WAR CRIMES - Afghanistan * Ben Roberts Smith files an appeal

[Kurve]

19 Nov 202011.13 AEDT

Brereton report finds alleged unlawful killing of 39 people.​

Justice Brereton considered in a detailed 57 allegations of incidents and issues.

Campbell says he found there to be “credible information to substantiate 23 incidents of alleged unlawful killing of 39 people by 25 Australian Special Forces personnel, predominantly from the Special Air Service Regiment”.

Link to Ben Roberts Smith defamation JUDGEMENT SUMMARY and FULL JUDGEMENT in pdf

 

[BFew]

Good on Keelty for doing the right thing here in handing back his OAM.

Former AFP commissioner Mick Keelty gives up Order of Australia honour six years after Ben Roberts-Smith tip-off

Federal court judge in last year’s defamation case found Roberts-Smith tried to evade surveillance after Keelty alerted him to pending war crimes investigation in 2018

www.theguardian.com

'...
In a statement to the Nine journalists Chris Masters and Nick McKenzie, Keelty said he did not know the former soldier at the time but contacted him at the request of someone in the security industry who had worked alongside Roberts-Smith at Seven Group Holdings, where he forged a civilian career after retiring from the army.

He said he had sought information from serving officers only to “de-conflict” with his former agency and avoid compromising any active inquiries.
...
Besanko found that Keelty told Roberts-Smith at the 20 June meeting he could not meet him again because police had received “referrals” about him, and that Roberts-Smith actively tried to avoid police detection after Keelty told him about the referrals.

The court heard that Roberts-Smith obtained burner phones and began using encrypted communication apps on them about two weeks after receiving the information. Besanko found Roberts-Smith lied when he denied knowing about the referrals before buying the phones. He also found he lied about trying to evade police detection.
...'

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Ch 7's Spotlight program has the blades out and coated with poison against the ABC over the Afghanistan War Crimes saga. Particularly concerning allegations against former Commando Heston Russell.

Gonna read more into it, but this will be interesting...

EDIT:

Inside Australian veteran’s defamation battle with ABC

The ABC has been forced into an embarrassing concession over its reporting of the war in Afghanistan, amid claims extra gunshots were added to a video of Australian soldiers shooting from a helicopter.

thenightly.com.au

September 15, 2024

...Further analysis by a digital audio expert commissioned by Spotlight found an additional five shots were added to a clip used in an ABC report by Mark Willacy over the single warning shot.

“They’ve taken the audio from the six shots and they’ve applied it to this video in the news clip, and they’ve copied and pasted across this scene,” audio analyst James Raper said.

“It completely misrepresents what those soldiers were going through that day...”

Yeah geeze. Probably needs a separate topic really as BRS is another matter entirely.

 

[schneebly111]

Ch 7's Spotlight program has the blades out and coated with poison against the ABC over the Afghanistan War Crimes saga. Particularly concerning allegations against former Commando Heston Russell.

Gonna read more into it, but this will be interesting...

The Nightly is a branch of 7West media.

So the truth of this - there is an attempt to whitewash and defend the Special Forces war criminals by certain sections of the establishment, government and media. Chief amongst them is Kerry Stokes. Kerry and his ilk have a hard on for special forces and a love of playing up hatred of brown people.

They are looking for any way to defend their “heroes”, that’s why Stokes bankrolled BRS’s $5million dollar legal defence. They want any excuse to attack the journos who reported on the war crimes, and paint them as liars and traitors.

Heston Russell had a very short lived “Australian Values” political party that got 0.04% of the vote in the last election and has been in front of the courts several times. Of late he’s also painted himself as the “defender of the Special Forces”. When the Brereton report was released he was in the media attacking it, when the BRS defamation verdict was released he got on TV saying it was only a civil verdict so the findings could be ignored.

With regards to this civil case the judge found an ABC article was basically written a bit sloppily, whilst not directly linking Russell with war crimes didn’t clearly state he wasn’t a part of a war crime allegation made earlier in the article. There have been credible allegations made against levers of the Commando Regiment too so the ABC is right to report that. Russell was also admonished by the judge on the stand for giving false statements too which I’m guessing Channel 7 didn’t state in their story. The defamation payout was relatively minor in the end, basically covering legal fees, which is a basically a statement of “well technically yes you were wronged but it’s a nothing burger so you can take your ‘moral victory’ and move on please”.

