![\"Getty](\"https:\/\/ichef.bbci.co.uk\/news\/480\/cpsprodpb\/a3e9\/live\/04c835e0-31ef-11f0-a481-17ceb465d16a.jpg.webp\")
Getty Images<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\nAustralia’s most-decorated living soldier Ben Roberts-Smith, has lost an appeal against a landmark defamation judgement which found he committed war crimes.<\/p>\n A judge in 2023 ruled that news articles alleging the Victoria Cross recipient had murdered four unarmed Afghans were true, but Mr Roberts-Smith had argued the judge made legal errors.<\/p>\n The civil trial was the first time in history any court has assessed claims of war crimes by Australian forces.<\/p>\n A panel of three Federal Court judges on Friday upheld the original verdict.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Mr Roberts-Smith, who left the defence force in 2013, maintains his innocence and has not been charged over any of the claims in a criminal court, where there is a higher burden of proof.<\/p>\n The former special forces corporal sued three Australian newspapers over a series of articles alleging serious misconduct while he was deployed in Afghanistan between 2009 and 2012 as part of a US-led military coalition.<\/p>\n At the time the articles were published in 2018, Mr Roberts-Smith was considered a national hero, having been awarded Australia’s highest military honour for single-handedly overpowering Taliban fighters attacking his Special Air Service (SAS) platoon.<\/p>\n The 46-year-old argued the alleged killings occurred legally during combat or did not happen at all, claiming the papers ruined his life with their reports.<\/p>\n His defamation case – which some have dubbed “the trial of the century” in Australia – lasted over 120 days and is now rumoured to have cost up to A$35m ($22.5m; \u00a316.9m).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n In June 2023 Federal Court Justice Antony Besanko threw out the case against The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald, and The Canberra Times, ruling it was “substantially true” that Mr Roberts-Smith had murdered unarmed Afghan prisoners and civilians and bullied fellow soldiers.<\/p>\n He also found that Mr Roberts-Smith lied to cover up his misconduct and threatened witnesses.<\/p>\n Additional allegations that he had punched his lover, threatened a peer, and committed two other murders were not proven to the “balance of probabilities” standard required in civil cases.<\/p>\n The “heart” of the appeal case was that Justice Besanko didn’t given enough weight to Mr Roberts-Smith’s presumption of innocence, his barrister Bret Walker, SC said.<\/p>\n There is a legal principle requiring judges to proceed carefully when dealing with civil cases that involve serious allegations and in making findings which carry grave consequences.<\/p>\n Mr Walker argued that meant the evidence presented by the newspapers fell short of the standard required.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.<\/i><\/p>\n You can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the <\/i>BBC News App<\/i><\/a>. You can also follow <\/i>@BBCBreaking on X<\/i><\/a> to get the latest alerts.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n