Stokes seems to be one of those guys who has a hard-on for military types. A vicarious valor kinda deal.
Stokes seems to be one of those guys who has a hard-on for military types. A vicarious valor kinda deal.
He hired BRS as an exec at 7 West and when this broke he didn’t want it to look like he’d been scammed by a war criminal, so he bankrolled his defence, no doubt on the back of a whirlwind of bullshit from BRS.
Add Witness Coaching to the list of appaling behaviour
BREAKING- Ben Roberts-Smith’s lawyers just outed in court by RS’s 3rd witness as feeding this witness the info in his statement that effectively cleared RS of an alleged murder, but which was patently FALSE. Our lawyers have alleged this falsehood may be a fraud on the court.
— Nick McKenzie (@Ageinvestigates) May 3, 2022
Coaching is illegal and lawyers can be disbarred for coaching, whoever instructed/approved it can also be in deep shit so team Stokes may well be needing their own lawyers.
Sounds like he had Better Call Saul.
Almost like they are going full train wreck, in order to make a better TV mini series for the rights holder?
^^^ Stokes’ motivation finally revealed!
Smells like perjury to me.
They can go in the bin as well
It just continues on and on and on…
Surely these proceedings will be looked back on in future law classes on how not to build a case? BRS lawyers are now boarding on incompetency
I won’t lie, but you’d be competing with Rudi Giuliani in that respect
What it seems to expose for me is just how incompetent or complicit the Army command structure was(is) - and subsequently the ministry of defense. Fully expect this “Special Investigator” to produce fuck all and they will try to let it all wash out over time. Just another national disgrace.
Coming on on Celebrity Survivor. BRS cries real tears over those allegations of murder.
Coming up on Masterchef. BRS cries real tears over the night he had to cook for a dying mate in Afghanistan.
Coming up on 60 minutes. BRS cries real tears over those other media organisations allegations of human rights abuses.
Coming up on Celebrity Big Brother. BRS cries real tears over the time he had to expel an entire family from their house.
And so forth…
Findings being handed down now.
It’s not going at all well for him.
To answer question in the title… appears he is a villain
Very much so.
About the only decision that came down on his side was the domestic violence ruling.
Villain is such a kind word. Can’t we go with Murderous Sociopath?
The following meanings were found by the judge to be substantially true:
- Roberts-Smith murdered an unarmed and defenceless Afghan civilian, Ali Jan, in September 2012 by kicking him off a cliff and procuring the soldiers under his command to shoot him.
- He broke the moral and legal rules of military engagement and is therefore a criminal.
- He disgraced his country, Australia, and the Australian army by his conduct as a member of the SAS in Afghanistan.
- He committed another murder on Easter Sunday, 2009, by pressuring a newly deployed and >inexperienced SAS soldier to execute an elderly, unarmed Afghan in order to “blood the rookie”.
- He committed a third murder by machine-gunning a man with a prosthetic leg on the Easter Sunday mission.
- He was so callous and inhumane that he took the prosthetic leg back to Australia and encouraged his soldiers to use it as a novelty beer drinking vessel.
- As deputy commander of the 2009 SAS patrol on Easter Sunday, he authorised the execution of an unarmed Afghan by a junior trooper in his patrol.
- He bullied a fellow soldier, Person 1.
- In 2010, he bashed an unarmed Afghan in the face with his fists and in the stomach with his knee and in so doing alarmed two patrol commanders to the extent that they ordered him to back off.
- As patrol commander in 2012 he authorised the assault of an unarmed Afghan, who was being held in custody and posed no threat.
- He assaulted an unarmed Afghan in 2012.
Besanko did not find the newspapers had established that Roberts-Smith committed an act of domestic violence against a former lover. However, he found the newspapers could rely on a defence known as contextual truth in relation to that allegation.
Under this defence, the newspapers argued that some of the articles conveyed the following meanings:
- Roberts-Smith broke the moral and legal rules of military engagement and is therefore a criminal.
- He disgraced his country, Australia, and the Australian army by his conduct as a member of the SAS in Afghanistan.
The newspapers argued successfully that those meanings were substantially true and that his reputation could not have been further harmed by the publication of the domestic violence allegation.
So basically he spent all that time and money to prove that he’s a war criminal. The kind of work Christian Porter would be proud of.
To truly emulate Christian Porter, BRS has to claim victory yet.