Aussie wrote on Jun 8^th, 2023 at 9:03pm:


You pin kids to trees for throwing a can of creaming soda at your turd mobile.
Imagine if you were let loose with a gun and unlimited power.

Aussie wrote on Jun 8^th, 2023 at 9:03pm:


If true, this guy is a monster - he needs to be locked up.

Gordon wrote on Jun 8^th, 2023 at 9:43pm:


Gordon, its time for you to clean yourself up, zip up, and leave.

Gordon shouldn't be allowed in public without adult supervision.

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 8^th, 2023 at 10:41pm:


Gordon?

In just this 1 link 👇

What an amazing insight into what the Federal Court was given as evidence. Grab a cuppa and have a go at reading this unfortunate and brutally confronting document. 😩😔🥺

https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/54187/NSD1486of2018-1808...

I wouldn’t mind hearing from you all...esp those who have had ADF experience.

Cheers.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 9:43am:


What? ... from Bwyan? 

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 9:43am:


Whoo-hoo, 136 pages to read. That can go on top of my 230 pages on workplace health and safety legislation and the 170 pages on infection control.

Will give you my opinion later about this.

Belgarion wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 1:08pm:


You ignorant, crustaceous, extremist cretin.

There is evidence. There are witnesses.

The upper echelon of the ADF is guilty of a coverup and criminal negligence for not prosecuting BR-S.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 1:13pm:


It hasn't been tested in a criminal court of law. There are different standards of proof in civil and criminal matters.

lee wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 1:48pm:


Yes....but the evidence and witnesses (eye witnesses) remain the same.

lee wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 3:23pm:


And do you doubt that same evidence will not meet the criminal standard of proof?

Aussie wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 1:13pm:


Apologies and you’re quite right. I should have stated :

What an amazing insight into what the Federal Court was provided with by way of filed documents.

Incidentally these documents are referred to as pleadings and pleadings specifically exclude evidence but set out the version of events by each party and essentially frame the issues of the case.

lee wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 3:48pm:


People like you and me who have read and seen the evidence.

No doubt in my mind....way beyond reasonable doubt.

The evidence is not going to change.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 4:31pm:


99% of those here would not have bothered reading the evidence as I have.

Ergo...pointless Poll and all you'll get is irrelevant emotive votes.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 4:53pm:


Not a chance in Hell.  Firstly, that would mean he would have to ADMIT he did the deeds (and thus perjured himself in the civil Trial), and secondly.....no shrink worth their salt is going to give evidence of insanity (or whatever) while at the same time BRS denies having done anything 'insane.'

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 4:53pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 6:25pm:


Rubbish. Just tosh.  A manufactured contrived bullshit scenario.

The bloke is just a turd.  Simple a that.

Colonel Kurtz went mad and joined the people who lived near the Vietnam-Cambodian border. He killed 4 of his South Vietnamese intelligence officers, suspected of being double agents. And when a Green Beret failed to bring back Kurtz, Capt Willard was sent in to kill Kurtz.

BRS was not going off plan with his missions. He just (allegedly) violated the rules of engagement. As far as I am concerned, he was put in a very trying environment and succumbed to the stresses that led him to making his decisions. BRS seems to be still well in control of his faculties.

Nope....I have never been found to have murdered anyone, let alone a captive controlled prisoner in cold blood.

Belgarion wrote on Jun 10^th, 2023 at 1:15pm:


Send him to Hague war crime court.

or

Hand him over to the Afghan government for prosecution.

BR-S is an embarrassment to the whole of Australia.

Aussie wrote on Jun 10^th, 2023 at 1:11pm:

Belgarion wrote on Jun 10^th, 2023 at 1:15pm:


No Court Martial, eh?

I suspect he will be Court Martialled.

(BTW....it is one or the other.....either he is done in a civilian criminal court or by way of court martial.  Can't be both.)

I understand a Special (Military) Prosecutor has been appointed and that the Military are carrying the can at the moment.

They should, IMO.  This prick is their prick and this prick has sh on everything the Australian military is supposed to stand for.

They SHOULD deal with him.

He sh on their dung hill, he is one of theirs, and thus it is their problem to sort out.

Genuine trial by peers, wot?

Aussie wrote on Jun 10^th, 2023 at 2:40pm:


No. The same rules apply in Courts Martial as in a civilian court. A trial by a Defence Force Magistrate (essentially a Court Martial but with only one Member instead of three or five) may be possible however the presumption of innocence issue will still be in play.

There is also the issue of the Defence Force Discipline Act and what the actual charges would be. There is generally a time limit of five years to charge someone with a service offence, however I imagine the charges BRS would face would be considered as Territory Offences which would be subject to the relevant laws of the Jervis Bay Territory (ACT Law effectively)

Aussie wrote on Jun 10^th, 2023 at 4:40pm:


Beyond reasonable doubt, same as a civil court.

