Roberts-Smith kaže da je propali sudski slučaj koštao Kerry Stokes 'više od 30 milijuna dolara'
Australijski ratni veteran Ben Roberts-Smith izjavio je u nedavnom intervjuu za medije da je njegova neuspješna tužba za klevetu protiv Nine Newspapers koštala milijarderu Kerry Stokesu više od 30 milijuna AUD. Građanski slučaj je završen sa odlukom saveznog suda da su optužbe u vezi Roberts-Smithove umiješanosti u smrt četvorice zatvorenika u Afganistanu bile u osnovi istinite. Roberts-Smith, koji trenutno čeka suđenje po pet tačaka optužnice za ratne zločine u vezi s njegovom službom u Afganistanu između 2009. i 2012. godine, negirao je bilo kakvo krivično djelo i tvrdio da je strogo slijedio pravila angažmana. Nije izrazio žaljenje za svoje vojne akcije, tvrdeći da je postupio ispravno kako bi zaštitio svoje drugove. Suđenje će se nastaviti u prosincu, a Roberts-Smith namjerava osporiti sve optužbe.
War veteran Ben Roberts-Smith disclosed that his unsuccessful defamation lawsuit against Nine Newspapers cost billionaire Kerry Stokes upwards of $30 million. The revelation came during a two-and-a-half-hour interview with 2GB radio, conducted while Roberts-Smith awaits trial on war crime charges. He stated he does not regret any aspect of his military service and maintains that he strictly followed rules of engagement. Roberts-Smith, a Victoria Cross recipient, has been charged with five counts of war crime murder. Prosecutors allege he killed unarmed Afghan nationals who were not participating in hostilities during his deployments with the Special Air Service Regiment in Afghanistan between 2009 and 2012. The victims were either shot directly by Roberts-Smith or by soldiers acting under his command. His criminal case is scheduled to return to court in December. During the interview with host Ben Fordham, Roberts-Smith denied all wrongdoing. He asserted that he would fight the allegations and charges in their entirety. When asked if he would change anything about his career, even non-criminal aspects, he replied that he would not change a single thing. He claimed he knew he did the right thing and was prepared to die for his country each time he entered combat zones. He emphasized that he worked to keep his comrades alive without ever breaking engagement protocols. The financial disclosure regarding Stokes relates to the civil proceedings that concluded with a Federal Court ruling. The court found it substantially true, on the balance of probabilities, that Roberts-Smith was responsible for or complicit in the deaths of four detainees in Afghanistan. Roberts-Smith described himself as naive regarding the civil court system. He noted that Stokes supported him from the start of the legal battle, including by covering legal fees. While Roberts-Smith could not provide an exact total, he estimated the expenditure exceeded thirty million dollars. He clarified that he could not discuss specific details of the ongoing criminal proceedings but wished to present certain facts to the public. He urged listeners to form their own opinions, referring to them as punters. Roberts-Smith raised concerns about the fairness of his upcoming criminal trial, which he acknowledged might be delayed by more than five years. He questioned how judges could select twelve jurors who had not already formed an opinion due to extensive media coverage. He asked rhetorically how one finds individuals without pre-existing positions and whether a fair trial is possible under such circumstances. Despite these doubts, he expressed comfort with the prospect of ordinary citizens hearing the case. He believed the defense could explain military complexities to the jury, allowing them to identify flaws in the prosecution's evidence. The interview marked Roberts-Smith's first major media appearance since his arrest at Sydney Airport six months prior. He criticized the public nature of his detention at the airport. He cited high levels of support from the general public. Roberts-Smith recently attended an event marking the 25th anniversary of the Afghanistan war in October. He has remained on bail throughout the period leading up to his trial. The media outlet conducting the interview, 2GB, is owned by Tapt Media. Roberts-Smith’s statements contrast with the findings of the earlier civil suit, though he continues to deny criminal liability. The legal team for the prosecution has not responded to his comments regarding juror selection. The next step in the legal process involves the resumption of court proceedings in December.
Australijski ratni veteran Ben Roberts-Smith izjavio je u nedavnom intervjuu za medije da je njegova neuspješna tužba za klevetu protiv Nine Newspapers koštala milijarderu Kerry Stokesu više od 30 milijuna AUD. Građanski slučaj je završen sa odlukom saveznog suda da su optužbe u vezi Roberts-Smithove umiješanosti u smrt četvorice zatvorenika u Afganistanu bile u osnovi istinite. Roberts-Smith, koji trenutno čeka suđenje po pet tačaka optužnice za ratne zločine u vezi s njegovom službom u Afganistanu između 2009. i 2012. godine, negirao je bilo kakvo krivično djelo i tvrdio da je strogo slijedio pravila angažmana. Nije izrazio žaljenje za svoje vojne akcije, tvrdeći da je postupio ispravno kako bi zaštitio svoje drugove. Suđenje će se nastaviti u prosincu, a Roberts-Smith namjerava osporiti sve optužbe.
