In a high-profile defamation trial, Ben Roberts-Smith’s lawyer has raised significant objections to key witness evidence surrounding accusations of kicking a civilian off a cliff and ordering an execution. The lawyer argued that the judge overlooked the timing of events and did not adhere to the “Briginshaw principle,” which calls for a cautious approach to serious allegations.
The credibility of evidence related to the alleged incidents came under scrutiny, with concerns raised about inconsistencies and delayed reporting by witnesses. Roberts-Smith, a Victoria Cross recipient, maintains his innocence amidst allegations of war crimes and unlawful killings in Afghanistan.
As the trial unfolds, proceedings continue with some sessions conducted behind closed doors to address national security information. The case remains ongoing, shedding light on the complexities and challenges inherent in addressing serious accusations within the legal system.