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/102423220

Australia's most decorated living soldier's reputation has been obliterated by the Federal Court, but that's not all he may lose.

Ben Roberts-Smith sat through more than 100 days of hearings in the mammoth defamation battle he mounted against The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Canberra Times, and three journalists.

But on Thursday he was absent when Justice Anthony Besanko threw out the case, finding publisher Nine Entertainment had established a substantial truth to the most serious allegations of murder.

Defamation trials are decided on the balance of probabilities, which is the civil standard of proof. This is different from criminal responsibility, which would require charges to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Mr Roberts-Smith was steadfast in his repeated denial of the allegations — published in 2018 — of bullying, domestic violence, and war crimes related to his six tours of Afghanistan undertaken between 2006 and 2012.

Justice Besanko found that Nine had established a substantial truth defence and contextual truth defence to most of the imputations, or meanings conveyed.

He has delayed the release of his full judgement so the Commonwealth can make redactions to any information concerning national security information.

A lot of the evidence throughout the trial was heard in closed court, as to not disclose Australian defence secrets.

Justice Besanko has not determined whether the public will ever have access to those 50 pages of closed-court findings, when he releases his judgement, which will come on June 5 at the latest.

How Mr Roberts-Smith might pay

One of the most expensive defamation trial's in Australian history, it is estimated to have cost upwards of $25 million.

Shortly after it was dismissed, Nicholas Owens SC, on behalf of Nine, flagged he would be applying for costs.

The barrister asked for 21 days to prepare any third party and indemnity costs, which if granted would mean Mr Roberts-Smith is up for most, or all of defence's legal bill, along with his.

A directions hearing has been set down on June 29, to begin this process.

Seven West's executive chairman, Kerry Stokes, has been financially supporting the case of Mr Roberts-Smith, who was leading the network's Queensland operations. 

Mr Roberts-Smith took leave from his job after taking legal action, and Seven said they are still assessing whether he would return.

"Ben remains on leave and will review the judgement with us and make a decision on his future in the near future," Seven said in a statement.

"We will make no further comment at this time."

Nine previously broadcast secret recordings in which the veteran appeared to say he was indebted to the media mogul, offering up his Victoria Cross as collateral.

Medals and honours

After Mr Roberts-Smith was awarded the prestigious Victoria Cross in 2011, he became an icon for the Special Air Service (SAS).

His memorabilia is currently exhibited at the Australian War Memorial, which Greens Senator David Shoebridge thinks should be removed.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/28/bail-for-former-sas-soldi...

Oliver Schulz: bail for Australian former SAS soldier accused of murdering Afghan man in war crime


A former Australian soldier alleged to have murdered an unarmed Afghan in a war crime a decade ago

Oliver Jordan Schulz, 41, faced the Downing Centre local court on Tuesday by videolink, dressed in a green prison tracksuit. He spoke only to say: “Thank you, your honour.”

Before granting bail under strict conditions, magistrate Jennifer Atkinson detailed Schulz’s alleged offence in court.

The decorated former Special Air Service trooper is alleged to have shot father-of-two Dad Mohammad, as Mohammad lay in a wheat field in the southern Afghanistan village of Deh Jawz in 2012.

Mohammad, the magistrate said, had fallen backwards and was lying on his back when confronted by the Australian troops, with his arms raised, holding prayer beads in one hand.

“He was quiet and not resisting,” Atkinson said, stating the video showed Australian soldiers discussing what they should do with the man.

“The accused then turns towards the Afghan man and shoots towards him three times. The man appears to go limp after the first shot.”

The dead man’s father said Mohammad had been struggling to feed his family, including his two daughters, and his body had been found shot in the head and through the heart, Atkinson said.

The allegations against Schulz state Mohammad “was not taking an active part in the hostilities” and Schulz “knew, or was reckless as to the factual circumstances establishing that the person was not taking an active part in the hostilities”.

Footage of the incident, shot on helmet cam, was broadcast on the ABC’s Four Corners program in 2020.



Australia federal police officers raided his home in May 2022.

The charge against Schulz is the first time a serving or former ADF member has been charged with the war crime of murder under domestic law.

If convicted, he faces a potential sentence of life imprisonment.

Because of the nature and gravity of Schulz’s alleged offence, there was a presumption against bail.

However, Atkinson said “exceptional circumstances” existed which warranted granting bail.

She said it would likely be 2024 or 2025 before a trial date was set for Schulz’s case, and that he faced a “difficult, onerous and potentially dangerous custodial environment”.


——————————

Given 👆 : Ben Roberts Smith will probably be charged then bailed to prep/fight his case on medical grounds. After that both Shulz and Smith will go on a pension on medical grounds (the ADF have generous pension entitlements).

