for defamation over a series of articles in 2018 he says portray him as a war criminal who was involved in the unlawful killing of unarmed Afghan prisoners. Under the rules of engagement that bound the SAS, prisoners could not be killed.
During cross-examination by the newspapers’ barrister, Nicholas Owens, SC, on Thursday Person 81 agreed he was unable to say one way or another whether there were people in the tunnel, only that he didn’t see any himself. Person 81 told the court he had a memory of seeing fighting-age Afghan men inside Whiskey 108, but could not remember where.Roberts-Smith has told the court no men were found inside the tunnel and two insurgents were killed lawfully outside Whiskey 108, including one man killed by him. He called four SAS witnesses who supported his account about the tunnel. Another soldier, Person 27, said he did not have “any recollection of anyone coming out of a tunnel”, although he was not in the area.
Person 81 agreed on Thursday he “wouldn’t know” whether two men killed on the day of the Whiskey 108 mission were prisoners. He also “couldn’t say” whether one of the men was executed by Roberts-Smith, or whether the second man was executed by Person 4 with Roberts-Smith’s encouragement. He did not see anything that made him suspect this had occurred, he said.
MWhitbourn That pretty much sums up the shenanigans on this. “Couldn’t say’ ‘A mate of a mate saw something, I think’ ‘Hearsay, hearsay, hearsay’ But I might write a story on it, blame that bloke and then go for some sort of media award.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: abcnews - 🏆 5. / 83 Read more »