History is at stake as two sides face off in the Ben Roberts-Smith case

History is at stake as two sides face off in the Ben Roberts-Smith case

“None – not a single one – of the six murders that we allege Mr Roberts-Smith either committed or was involved in, involved decisions that were made in the heat of battle” Owens asserted. Instead, he said, six Afghani men – on separate occasions over a number of different missions – died at the hands of Roberts-Smith or with his blessing in situations where they were either already a prisoner or rendered incapable of combat. Under those circumstances, Owens went on, they should have been entitled to protection under the Geneva Conventions even if any one of them could have been “without a shadow of a doubt the most brutal, vile member of the Taliban imaginable”. But asked later by McClintock if he thought it was acceptable to kill unarmed people under the control of Australian troops, Roberts-Smith replied: “Absolutely not.” He said every time he heard or read that allegation he couldn’t believe it and it felt like he was “in a bloody nightmare”. There is more at stake in this trial than contested events on the battlefields of …
More on: www.smh.com.au