Show Notes
In the defamation trial of the century, Australia’s most decorated living soldier is seeking to defend his reputation against reports in three newspapers that he says falsely accuse him of being a war criminal. His lawyers argue Ben Roberts-Smith has been unfairly targeted by envious comrades and assisted by credulous journalists. The newspapers’ lawyers say their reporting is true, and that Roberts-Smith broke the ‘moral and legal rules of military engagement’, something he denies outright. But who is Ben Roberts-Smith, and how did he earn the military’s highest honour, the Victoria Cross?
More from Ben Roberts-Smith v the media
At the heart of the defamation case Ben Roberts-Smith launched against three of Australia’s biggest newspapers were the articles published by Nick McKenzie and Chris Masters. In this episode Ben Doherty speaks to these journalists about what led them to start this investigation, how they overcame their doubts and fears to publish articles that accused Australia’s most decorated living soldier of war crimes, and what the results of the civil case mean for Australia’s military legacy
Australia’s most decorated living soldier has lost his defamation case against the Sydney Morning Herald, the Age and the Canberra Times. A federal court judge has found that the newspapers proved in their defence that Ben Roberts-Smith murdered unarmed prisoners while serving in the Australian military in Afghanistan. In this episode, host Ben Doherty combs through Justice Anthony Besanko’s full verdict which describes how Australia’s most decorated soldier lied to save his reputation How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know
Australia’s most decorated living soldier has lost his defamation case against the Sydney Morning Herald, the Age and the Canberra Times. A federal court judge has found that the newspapers proved in their defence that Ben Roberts-Smith either murdered or was complicit in and responsible for the murder of unarmed civilians while serving in the Australian military in Afghanistan. Ben Doherty reports from court, sifting through the judge’s ruling and what it means for public interest journalism
In June 2018, an SAS soldier known in this defamation trial as Person 18 says he received two threatening letters at his barracks in Perth. In their defence, the newspapers allege that these letters were written by Ben Roberts-Smith. He denies this outright. In this episode, Ben Doherty explains why the newspapers think these letters are important to their defence of this case and we hear testimony from Ben Roberts-Smith, as well as his former employee John McLeod and ex-wife Emma Roberts, who are witnesses for the newspapers, read by voice actors. We also hear closing arguments from both sides and from a defamation barrister about what this trial tells us about defamation law in Australia
On 12 April 2009, the SAS arrive in the village of Kakarak in Afghanistan’s Uruzgan province. It’s a Taliban stronghold where an Australian soldier was killed just a month earlier. It’s here, in a compound known as Whiskey 108, that one of the most contested events in this extraordinary defamation trial takes place. In their defence, the newspapers allege that at Whiskey 108 Ben Roberts-Smith murdered an Afghan man with a prosthetic leg and ordered a junior member of his patrol to murder another Afghan man as part of a military ‘blooding’ ritual. Roberts-Smith strenuously denies these claims and says the two men who were killed were legitimate engagements shot lawfully in the heat of battle. In this episode, Ben Doherty takes us inside the raid on Whiskey 108. We hear evidence presented by Ben Roberts-Smith and others who support his version of events, as well as witnesses for the newspapers, read by voice actors