Procjena pristranosti (Sredina): Članak predstavlja uravnotežen izvještaj o vrlo osjetljivom nacionalnom pitanju koji uključuje vojnu odgovornost i vladavinu prava. On citira optuženog izravno, istovremeno pružajući činjenični kontekst prethodnog civilnog sudskog gubitka i specifične kazneno optužbe. Nema očiglednih sl
Zašto činjenice (95): Highly accurate and well-sourced. It provides specific details (charges, dates, costs, quotes) that align with the general premise of Articles 0 and 1. It clearly attributes claims to the subject ('said', 'revealed') and cites the specific media outlet (2GB/Tapt Media), ensuring high fidelity to the
Zašto objektivnost (95): Extremely balanced. It presents the defendant's strong denials and personal feelings alongside the specific legal charges and the prosecutor's allegations. The language is dispassionate, using terms like 'alleged' and 'charged' rather than accusatory or exculpatory adjectives.
The AgeNeovisanSredinaČinjenice: nije otkriven službeni izvor/dokumentObjektivnost 90
Australski vojni lik Ben Roberts-Smith je sudjelovao u dva opsežna intervjua o svojoj pravnoj situaciji, označavajući svoje prve javne komentare od njegovog uhićenja prije otprilike šest mjeseci. Bio je pritvoren zbog optužbi vezanih uz teške optužbe za ratne zločine koje proizlaze iz njegove službene povijesti. Članak naglašava ove razgovore kao značajan razvoj događaja u slučaju visokog profila koji uključuje međunarodno kazneno pravo i vojnu odgovornost. U tekstu nisu navedeni konkretni detalji sadržaja intervjua ili novi dokazi.
Procjena pristranosti (Sredina): Pruženi tekst sastoji se prvenstveno od metapodataka, naslova i osnovnih elemenata web stranice, a ne od glavnog teksta. Iako naslov koristi pridjev "eksplozivan", što sugerira senzacionalizam, nema dovoljno narativnog sadržaja da se utvrdi jasna ideološka sklonost, specifična
Zašto činjenice: nije otkriven službeni izvor/dokument
Zašto objektivnost (90): The limited text present uses standard journalistic phrasing ('breaks silence', 'explosive'). While 'explosive' is slightly sensationalist, the overall tone remains neutral and lacks any visible bias or editorializing.
The Sydney Morning HeraldNeovisanSredinaČinjenice: nije otkriven službeni izvor/dokumentObjektivnost 90
Australski vojni lik Ben Roberts-Smith sudjelovao je u dva opsežna intervjua o svojoj pravnoj situaciji. Ti razgovori odvijaju se otprilike šest mjeseci nakon njegovog uhićenja, koje je proizašlo iz ozbiljnih optužbi za ratne zločine. U članku se ističe da je ovo prvi put da se javno obratio ovim konkretnim optužbama od njegovog pritvora.
Procjena pristranosti (Sredina): Tekst je vrlo kratak i sastoji se samo od naslova i jedne uvodne rečenice. Ona navodi činjenicu intervjua i vrijeme u odnosu na njegovo uhićenje, ali ne pruža nikakvu suštinsku sadržaj, citati, ili uokvirenje koji bi ukazivali na političku sklonost. Bez pristupa,
Zašto činjenice: nije otkriven službeni izvor/dokument
Zašto objektivnost (90): Maintains a neutral, objective tone. The use of the word 'explosive' is common in tabloid/feature journalism headlines but does not significantly skew the presentation of the facts.
Kako je izvijestila svaka strana
Isti događaj, grupiran prema političkom nagibu medija koji su o njemu izvještavali.
progresivno
sredina
konzervativno
★
Kako je izvijestila svaka strana
Podržite neovisne vijesti svjesne pristranosti i otključajte društveni puls, glasovanje zajednice i sve ostale značajke za podupiratelje.
Australia
![[Ruth Pollard] Svijet sudovima Kim Jong-un](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.lexpress.fr%2Fresizer%2Fv2%2FD3IZXNO2UZBUJCJO5MQX3ULULY.JPG%3Fauth%3Dbeff8911aaab2c90e32f72660a59443e940bb324f6d27fad58bf6040702def37%26smart%3Dtrue%26width%3D5028%26height%3D3352&w=3840&q=75&output=webp&we)