Posted on 04/09/2026 5:58:43 PM PDT by naturalman1975
Victoria Cross recipient Ben Roberts-Smith had written to Australian Federal Police and the Office of the Special Investigator multiple times offering to hand himself in before his high-profile arrest in front of his teenage daughters at Sydney Airport this week.
Veterans have reacted furiously to what they see as an orchestrated and deliberate attempt to humiliate Australia’s most decorated soldier to justify only the second arrest after the Office of the Special Investigator’s (OSI) six-year, $300m investigation into alleged war crimes.
Roberts-Smith was arrested in front of media cameras on Tuesday as he arrived at Sydney Airport on a Qantas flight from Queensland with his partner Sarah Matulin and his twin 15-year-old daughters.
Before he had even reached Mascot Police Station, Nine Newspapers’ extensive pre-written coverage was running on its website.
A legal source confirmed to The Daily Telegraph the 47-year-old and his lawyers had written multiple times to both the AFP and the OSI offering to hand himself in at a time and place of their choosing if they reached that point in their investigations.
.....
Former NSW veterans’ affairs parliamentary secretary and Vietnam veteran Charlie Lynn said veterans were furious at the way the AFP and OSI had gone about its arrest of Roberts-Smith.
“What veterans are furious about is the absolute public humiliation of our most decorated soldier,” he said.
“(Roberts-Smith is) a man who served his country and is entitled to the presumption of innocence.
“I have twin daughters myself and I can imagine exactly what those girls went through when they saw their father – who they know as a war hero – marched off a plane and paraded before the media who the authorities had tipped off.”
(Excerpt) Read more at heraldsun.com.au ...
I wish the press and others would stop referring to troops who are awarded medals and honors “winners” of said awards, like there was some contest or competition to win. They fought for their comrades and their country and died or nearly died doing so. The are “recipients”, “awardees” or “honorees”.
The term ‘winner’ has a long and specific tradition associated with it, when it comes to the Victoria Cross, and I use it quite deliberately for that reason.
I wouldn’t use the term, for example, with the Medal of Honor because the traditions there are different.
I really wanted to find a way to move to Australia after my 3 week visit in ‘97.
Sad but glad I didn’t
Who is his accuser? How did this case even happen at all?
The accusers/witnesses include both Afghanis and SAS soldiers.
I give the SAS people more credibility, but a key point to make here is that may well have had less information available to them than BRS did.
Since I am unfamiliar with this case I asked Grok.
Here is what it said:
What is Ben Roberts-Smith accused of?
Ben Roberts-Smith, a former Australian Special Air Service Regiment (SASR) soldier and the country’s most decorated living veteran (Victoria Cross and Medal for Gallantry recipient), has been accused of committing war crimes in Afghanistan.3f6cb9
On 7 April 2026, he was arrested by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) at Sydney Airport and charged with five counts of the war crime of murder related to the alleged unlawful killings of five unarmed Afghan civilians/detainees between 2009 and 2012. Each charge carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.c20df3
Details of the Charges
The AFP has stated that the victims were:
Detained, unarmed, and not taking part in hostilities.
Under the control of Australian Defence Force (ADF) members when killed.
Shot by Roberts-Smith himself, or by subordinate ADF members in his presence and acting on his orders.328197
Specific locations and incidents referenced in reports and the prior civil case include:
April 2009, Whiskey 108 compound, Kakarak, Uruzgan Province: Allegations involve the killing of a man with a prosthetic leg (shot by machine gun) and pressuring an inexperienced soldier to execute an elderly unarmed Afghan man to “blood the rookie.” The prosthetic leg was reportedly taken as a trophy and used by troops as a drinking vessel in one account.0e231f
September/October 2012, Darwan and Syahchow: Allegations include kicking a handcuffed detainee (Ali Jan) off a cliff and ordering a subordinate to shoot him dead, among other killings.687abd
One charge is for the war crime of murder, one for jointly commissioning a murder, and three for aiding, abetting, counselling, or procuring murder.298f23
Background from the Defamation Case
These criminal charges follow a high-profile 2018–2023 civil defamation lawsuit that Roberts-Smith brought against Nine Entertainment newspapers (The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, and The Canberra Times) and journalists over 2018 articles alleging misconduct, including unlawful killings, bullying, and domestic violence.
In June 2023, Federal Court Justice Anthony Besanko ruled that the core allegations of four murders (or complicity in them) were substantially true on the balance of probabilities (the civil standard). He dismissed most bullying and all domestic violence claims but found Roberts-Smith had broken rules of engagement by killing or ordering the killing of unarmed detainees. The judgment was upheld on appeal in 2025, with the High Court refusing further appeal.164d53
The criminal investigation, involving the AFP and the Office of the Special Investigator, built on evidence from that case and a broader inquiry into Australian forces’ conduct in Afghanistan (e.g., the Brereton Report). Roberts-Smith has consistently denied all wrongdoing and maintains his innocence; his lawyer has said he will contest the charges. He remains in custody as of the latest reports, with a bail review hearing set for 17 April 2026 (no bail application was made at the initial hearing).9ba247
Important Context
This is only the second Australian serviceman charged with war crimes from the Afghanistan deployments.