I do wonder what the outcome would be if the ABC hadn’t been historically defunded and they could afford good lawyers to back their investigative journalists like Channel 9 did in the BRS defamation trial.

But I can see that Channel 7 (and News Corp feeding off their stories) are now using this minor defamation case to imply ALL allegations against Australian special forces for war crimes are suspect. These facts remain:

The Brereton Report found dozens of allegations of war crimes amongst soldiers from the SAS and Commando Regiment.

Brereton also found a toxic and dangerous culture existed within special forces.

An Australian special forces soldier has been charged with murder.

The charge came DIRECTLY from Mark Willacy’s reporting and 4 Corners “Killing Field” episode. This has made Willacy a major target of the pro SAS mob.

Willacy’s 4 Corner’s episode and book earned him a Gold Walkley and PM’s Literary Prize.

Channel 9, Nick McKenzie and Chris Master’s reporting earned them accolades too. Their reporting was upheld in court in a multi million dollar defamation action.

The Federal Police are apparently (according to a paywalled SMH article I saw within the last few days) stepping up their BRS prosecution and should be ready to lay charges imminently.

So be wary of a lot of suggestive propaganda that is going to be fed into the media by the pro SAS mob in the future. They will do anything to defend these war criminals and smear the journalists who reported on their crimes.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

The Nightly is a branch of 7West media.

So the truth of this - there is an attempt to whitewash and defend the Special Forces war criminals by certain sections of the establishment, government and media. Chief amongst them is Kerry Stokes. Kerry and his ilk have a hard on for special forces and a love of playing up hatred of brown people...

That was my thinking. I'm interested in the developments here though, so I'll post what might look like whitewashing for now knowing that more will follow.

Believe me, I know what Kerry Stokes is all about.

 

[jason_recliner]

The Nightly is a branch of 7West media.

So the truth of this - there is an attempt to whitewash and defend the Special Forces war criminals by certain sections of the establishment, government and media. Chief amongst them is Kerry Stokes. Kerry and his ilk have a hard on for special forces and a love of playing up hatred of brown people.

They are looking for any way to defend their “heroes”, that’s why Stokes bankrolled BRS’s $5million dollar legal defence. They want any excuse to attack the journos who reported on the war crimes, and paint them as liars and traitors.

Heston Russell had a very short lived “Australian Values” political party that got 0.04% of the vote in the last election and has been in front of the courts several times. Of late he’s also painted himself as the “defender of the Special Forces”. When the Brereton report was released he was in the media attacking it, when the BRS defamation verdict was released he got on TV saying it was only a civil verdict so the findings could be ignored.

With regards to this civil case the judge found an ABC article was basically written a bit sloppily, whilst not directly linking Russell with war crimes didn’t clearly state he wasn’t a part of a war crime allegation made earlier in the article. There have been credible allegations made against levers of the Commando Regiment too so the ABC is right to report that. Russell was also admonished by the judge on the stand for giving false statements too which I’m guessing Channel 7 didn’t state in their story. The defamation payout was relatively minor in the end, basically covering legal fees, which is a basically a statement of “well technically yes you were wronged but it’s a nothing burger so you can take your ‘moral victory’ and move on please”.

I do wonder what the outcome would be if the ABC hadn’t been historically defunded and they could afford good lawyers to back their investigative journalists like Channel 9 did in the BRS defamation trial.

But I can see that Channel 7 (and News Corp feeding off their stories) are now using this minor defamation case to imply ALL allegations against Australian special forces for war crimes are suspect. These facts remain:

The Brereton Report found dozens of allegations of war crimes amongst soldiers from the SAS and Commando Regiment.

Brereton also found a toxic and dangerous culture existed within special forces.

An Australian special forces soldier has been charged with murder.

The charge came DIRECTLY from Mark Willacy’s reporting and 4 Corners “Killing Field” episode. This has made Willacy a major target of the pro SAS mob.

