally brave,” Moses said.
Mr Moses said Mr Roberts-Smith was competent in battle, effective in killing anti-coalition militias and never sought honor or recognition of defense.
“What was not expected was that after receiving the Victoria Cross, he would have a target on his back,” the lawyer continued.
“Respondents’ publications were based on rumors, rumors, and contradictory accounts from former colleagues who, some, were jealous and / or obsessed with Mr. Roberts-Smith.”
Publisher Nine Entertainment has relied primarily on the defense of the truth and has called on dozens of current and former SAS soldiers.
Mr. Moses pointed to the test of three SAS witnesses for Nine: Person 7, Person 14, and former soldier turned politician Andrew Hastie.
He said journalists Nick McKenzie and Chris Masters reported what these sources told them as “matters of fact.”
“What is clear is that both journalists have waged a sustained campaign to unfairly create the belief that Mr. Roberts-Smith had committed war crimes in Afghanistan, including during the course of these proceedings.”
Moses said journalists were willing to write “sensationalist accounts,” “presumably to get praise.”
He also criticized Nine for refusing to make any concessions even when faced with probation issues, which he said would be relevant to the issue of aggravated damages.
“The purpose of these proceedings is to vindicate Mr. Robert-Smith’s reputation.”
Each side has been assigned four days for a closing address.