Page:Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 41) (2023, FCA).pdf/165

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

he walked down the track and as he did so, he saw an insurgent moving from right to left on the outside of the line of the compound. He said that the insurgent was:

… just coming around — it wasn't in corn; it was effectively around the outside of corn, sort of on an arc, and I engaged that individual with my Minimi, but I had a stoppage. I think I got maybe two rounds away. …

607 The insurgent was killed and given the designation "EKIA57". The applicant said that there was a second insurgent who was shot by a soldier who came up from behind him. He did not see who that soldier was. The second insurgent was killed and given the designation "EKIA56".

608 The applicant said that the insurgent he shot was running in a crouched position and was holding a bolt action rifle in his hand.

609 The applicant said that once he had rectified the stoppage, he saw that the insurgent he had shot had fallen past the line of the compound. He considered it would be dangerous for him to try and clear the body or conduct any type of SSE in the open because he would have no cover. He decided to move out and grab the insurgent's body and drag it back perhaps five metres so that it was on the inside of the corner of the building side. He had the protection of a wall. He gave the body a quick pat search in order to identify whether the insurgent had any further weapons. The applicant had secured the insurgent's weapon. He took the bolt out of it and placed it in a position at the far end of the building against the wall. At that point, the applicant did not notice anything about the insurgent's leg. The search he conducted was a quick one.

610 The applicant denied the allegations made by the respondents to the effect that the "two insurgents" had been taken out of the tunnel and executed. The applicant identified the man with the prosthetic leg as the man he had shot. The evidence bag for that man identifies the insurgent by the number 57 and also contains the following reference:

108

NW corner

611 The applicant identified the photograph of Person 18 near a damaged wall with a dead body (designated "EKIA50") next to him. The applicant also identified the photograph of the elderly Afghan male who was shot. He identified the raised path upon which the body was lying and what appeared to be a plastic fuel jerry can. He said the path looked like a foot pad. The applicant had no idea what the oval shaped small structures were in the photograph. The applicant said that his recollection was that the elderly Afghan male had a PKM, which is a


Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 41) [2023] FCA 555
155