Willacy’s 4 Corner’s episode and book earned him a Gold Walkley and PM’s Literary Prize.

Channel 9, Nick McKenzie and Chris Master’s reporting earned them accolades too. Their reporting was upheld in court in a multi million dollar defamation action.

The Federal Police are apparently (according to a paywalled SMH article I saw within the last few days) stepping up their BRS prosecution and should be ready to lay charges imminently.

So be wary of a lot of suggestive propaganda that is going to be fed into the media by the pro SAS mob in the future. They will do anything to defend these war criminals and smear the journalists who reported on their crimes.

Highlights how critical it is that reporting of crime is fair, balanced and above all accurate. An act to make a story more sensational or interesting, or to emphasise an aspect, could result in justice not being served.

 

[schneebly111]

Highlights how critical it is that reporting of crime is fair, balanced and above all accurate. An act to make a story more sensational or interesting, or to emphasise an aspect, could result in justice not being served.

The trouble with Australian defamation law is that if the plaintiff has enough money they can legally bully any criticism into silence. Th ABC reporting was accurate in regards to Commandos committing murders.

I read the original article and could tell that they were not identifying Russell as the suspect but apparently the judge was convinced some with less ability to read a document could mistake him for the suspect, therefore he got a small payout, and also an admonishment from the judge about false statements to the court.

In reality it’s a nothing burger case. But 7West are now on a vendetta to rehabilitate the SAS and special forces so are going after this like it’s the most critical story in the nation, it even made the front cover of the toilet paper rag here in Perth.

I wonder if this will give cover for Dutton to announce the LNP will drop any reform and criminal prosecutions into Special Forces?

 

[schneebly111]

That was my thinking. I'm interested in the developments here though, so I'll post what might look like whitewashing for now knowing that more will follow.

Will more follow? I don’t think there’s much left in this ‘tale’. What I want to know is when are they going to lay charges against BRS and the other 18 war criminals?

 

[jason_recliner]

The trouble with Australian defamation law is that if the plaintiff has enough money they can legally bully any criticism into silence. Th ABC reporting was accurate in regards to Commandos committing murders.

I read the original article and could tell that they were not identifying Russell as the suspect but apparently the judge was convinced some with less ability to read a document could mistake him for the suspect, therefore he got a small payout, and also an admonishment from the judge about false statements to the court.

Regardless, if it's true they added bullet sounds, that's incredibly reckless, perhaps unethical, and can't be condoned.

 

[schneebly111]

Regardless, if it's true they added bullet sounds, that's incredibly reckless, perhaps unethical, and can't be condoned.

No evidence beyond an “expert” commissioned by Channel 7 themselves and not verified by an independent party.

Just like a lawyer you can get an “expert” to testify pretty much anything you want if you pay them enough. Plus that clip wasn’t what was subject to court action, nor did it detract from the main allegation that Commandos had executed prisoners (which has been confirmed by the Australian military).

It really is Channel 7 clutching at minor straws to achieve a massive win when the truth is the actions of their “heroes” in Afghanistan have been thoroughly exposed as criminal.

And if we want accurate journalism we were told by Channel 7 (and the rest of the Australian media frankly) from 2012-2020 that the actions of BRS and the special forces was perfect and infallible, and any attempt to highlight potential crimes was ignored. Where is the investigation into why journalists kept their mouths shut and failed to report the truth then?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Will more follow? I don’t think there’s much left in this ‘tale’. What I want to know is when are they going to lay charges against BRS and the other 18 war criminals?

Yeah, me too.

 

[FIGJAM]

No evidence beyond an “expert” commissioned by Channel 7 themselves and not verified by an independent party.

“We have removed the online video where an error has been identified, based on preliminary inspection of the audio,” the ABC said in a statement to 7NEWS Spotlight.

“The ABC is seeking more information on how this occurred.”

Highlights how critical it is that reporting of crime is fair, balanced and above all accurate. An act to make a story more sensational or interesting, or to emphasise an aspect, could result in justice not being served.

Absolutely spot on. Expect infinitely better from Four Corners and while it doesn't undermine all of their good work, it sure as shit doesn't help with credibility.