War veteran Ben Roberts-Smith’s marathon defamation trial has ended after his lawyer told a Sydney court he was the victim of a “war of words” by bitter and jealous former colleagues who they fed lies to journalists.
Key Points:
- The trial began in June 2021, but there was a six-month break for COVID
- Lawyer Arthur Moses said the false stories were given to reporters out of jealousy
- Judge Anthony Besanko is likely to take months to issue a verdict
Roberts-Smith sued The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Canberra Times and three journalists in the Federal Court over a series of articles published four years ago.
He claims he was falsely portrayed as a war criminal, a stalker of SAS colleagues and a perpetrator of domestic violence, while publisher Nine Entertainment defended the stories as true.
The trial lasted 13 months, including a six-month break due to the COVID-19 lockdown.
On the closing day of submissions, barrister Arthur Moses SC repeated his opening arguments that the case was about corrosive jealousy and cowardice on the part of some who made allegations “in the dark”.
“It is very clear, we say, on the evidence, that the awarding of the Victoria Cross to Mr Roberts-Smith for his acts of bravery during the Battle of Tizak in Afghanistan sparked a war of words against him for part of jealous people. and bitter to have received this award,” said Moses.
Arthur Moses said Roberts-Smith’s colleagues were “jealous and bitter” over the war veteran’s Victoria Cross. (AAP: Bianca De Marchi)
The barrister said former SAS colleagues, including a soldier known as Person 7, were motivated by “professional jealousy” as they embarked on a “campaign of rumor and innuendo”.
He argued that they passed on false stories to journalists Nick McKenzie and Chris Masters, who are both respondents, who in turn “jumped on the rumors like a salmon jumping on a hook and published them as fact when they were fiction”.
“It is unfortunate that after having to face danger and risk his life in Afghanistan being targeted by the Taliban, that Mr Roberts-Smith and other brave members of the Australian Defense Force have returned to home to become the target of some media that have carelessly published allegations of war crimes as facts, without knowing all the facts or what impact the making of these allegations would have on the person’s reputation or that He’s been traumatized.”
Moses also criticized Nine for persisting in running stories about Roberts-Smith throughout the proceedings, which “trampled on her reputation and her right to the presumption of innocence”.
“They were done without regard to the impact it would have on him and his family in the search, it seems, not for the truth but for journalistic glory,” Moses said.
“There was nothing noble or appropriate in the conduct of those who fed them lies and rumours.”
Moses argued that key witnesses who testified about missions central to the case were exposed as “perjurers.”
Roberts-Smith was awarded the Victoria Cross for his acts of bravery during the Battle of Tizak in Afghanistan. (ABC News)
He also rejected the suggestion that there had been “collusion” by Mr. Roberts-Smith and some of his SAS witnesses, saying the allegation was largely “handed” to Nine by the veteran’s ex-wife Emma Roberts, who tried to turn the family holiday into a narrative to help Nine.
Barrister Nicholas Owens SC earlier told the court that Mr Roberts-Smith had been “prepared to lie under oath” which caused serious damage to his credibility as a witness.
He emphasized that Roberts-Smith’s witnesses were “closely associated,” including through friendship and business ties, who had reason to lie.
Judge Anthony Besanko reserved his decision, which is now likely to be months away.