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 9^th, 2023 at 6:25pm:


Hi Lisa,
he went rogue - fighting the war his own way -
a bit like Colonel Kurtz in Apocalypse Now -
you should watch that movie.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 10^th, 2023 at 1:27pm:



Hand you over a 300 ft cliff you arsehole.

Aussie wrote on Jun 10^th, 2023 at 5:23pm:


I was referring to a civilian court, as opposed to a military one, and the defence will make the same claim about presumption of innocence. Even military officers can be swayed by the media. 

Gnads wrote on Jun 10^th, 2023 at 6:50pm:


Yeas, but his own mates in the field with him are.  And they have given damning evidence against him.  Are you going to question their fitness to judge, Train Driver?

The ADF has committed crimes.

AusGeoff wrote on Jun 11^th, 2023 at 3:49pm:


What is so hard to believe?  His OC did not kick a captive over a cliff and did not murder anyone.

Or are you conceding that BRS is a murdering arsehole, but claiming that his OC gave him permission to be a murdering arsehole....a killer of captive, controlled people?

Aussie wrote on Jun 10^th, 2023 at 7:30pm:


They were never his "mates in the field".  and yes.

Aussie wrote on Jun 11^th, 2023 at 4:17pm:


They fast roped down from a chopper so unlikely to have capacity to deal with captives.

Do you think he should have released them?

Called in ground troops to risk being blown up by IEDs and getting shot to remove and send to Gitmo?

Do you think any reasonable person will believe the guy hiding in Taliban tunnel wasn't Taliban?

If the Taliban caught BRS would they have executed him or followed conventions on war crimes they don't believe in and never signed?

There is some report in the SMH today about the AFP investigation breaking down over an evidence issue and a new joint task force being set up to continue investigating.  The SMH is paywalled.  Anyone got the text of that which they can post?

From the previous article : At issue is the legal principle of “use immunity”.

Let’s take a closer look at Use Immunity (Wiki google helps here)

Use immunity and transactional immunity: What is the difference?


You know something about a crime — and the prosecutor wants you to testify in court. Your concern, however, is that you may not exactly have “clean hands.” You’re worried that what you say could eventually come back to haunt you.

In situations like these, the word “immunity” may get tossed around, but you need to make sure you understand exactly what type of immunity is being offered.

What is use immunity?

This is a narrow form of immunity that prohibits prosecutors from using any of your testimony in court — or any evidence that may have been derived from that testimony — against you.

In theory, it’s designed to protect you just as much as not testifying at all. However, there’s a catch: You can still be prosecuted for any crimes you mention as long as the prosecutor comes by their evidence another way.

For example, maybe you got mixed up in a robbery that turned into a homicide. You testify against the ringleader of the gang involved. Your testimony can’t be used  — but if video evidence turns up that shows you on the scene during the incident, that evidence can be part of the prosecution’s case against you.

What is transactional immunity?

This is the kind of immunity that most people think of when they hear that the prosecutor is offering immunity in exchange for their testimony.

With transactional immunity, you’re protected from charges related to your immunized testimony.

For example, maybe you played a role in luring the robbery victim mentioned above to the spot where they were ultimately killed. You could fully testify to your part in the scheme and remain immune from prosecution — even if the prosecutor later finds independent evidence of your involvement.

It's the Briyawn bluffing show!

Wasn't Roberts-Smith a Sardaukar Mercenary for the USA's political agenda?
Nothing more than a hired hand assassin?
Didn't Roberts-Smith not adhere to the 'team spirit' and instead, expected the team to adhere to 'him' only?
Didn't he feel it when the 'team' dobbed him in?

What's with this 'coward' John Singleton dick suck?
The same military tries to ENSLAVE innocent civilians and citizens and throw them to the 'front'  just like what Russia and Ukraine are doing!!

Unlike other Industries - the Military steals money from the Taxpayers.
Personally - they should fund themselves and soon see where the real world and real battles begin!

Suck it up Frankie baby.
Aussie soldiers are 'dick-sucking' sardaukar mercenaries for the selfish and privatised USA agendas.
Ben Roberts-Smith even masturbated that his group were called the '300-Spartans' due to a movie! 

He ain't no Anzac. He's just a paid Merc for America who rips off the Australian taxpayer too, just like Religions do.

[edit] Ben Roberts-Smith would be the first professional-Soldier-Merc who would draft/conscript civilians/citizens from Australia to stand in front of him as his human shield and protect his sorry arse. He would probably only arm them with mobile phones - so he gets the tax-paid gun. 

Aussie wrote on Jun 8^th, 2023 at 9:03pm:


Really?

Aussie wrote on Jun 10^th, 2023 at 7:30pm:


They were never his mates.