A Federal Court judge has thrown out Ben Roberts-Smith's defamation claims against three newspapers and three journalists, in a devastating blow to the decorated war veteran.
He had been suing Nine newspapers and several reporters over articles that alleged he committed war crimes in Afghanistan.
Justice Anthony Besanko has delivered his judgement in Sydney on Thursday afternoon.
This is how it unfolded.
Key events
Live updates
That's all from us folks
By Greta Stonehouse
We hoped to be pouring over the lengthy judgement right about now, but that is going to have to wait.
In the meantime, you can read Justice Anthony Besanko's summary here: Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications
This will surely go down in Australian history as one of the most significant and costly defamation battles in living memory.
Thanks for following along with our live coverage. You can also check out this full article from today.
Disappointing day 'for everyone involved'
By Greta Stonehouse
Martin Hamilton-Smith, from the Australian Special Air Service Association, said the defamation judgement would be felt widely throughout the organisation.
"This will be a very disappointing day not only for Ben Roberts-Smith, but for everyone involved," he told the ABC News Channel.
"This is a very proud regiment, it's one of the finest units in the Australian order of battle, these men have served us bravely, from Malaysia, Borneo right through Vietnam, through to the Middle East.
"I'm very concerned, as the national chairman for our veterans and their families.
"It's been very traumatic for a group of soldiers, 99.9 per cent of whom did nothing more than fight bravely for their country.
"And they're being re-traumatised after going through a difficult war now, with all of these matters."
Analysis: The personal cost of Ben Roberts-Smith's legal battle
By Greta Stonehouse
You can read our analysis on this issue by Jamie McKinnell here.
Next steps
By Greta Stonehouse
The defamation trial has been estimated to cost upwards of $25 million.
Nine are seeking indemnity costs, which would cover most, or all of their legal fees incurred in defending the case.
Arthur Moses SC has asked the court to grant him an extension of 42 days to lodge an appeal.
Justice Anthony Besanko has listed a directions hearing to hear these matters on June 29.
The Commonwealth has until June 5 to scrutinise the judgement and make any redactions to sensitive information it may contain.
After that, it will be dropped off online. And, it will be long.
Nick McKenzie comments on Ben Roberts-Smith's absence
By Greta Stonehouse
Speaking outside court, investigative journalist Nick McKenzie spoke about Ben Roberts-Smith's absence today.
The reporter pointed out the war veteran had attended "almost every day" of the lengthy trial.
"Ben Roberts-Smith launched this case, me and Chris did not want to go to court.
"None of the SAS witnesses who testified about Mr Roberts-Smith's war crimes wanted to go to court.
"He did not come to the day of judgement. He's in Bali doing whatever he's doing, but we're here ... to welcome justice and the truth.
He said it was a time for the nation and the defence force to absorb the full extent of Justice Anthony Besanko's findings.
"What happens to his awards and his decorations is a matter for others."
Allegations of domestic violence
By Greta Stonehouse
Ben Roberts-Smith was accused of assaulting his mistress in a Canberra hotel room after they had left a public function.
The high-profile event in 2018 was attended by the likes of then- prime minister Malcolm Turnbull.
He was also fighting the imputation that he was a "hypocrite who publicly supported Rosie Batty, a domestic violence campaigner, when in private he abused a woman".
He flatly refuted this in court, saying domestic violence was "a disgusting act of cowardice".
Justice Anthony Besanko was not satisfied the woman's evidence, known under the pseudonym Person 17, was "sufficiently reliable" to form the basis that the assault occurred.
He did however find the respondent had made out the defence of contextual truth, and ruled in the newspapers' and journalists' favour.
Arthur Moses speaks briefly to media
By Heath Parkes-Hupton
Arthur Moses SC, Mr Roberts-Smith's barrister, has been questioned by journalists outside court.
He remained tight-lipped when asked about his client's reaction or why the war veteran was not present for the judgment today.
"We will consider the lengthy judgment that his honour has delivered and look at issues relating to an appeal."
Expert analysis of the verdict
By Greta Stonehouse
Jason Boston from the media and communications network at University of Melbourne Law School explains the judgement on the ABC News Channel.
Today's judgement a 'vindication', Nine boss says
By Heath Parkes-Hupton
James Chessell, the managing director of publishing at Nine, has welcomed Justice Besanko's decision outside court.
He said it confirms the article's reports that Ben Roberts-Smith breached the Geneva Convention and is a "critical step toward justice for families of the murder victims".
"And most importantly it is a vindication for the brave soldiers of the SAS who served their country with distinction and then had the courage to speak the truth about what happened in Afghanistan."
Mr Chessell said the judgement would have a "lasting impact" on the Australian Defence Force.
Journalist Chris Masters said the decision to publish the articles would go down as one of the "great calls" in the news industry.
"I’m not standing here as a loser but I don’t think that anybody comes out of a matter like this feeling exultant and triumphant."
Nick McKenzie called the decision "justice" and paid tribute to the SAS witnesses who testified against Mr Roberts-Smith.
"Australia should be proud of those men."
What is 'substantial' and 'contextual' truth
By Greta Stonehouse
Defamation trials are decided upon by the civil standard of proof — the balance of probabilities — this does not equate to guilt.
Ben Roberts-Smith is a free man, he will just now have to pay costs to defendants' legal team, how much yet is still to be determined.
Mr Roberts-Smith's legal team has asked for an extension of time to lodge an appeal of the decision.
