Former SAS soldier Ben Roberts-Smith was "not an honest and reliable" witness in parts of his marathon defamation case against Nine Newspapers, a Federal Court judge has found.
The judgement, published four days after Justice Anthony Besanko dismissed the Victoria Cross recipient's cases, also said Mr Roberts-Smith at times lied and colluded with another witness.
And while Justice Besanko could not find "sufficiently reliable" evidence the soldier punched a woman he was having an affair with, he found he was "intimidatory, threatening and controlling".
Here are five findings you might have missed from the 726-page judgement.
'Collusion' with ex-colleague
One of the key murder allegations Nine made about Ben Roberts-Smith was that on a mission to Chinartu in 2012, he ordered an Afghan soldier, called Person 12, to shoot a man who was being questioned.
That allegation was found to be substantially true.
During evidence, Mr Roberts-Smith's witnesses suggested Person 12 could not have been present on that mission because he had earlier shot a dog and been stood down from the team.
But under questioning, several witnesses — including one codenamed Person 35 — admitted he was wrong about who shot the dog.
Justice Besanko's judgement found Mr Roberts-Smith had made the story up with Person 35, who repeated the "deliberate lie" in court.
"The applicant and Person 35 colluded to put forward a false story that Person 12 had been removed or stood down following a shooting incident on 31 July 2012," the judgement reads.
Threatening letters may be a crime
Private investigator and former friend of Ben Roberts-Smith, John McLeod, gave an explosive testimony during the defamation trial in February 2022.
He said he posted letters at the request of Mr Roberts-Smith in 2018, which turned out to be threats towards a former SAS colleague of the army veteran.
"You and others have worked together to spread lies and rumours to the media and the inspector general's inquiry," one letter read.
Justice Besanko's found the letters reflected "very poorly" on Mr Roberts-Smith's credit and might be a crime.
"The sending of the letters may constitute a criminal offence of attempting to pervert the course of justice, or using a postal, or similar service to menace, harass or cause offence," the judgement read.
Polite, but 'not an honest' witness
Justice Besanko's dismissal of the 44-year-old's three defamation cases against the newspapers gives a firm indication about the strength of his evidence.
But the judgement goes further.
"I find that the applicant was not an honest and reliable witness in the many areas I will identify," the judgement read.
He did say the former soldier was polite and composed throughout the lengthy hearing process.
But elsewhere in the document he says Mr Roberts-Smith lied at times.
"The applicant has motives to lie, being a financial motive to support his claim for damages in these proceedings … and a motive to resist findings against him which may affect whether further action is taken against him," the judgement says.
'Lies' about USBs buried in backyard
One of the more bizarre parts of the marathon defamation case was evidence that Mr Roberts-Smith had buried USBs containing crucial evidence in the backyard of his marital home.
He denied burying the USBs, instead telling the court they were kept in a desk drawer.
But Justice Besanko's judgement found that was a lie.
"The applicant lied about not burying the USBs in the backyard of the matrimonial home," the judgement read.
"He had sworn three affidavits of discovery and each time has not discovered them. I find that he decided not to discover them."
Some DV complainants' claims credible
One of the allegations Nine Newspapers did not prove to be substantially true was that Mr Roberts-Smith punched a woman in the face in Canberra in 2018.
The court instead found that allegation could be considered "contextually true", meaning Mr Roberts-Smith's reputation was already damaged by more serious findings of war crimes.
The court heard a woman he was having an affair with, Person 17, attended a function at Parliament House in March 2018, where she fell down stairs, having been drinking, and sustained an injury to the side of her forehead.
She told the court Mr Roberts-Smith later punched her to the side of the face.
He denied hitting her, and Judge Besanko's judgement reveals he could not find enough evidence to prove that allegation substantially true.
But he did find other parts of the woman's evidence to be credible, particularly that Mr Roberts-Smith said if she "did anything stupid … he would burn her house down", and that he took photographs of her personal diaries.
"This behaviour was intimidatory, threatening and controlling," the judgement reads.
Justice Besanko also said some of Person 17's evidence was flawed or raised "a doubt in my mind about the truth."