The civil findings are not a criminal conviction; the criminal case will require proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Roberts-Smith’s military record includes multiple deployments and bravery awards, but the allegations center on specific incidents involving detainees rather than battlefield combat.
The case is ongoing, and he is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a criminal court. Details may evolve as proceedings continue.
Is there any proof beyond people saying he did things?
No, there is no physical forensic evidence (such as recovered projectiles, blood spatter analysis, post-mortems, crime scene photos with measurements, or bodies) directly linking Ben Roberts-Smith to the alleged killings. The incidents occurred in remote Afghan locations over 15–17 years ago, in an active war zone, and investigators have stated they lack access to the sites or the deceased.b80484
What Evidence Exists
The case relies primarily on eyewitness testimony from fellow Australian SAS soldiers (many subpoenaed and some reluctant), contemporary military reports, limited battlefield photographs, intercepted radio logs, and helmet-cam videos where available. The Australian Federal Police (AFP) and Office of the Special Investigator (OSI) have conducted a multi-year probe involving re-interviews and fresh evidence gathering, but officials have publicly noted the inherent challenges: no traditional crime scene forensics are possible.3f6b89
Key elements that have been cited as supporting the allegations include:
Multiple eyewitness accounts: In the 2018–2023 defamation trial (which Roberts-Smith initiated), Justice Anthony Besanko heard testimony from several SAS personnel. For one key incident (the 2009 killing of a man with a prosthetic leg at Whiskey 108), the judge noted it was “a rare murder” witnessed by three independent eyewitnesses whose accounts provided “cogent evidence” that Roberts-Smith machine-gunned the unarmed detainee. The Full Federal Court upheld this on appeal in 2025, rejecting challenges based on minor inconsistencies.790bfa
The prosthetic leg as a “trophy”: Multiple soldiers testified that the leg was removed from the body, taken back to base, and used as a novelty drinking vessel at an unofficial bar (”Fat Ladies Arms”). Photographs showing soldiers (including one with Roberts-Smith nearby) drinking from it were entered into evidence. Witnesses described it being used to “bond” or decompress. The judge accepted this as part of the broader findings on the incident.e896c5
Alleged cover-up actions: Testimony included claims that Roberts-Smith removed handcuffs from a victim (Ali Jan in Darwan, 2012), planted a radio on the body to stage it as a legitimate combatant (”spotter”), and instructed others to stick to an approved story. The judge found Roberts-Smith’s own evidence on these points unsatisfactory and that he had motives to lie.
Other supporting details: Contemporary ADF reporting, some photos from the battlefield, and accounts of “blooding the rookie” (pressuring inexperienced soldiers to execute unarmed detainees).
The defamation judgment (upheld on appeal, with the High Court refusing further review in 2025) found on the balance of probabilities (civil standard) that Roberts-Smith committed or was complicit in four unlawful killings of unarmed detainees. The judge described him as “not an honest and reliable witness” in key areas and rejected much of the defence evidence from soldiers he called.41273b
Criminal vs. Civil Standards
The current criminal charges (five counts of war crime murder) require proof beyond reasonable doubt—a much higher threshold. The AFP/OSI investigation built on the civil case material but cannot directly reuse compelled testimony from it in the same way; fresh statements and evidence are needed. Prosecutors have acknowledged the difficulties due to the passage of time, lack of forensics, and the nature of special forces operations.755e1a
Roberts-Smith denies all allegations, calling them false and motivated by malice. His lawyers argue he will vigorously contest the charges, and concerns have been raised about potential fair trial issues due to extensive prior media coverage and the delay. As of April 2026, he remains in custody pending further court proceedings; no trial date has been set, and the presumption of innocence applies.
In short: The “proof” is testimonial and circumstantial (eyewitnesses + some photos/documents), accepted as substantially true in civil court but untested to criminal standards. There is no smoking-gun physical evidence like ballistics tying specific weapons to victims. The criminal case will turn on whether the witnesses hold up under cross-examination and whether the prosecution can meet the higher burden. Details may change as the matter proceeds through the courts.
“I have twin daughters myself and I can imagine exactly what those girls went through when they saw their father – who they know as a war hero – marched off a plane and paraded before the media who the authorities had tipped off.”
Wonder if there is a connection to the same ICC loving folks who were in with Murtha on accusing US soldiers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.