[ad_1]
A clean strip of skin on the bloodied arm of an Afghan man is photographic evidence that Ben Roberts-Smith executed a handcuffed prisoner, Nine claimed in court.
But the elite soldier denied – more than 50 times – that he interrogated or beat the unarmed prisoner, threw him off a cliff and shot him dead.
Mr. Roberts-Smith faced his second day of cross-examination by Nines attorney Nicholas Owens SC.
The lawyer devoted much of his time to Nines’ central allegation that Mr. Roberts-Smith killed the shepherd Ali Jan in the village of Darwan in 2012.
Mr Roberts-Smith has repeatedly denied Nines’ version of events, claiming he helped another SAS operator, Person 11, shoot a Taliban observer in a nearby corn field.
Photographs of the body in the cornfield were shown to Mr. Roberts-Smith, including close-ups of the man’s arms and wrists.
Mr Owens pointed out that much of the dead man’s arms were covered in blood, except for a scratch near his wrists.
Do you agree (clean skin) is compatible with wearing flexicuffs on his wrists when bleeding? asked Mr. Owens.
No, Mr Roberts-Smith replied, exhaling and shaking his head.
Camera IconBen Roberts-Smith made dozens of denials under cross-examination by Nine’s lawyer. Credit: News Limited
Mr. Roberts-Smith was then shown photographs of a gaping wound on the man’s arm.
Mr Owens said the injury could only have happened if Ali Jans’ arms were behind his back when he was shot.
Mr Roberts-Smith denied this claim that the injury could have happened in several ways.
Finally, the SAS veteran was shown photographs of a bloody wound around the man’s mouth.
This man suffered this wound when he hit his mouth while falling towards the creek bed, right? Mr Owens said.
No, replied Mr. Roberts-Smith.
Every detail was put to Mr. Roberts-Smith and he said no every time.
Mr Owens, continued, claiming that the SAS Troop covered up the war crime by dragging Ali Jans’ body across the creek bed.
Mr Owens said the soldiers threw Ali Jan into the cornfield and planted a radio on his corpse to justify the murder.
The SAS took photos and concocted a story that Ali Jan was a Taliban observer whom they confronted and killed in the cornfield, Owens said.
And that’s what you’ve been saying since, Mr Owens said.
No, we explained the engagement exactly how it went, Mr Roberts-Smith replied.
Mr Owens earlier told Mr Roberts-Smith he made up details, but also said he left a crucial point: that there was a cliff in Darwan.
Mr Roberts-Smith said there was no nearby cliff where he could have kicked Ali Jan.
Nines’ attorney showed him a photo of a steep fall that Roberts-Smith said appeared to be seven to 10 meters in height.
But, said the elite soldier, it was not a cliff as there was a walking track along it.
A cliff is a cliff – and it is not a cliff to me, said Mr. Roberts-Smith.
Camera IconBen Roberts-Smith has refuted claims he “lied” about details of a crucial mission. Department of Defense. Credit: News Corp Australia
Court documents released this week confirmed that Deputy Federal Defense Minister and former SAS commander Andrew Hastie is listed as a likely witness for Nine against Mr Roberts-Smith.
He is one of 30 witnesses Nine will call about their accusations that Mr. Roberts-Smith was involved in six unlawful killings – amounting to war crimes – while deployed to Afghanistan.
According to court documents, one allegation is that Mr. Roberts-Smith stood behind an SAS soldier known as Person 66 and ordered him to execute one of two Afghan prisoners in a field in Syahchow in October 2012.
The blood of Person 66 should be the subject of Mr. Hasties’ evidence.
The court heard on Friday that then Captain Hastie was the new troop commander who had been sent on this mission.
Camera Icon Liberal Assistant Minister Andrew Hastie is expected to testify for Nine against Ben Roberts-Smith. NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman Credit: News Corp Australia
Mr. Hastie has long been a commentator for the respondents and anti-my client, Mr. Roberts-Smith’s attorney, Bruce McClintock, told the court at the opening of the case last week.
His glimpse (of the evidence) offers nothing convincing, except that at the end of the mission, he saw Person 66 looking anxious and uncomfortable. There can be many reasons after the fight that someone seems anxious and uncomfortable.
Mr Roberts-Smith was asked about the term bloody and said he had not heard or used it during his time in the SAS.
I hadn’t heard that line until a few years ago, when it first aired, he said.
Person 66 is also listed as a probable witness for Nine.
NED-3953 Allegations against Ben Roberts-Smith
Mr Roberts-Smith said on Friday he remembered parts of that mission, including throwing a grenade at two insurgents in a heavily forested agricultural area.
Did you know that after this mission, a large number of local nationals protested against the deaths of civilians? Nines lawyer Nick Owens SC asked.
No, but it has happened several times, it could have been this mission, Mr Roberts-Smith said.
Mr Roberts-Smith was not directly involved in the allegation of blood by Nines’ attorney, but said he did not recall whether there had been any prisoners taken that day.
Camera IconBen Roberts-Smith denies having “bloodied” SAS recruits. Department of Defense Credit: News Corp Australia
The Victoria Cross recipient began his second day of cross-examination by correcting evidence provided a day earlier about a bloody battle at an Afghan resort known as Whiskey 108.
Nine alleged that Mr. Roberts-Smith knocked an unarmed Afghan with a prosthetic leg to the ground before shooting him a dozen times with a machine gun.
Mr Roberts-Smith denied this version of events, saying he fired two bullets at the Taliban insurgent, who had arrived around the corner with a bolt-action rifle, before his machine gun broke down.
A second SAS operator, standing nearby, fired at a second insurgent seconds later, Roberts Smith told court.
Mr Roberts-Smith told court on Thursday he dragged the man he killed to the compound wall while the second SAS operator dragged the second insurgent.
On Friday, he said he had reflected on his evidence and realized it was wrong – the second SAS operator had not moved the second insurgent corps.
He was lying where he had fallen. It was a mistake in my testimony that I felt I needed to correct, said Mr. Roberts-Smith.
Cross-examination continues.
[ad_2]
picture credit