Page:Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 41) (2023, FCA).pdf/34

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

62 There is then a reference in para 41 to four defence insiders having alleged that they observed patrols under the applicant's direct or deputy leadership severely mistreat unarmed Afghans on four occasions. There then follows reference to these four instances in paras 42 to 49. Paragraph 42 contains a statement that a member of the applicant's 2009 patrol encouraged a more junior trooper to execute a detainee who was a suspected militant and that member of the applicant's patrol was later heard boasting about. There is a further statement that Fairfax Media had obtained a photograph of the dead man and two witness accounts describing the circumstances in which the Afghan died. In paras 43 to 48, there is reference to an assault in 2010. There is then reference to two alleged assaults in 2012.

63 The statements concerning bullying by the applicant first appear in para 55 and are followed by a clear statement in para 64 that multiple sources contended that the applicant repeatedly bullied Trooper M. More than one witness claims to have heard the applicant threatening to harm Trooper M. The alleged threat by the applicant to Trooper J is the subject of paras 78 and 79. There is reference to the complaints by patrol commanders about the applicant receiving a Commendation for Distinguished Service in paras 81, 82 and 83. The article then has a heading of "Denials and accusations". The applicant drew particular attention to paras 95, 96 and 97 under that heading and the comparison made in those paragraphs between the way he has been challenged and the treatment of other recipients of the Victoria Cross. The applicant referred to the paragraphs under the heading "Pushing back".

64 The applicant then drew particular attention to para 110 and the statement that Canberra sources had said that the female lawyer was alleging that the applicant had subjected her to an act of domestic violence and intimidation in the hours after the event in the Great Hall in late March 2018. Paragraph 111 contains a statement concerning how defence officials became aware of the woman's complaint and the fact that the woman had later told police of her claims. In para 112, the circumstances of her fall as she was leaving the event and her arrival at the Hotel Realm are referred to and, for the third time according to the applicant, it is stated that the woman was subjected to an act of domestic violence. In para 116, there is a statement that on 22 April 2018, the woman received an email from "Danielle Kennedy". In para 119, there is a statement that the applicant has declined requests from Fairfax Media to be interviewed or to answer any questions about any knowledge he might have about Danielle Kennedy. In para 120, there is a statement that it was understood that after the applicant received questions, he told his public relations adviser that no affair had occurred and that that particular claim that no affair had occurred was undermined by copious evidence. In other words, the meaning


Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 41) [2023] FCA 555
24