Full Breakdown
Ben Roberts-Smith’s 2GB Interview Fact-Check and the Defamation Verdict
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event – 2GB Interview Fact-Check
During a two-and-a-half-hour interview on 2GB with host Ben Fordham, former SAS soldier and Victoria Cross recipient Ben Roberts-Smith repeated several defenses of the allegations that he murdered Afghan civilians. When asked whether shooting a prisoner constitutes a war crime, he answered “Yes.”
Fact-checking the interview against the findings of Justice Anthony Besanko in the related defamation case shows that the judge concluded Roberts-Smith murdered an unarmed Afghan civilian, Ali Jan, by kicking him off a cliff and ordering his soldiers to shoot him. The judge also found three other victims to be “Persons Under Control” (PUCs) who were unlawfully killed.
Background & Context – Defamation case and war-crime investigations
Roberts-Smith sued several newspapers for defamation, prompting a five-year criminal investigation led by former High Court judge Mark Weinberg, KC. The civil case was decided on the balance of probabilities, with the Briginshaw principle applied because of the gravity of the allegations. Justice Besanko ruled that the evidence was “clear and cogent,” satisfying the higher standard required for findings of murder.
Separately, the Federal Office of the Special Investigator has indicated it possesses sufficient hard evidence to charge Roberts-Smith with five counts of war-crime murder under the criminal standard.
Data & Statistics – Findings on alleged murders
- Civil judgment: Four murders were found “substantially true,” including the killing of Ali Jan and the deaths at Whiskey 108, Darwan and Chinartu.
- Criminal prospect: The Special Investigator believes there is enough evidence for five war-crime murder charges.
- Legal costs: Roberts-Smith’s defence, funded by billionaire Kerry Stokes, exceeded $30 million.
Official Statements & Responses
- On “throw-downs”: He said soldiers were instructed to place weapons on bodies for photographs, describing it as a “directive from the leadership.” Witness testimony, however, indicated that Roberts-Smith himself gave those instructions during a 2012 pre-deployment rehearsal.
- The judge’s judgment clarified that the balance of probabilities, reinforced by the Briginshaw principle, demanded clear and cogent proof.
Why It Matters – Impact on public perception and upcoming trial
Roberts-Smith has launched a merchandise brand, Epic 1 Two (E12), marketed to “underdogs” and positioned as part of a broader “shaping” campaign. He frames his legal battle as a war, targeting a jury of twelve Australians—what he calls the “Epic-12”—and seeks to sway public opinion ahead of the criminal trial. The combination of a high-profile media interview, a costly defamation defence, and an ongoing war-crime investigation underscores the intersection of legal accountability, media strategy, and national sentiment surrounding a decorated war hero.
Verbatim Quotes
- “I am satisfied that the proof is clear and cogent.” — Justice Anthony Besanko
- “It was such a deliberate attempt to sensationalise the arrest,” — Ben Roberts-Smith