Judge orders #BenRobertsSmithVC to pay media outlets’ costs due to serious allegations being “substantially true.”

Australian war veteran Ben Roberts-Smith, who is accused of war crimes in Afghanistan, has been ordered to pay the media outlets he sued for defamation. The judge ruled that Roberts-Smith knew the allegations against him were “substantially true.”

You may also like to watch: Is US-NATO Prepared For A Potential Nuclear War With Russia - China And North Korea? <span data-mce-type="bookmark" style="display: inline-block; width: 0px; overflow: hidden; line-height: 0;" class="mce_SELRES_start"></span>

Title: Australian War Hero Ben Roberts-Smith VC Ordered to Pay Legal Costs in Media Lawsuit

Introduction

In a recent development, Australian war hero Ben Roberts-Smith VC has been ordered by Judge Besanko to pay legal costs to the media outlets he sued. This ruling comes after it was determined that Roberts-Smith knew that the most serious allegations against him were “substantially true.” Let’s delve deeper into the background of the case and the implications of this decision.

Background of the Lawsuit

Ben Roberts-Smith VC is a highly decorated Australian soldier who has received the Victoria Cross, the highest military decoration awarded for valor in the face of the enemy. However, his reputation has been marred by allegations of war crimes during his service in Afghanistan.

Roberts-Smith took legal action against three media outlets – The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, and The Canberra Times – for defamation. He claimed that the newspapers had published false and damaging allegations against him, tarnishing his reputation and career. The media outlets, on the other hand, argued that their reports were based on credible sources and were in the public interest.

The Judge’s Ruling

Judge Besanko’s ruling is a significant blow to Roberts-Smith’s case. The judge ordered him to pay the media outlets’ legal costs dating back to the start of his legal action. This decision was primarily based on the finding that Roberts-Smith knew the most serious allegations against him were “substantially true.” The judge’s ruling suggests that not only did Roberts-Smith’s legal action lack merit, but it was also an attempt to suppress legitimate reporting and accountability.

Implications of the Decision

This ruling has several implications for both Roberts-Smith and the broader society. Firstly, it raises questions about the credibility of his defamation claims. If the allegations against him were indeed true or had substantial evidence supporting them, it calls into question his integrity and the validity of his previous accolades.

Secondly, the decision highlights the importance of a free press and responsible journalism. Media outlets have a crucial role in holding individuals in power accountable and providing the public with accurate information. This ruling reinforces the notion that journalists have the right to report on matters of public interest, even if they involve public figures or individuals with prestigious backgrounds.

Furthermore, the ruling sends a strong message to the public that no one is above the law. Regardless of one’s achievements or reputation, if there is evidence to suggest wrongdoing, it must be thoroughly investigated and addressed.

Conclusion

The recent ruling against Ben Roberts-Smith VC, ordering him to pay legal costs to the media outlets he sued, is a significant development in his defamation case. Judge Besanko’s decision reflects the understanding that Roberts-Smith was aware of the credibility of the allegations against him. This ruling has implications for both Roberts-Smith and the broader society, emphasizing the importance of a free press and the need for accountability. As the case unfolds, it will undoubtedly have far-reaching consequences for the reputation and legacy of a once-celebrated war hero..

Source

@hughriminton said BREAKING: #BenRobertsSmithVC must pay costs to the media outlets he sued, dating from the START of his legal action – Judge Besanko has ordered the higher cost figure because BRS knew the most serious allegations against him were “substantially true.” ⁦@10NewsFirst⁩