Justice Anthony Besanko found the newspapers established substantial truth, or contextual truth, for many of the imputations.
- Substantial truth means an imputation is found to be proved on the balance of probabilities.
- Contextual truth comes into play when a publication complained of carries several defamatory imputations.
If the substantial truth is established on some of the more serious accusations, then the complainant's reputation cannot be further harmed by the less serious allegations (bullying etc).
Contextual truth means that, if other, more serious imputations have been proven, then the defendant does not have to establish the others, to be found contextually true.
Masses of media outside Federal Court
By Greta Stonehouse
A large press pack has gathered outside the Federal Court in Sydney, waiting for the parties to leave.
The Federal Court has entered into a closed court setting.
It is unknown how long this will take, before we hear from the lawyers and representatives from the newspapers involved.
Decision 'firmly on the side of the media'
By Heath Parkes-Hupton
Jason Boston from the media and communications network at University of Melbourne Law School has explained the judgement to ABC News.
He says Nine was able to establish the truth of "most of the imputations", and its contextual truth defence covered the imputations it was not able to prove.
But essentially it means that the allegations that could be proven to be true were so harmful and so damaging to Ben Roberts-Smith's reputation that those couldn't be proven to be true didn't really further affect his reputation at all.
Mr Boston said the emphatic nature of Justice Besanko's decision was "unexpected".
I thought that Ben Roberts-Smith would win on some things and the media on others and it would be a mixed bag.
This has definitely come down firmly on the side of the media.
What war crimes allegations were 'proved'
By Heath Parkes-Hupton
Justice Besanko found these allegations of war crimes against Ben Roberts-Smith were proved by the defence argument of substantial truth:
- That Mr Roberts-Smith murdered an unarmed man by kicking him off a cliff and procuring soldiers under his command to shoot him
- That Mr Roberts-Smith broke the moral and legal rules of military engagement and is therefore a criminal
- That he committed murder by pressuring an inexperienced SAS trooper to execute an elderly, unarmed Afghan to "blood the rookie"
- That he committed murder by machine gunning a man with a prosthetic leg
- That he was so callous and inhumane that he took the prosthetic leg back to Australia and encouraged other soldiers to use it as a novelty beer drinking vessel
- That while as deputy commander of an SAS patrol in 2009 he authorised the execution of an unarmed Afghan by a junior trooper
What we know so far
By Greta Stonehouse
- We won't receive the written judgement today as Justice Anthony Besanko ordered the Commonwealth be given time make redactions before making it public
- At the latest, we will receive it by June 5
- A smaller section of his decision may or may not ever be revealed, as it was heard in closed court. That is yet to be determined
- The judge did not find in favour of all the newspapers defence, however, for some of the most serious allegations, including war crimes of murder, he found truth was established
- This meant the defamation case was dismissed
- Arthur Moses SC has asked for an extension to appeal for his client Ben Roberts-Smith, while Nicholas Owens SC has asked for 21 days to establish a case for costs, given they were successful in their defence
Costs will 'follow inevitably' to news organisation
By Heath Parkes-Hupton
Nine's barrister Nicholas Owens SC has flagged an application for costs after the proceedings were dismissed.
He said, having successfully defended the case, a costs order will "follow inevitably" in their favour.
Mr Owens asked for 21 days to prepare any third party and indemnity costs Nine wishes to seek.
Justice Anthony Besanko delays written judgement
By Greta Stonehouse
Justice Besanko has sided with the Commonwealth and has prevented his written judgement from being distributed.
The Commonwealth has until 2pm on June 5 to scrutinise the findings, and redact any sensitive information.
Arthur Moses SC has asked for an extension to appeal the decision. The Federal Court is about to enter into closed court.
Commonwealth seeks to delay written judgement
By Greta Stonehouse
The Commonwealth are now applying to Justice Anthony Besanko to delay delivering his written judgement, after reading out a summary in the Federal Court.
Nicholas Owens SC, legal counsel for Nine, is opposing the orders.
" As you are well aware, there was a very clear delineation between open and closed exhibits, transcript and submissions both written and oral," he said.
"With respect, your honour, you are acutely sensitive to the need to maintain that separation."
Justice Besanko has proposed to give the Commonwealth time to make the redactions.
'Each proceeding must be dismissed'
By Heath Parkes-Hupton
Justice Besanko has found the newspapers established the substantial truth of many of the imputations, including allegations of murder.
He also found the news organisations had established contextual truth on allegations of domestic violence and bullying of an SAS colleague.
In light of my conclusions each proceeding must be dismissed.
Justice Besanko finds imputations were conveyed
By Heath Parkes-Hupton
As he began his judgement, Justice Besanko outlined all the allegedly defamatory imputations Mr Roberts-Smith claimed were conveyed by the articles.
The court heard they included that Mr Roberts-Smith murdered an unarmed Afghan man by kicking him off a cliff, before ordering other SAS soldiers to shoot him.
Others included that he "disgraced Australia and the Australian army" by his conduct in Afghanistan, and that he was "so callous and inhumane" he took the prosthetic leg of another man who was allegedly murdered.
The court heard Nine's lawyers accepted the articles carried some of the imputations but rejected others.
Justice Besanko found that all of the imputations were carried.
Legal counsel for both parties arrive
By Greta Stonehouse
Arthur Moses SC greeted media with a smile before walking into court, while Nicholas Owens SC arrived shortly after.
