THE SQUIZ
That was the headline the Sydney Morning Herald ran online following the publication’s epic win against Ben Roberts-Smith in the Federal Court yesterday. Along with The Age and the Canberra Times, the Victoria Cross recipient sued the newspapers for defamation following a series of reports he said damaged his reputation because they painted him as a war criminal, a bully towards his colleagues, and a domestic violence abuser. But after 110 days of evidence given by 41 witnesses and almost a year of deliberation, the judge found most of what the media outlets published about the fallen decorated war hero was true. According to legal experts, it increases the likelihood that Roberts-Smith will face criminal charges over his conduct in Afghanistan. And there is a push to strip him of his military honours.

GIVE ME THE DETAILS…
Yesterday, Judge Anthony Besanko said the media outlets had proven that Roberts-Smith murdered 4 unarmed Afghan civilians while deployed with the SAS – our very elite military unit. Specifically, he committed murders and directed soldiers under his command to shoot the men, breaking the moral and legal rules of military engagement. Besanko also found he disgraced his country and the Australian Army by his conduct. But he found the newspapers didn’t establish that Roberts-Smith had committed acts of domestic violence. Roberts-Smith didn’t ‘win’ that one, though – Besanko found the accusations aired by the newspapers did not inflict harm on Roberts-Smith’s reputation, given the severity of his other dastardly deeds. Given the complexities, it’s likely to be the most expensive defamation case in history – reports say it will cost Robert-Smith’s financial backer/boss Kerry Stokes millions.

SO WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
It’s a huge victory for journalists Nick McKenzie and Chris Masters. Nine’s publishing boss James Chessell said it was also a “critical step towards justice for the families of the murder victims” and vindication for the soldiers who “had the courage to speak the truth about what happened in Afghanistan.” And he said it was a huge day for public interest journalism in Australia – that’s because the media outlets say our defamation laws make it difficult for them to publish difficult stories. As for what’s next for Roberts-Smith – it’s important to note that criminal charges have not been laid against him. Martin Hamilton-Smith from the Australian Special Air Service Association said the case “has no bearing on whether anyone is guilty or not guilty of a war crime.” Roberts-Smith is yet to comment on the verdict, but his billionaire financial backer/boss Kerry Stokes said he was disappointed by the outcome and the verdict “does not accord with the man I know.” Roberts-Smith has a month-and-a-half to appeal.

Confused by what’s what when it comes to defamation? We’ve got you covered with this Squiz Shortcut.