Roberts-Smith was arrested by Australian Federal Police at Sydney Airport after arriving on a flight from Brisbane, according to reports. Multiple reports indicate he was not handcuffed during the arrest, with an expert speculating this could be due to a calculated decision, respect for his Victoria Cross, or his cooperation. He had his twin daughters with him at the time, according to those same reports.
The charges include five murders of unarmed prisoners, according to official sources. Police or court allegations accuse Roberts-Smith of killing unarmed civilians or detainees in Afghanistan and failing to stop members of his unit from killing others. According to the media reports, these allegations include killing a man with a prosthetic leg and ordering a junior member of the SAS to kill another unarmed prisoner found in a tunnel to 'blood the rookie'.
Roberts-Smith denies all wrongdoing and says the allegations are 'egregious' and driven by spiteful and jealous peers.
A Federal Court judge in 2023 found, on the balance of probabilities, that Roberts-Smith committed four murders in Afghanistan, a finding upheld on appeal. In June 2023, Justice Anthony Besanko dismissed the defamation case, ruling that the media outlets had established that Benjamin Roberts-Smith murdered four unarmed Afghans and had broken the rules of military engagement. Justice Anthony Besanko wrote that Benjamin Roberts-Smith had 'disgraced his country' by his conduct in Afghanistan.
An appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court was heard over ten days, beginning on 5 February 2024, and was unanimously dismissed on 16 May 2025, according to court records. The Federal Court today upheld the original judgment that media reports published by Nine Newspapers alleging Roberts-Smith was involved in the murder of four unarmed civilians were substantially true, according to the ruling. A panel of three justices dismissed both his appeal and a last-minute attempt to reopen the case over a secret recording, which Roberts-Smith argued showed a miscarriage of justice, according to the court. The High Court of Australia refused an application by Benjamin Roberts-Smith for special leave to appeal on 4 September 2025 and ordered him to pay the defendants' costs, according to court documents.
Justice Anthony Besanko wrote that Benjamin Roberts-Smith had 'disgraced his country' by his conduct in Afghanistan.
During the defamation proceedings, a barrister representing the newspapers behind the reports said allegations about the murder of a prisoner with a prosthetic leg outside a compound called Whiskey 108 had been corroborated by four soldiers, according to court testimony. Barrister Nicholas Owens SC said three witnesses gave 'strikingly coherent accounts' of the 45-year-old ex-soldier manhandling the man before throwing him to the ground and machine-gunning him in 2009, according to his statements. A fourth witness said he had seen the body on the ground and recognised the man as a prisoner who had been brought out of a tunnel discovered in the Whiskey 108 compound, according to testimony. According to www.theguardian.com, Nicholas Owens SC described how all three of them support that coherent and essential narrative.
Roberts-Smith is only the second Australian veteran of the Afghanistan campaign to be charged with a war crime, after Oliver Schulz, according to multiple reports. A 2020 military report found evidence that elite Australian troops unlawfully killed 39 Afghan noncombatants. The Office of the Special Investigator has investigated 53 war crime allegations, with 39 concluding without charges, according to that office. This ruling could now clear the way for a criminal investigation by the Australian Federal Police, according to research sources.
The defendants hailed the verdict as a major victory for media freedom in Australia.
The case was one of Australia's longest-running defamation trials and local media has estimated the legal costs to be about US$16 million, making it also one of the costliest, according to reports. The media reports were published by the Nine-owned Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, as well as The Canberra Times. Lawyers for the media defendants indicated they would now be seeking 'indemnity costs against the applicant', according to those lawyers. Roberts-Smith's defence was partially bankrolled by the boss of Seven West Media, a rival to the three newspapers, according to research sources.
Roberts-Smith's wife and former mistress testified against him in the defamation trial, while his current girlfriend and mother supported him, according to multiple reports. Roberts-Smith broke down in court over the allegation that he punched his mistress, expressing distress over public perception, according to court testimony. He was photographed holidaying in Bali ahead of the ruling and did not attend court, according to research sources.
Journalist Nick McKenzie said it was a victory for servicemen who testified against their former comrade and for Afghan victims.
A veteran returned his medals to MP Bob Katter in protest of Roberts-Smith's arrest, expressing feeling betrayed, according to multiple reports. High-profile figures, including Elon Musk, Gina Rinehart, Tony Abbott, Pauline Hanson, and a retired US Navy SEAL, have expressed support for Roberts-Smith, according to those same reports.
The Australian War Memorial updated its display for Roberts-Smith to note the charges, but his uniform and medals remain in the Hall of Valour, according to multiple reports. Some historians have called for the removal of Roberts-Smith's display from the Hall of Valour, while others argue it should be moved to an Afghanistan exhibition, according to historians' opinions.
It's a day of justice for those brave men of the SAS who stood up and told the truth about who Ben Roberts-Smith is -- a war criminal, a bully and a liar.
He now faced the prospect of paying tens of millions in legal costs, with the total bill likely to exceed $25 million (NZ$27m), according to research sources. There is uncertainty about the exact financial impact, with estimates ranging from about US$16 million to over $25 million.
The exact breakdown of the charges against Ben Roberts-Smith remains unclear, with conflicting reports about whether he faces five counts of murder or a combination of murder and aiding/abetting charges. The current status of the criminal investigation and potential trial timeline has not been publicly detailed. What specific evidence led to the arrest and charges, beyond the civil defamation findings, has not been disclosed by authorities.
Australia should be proud of those men in the SAS, they are the majority in the SAS.
How the Australian War Memorial will ultimately handle Roberts-Smith's display, given the ongoing controversy, remains uncertain. The identities and full testimonies of the witnesses corroborating the allegations, particularly in the criminal case, have not been fully revealed. According to BBC News, Ben Roberts-Smith described the allegations as 'egregious' and driven by spiteful and jealous peers. According to www.france24.com, the defendants described the verdict as a major victory for media freedom in Australia. According to www.france24.com, Nick McKenzie described it as a victory for servicemen who testified against their former comrade and for Afghan victims, adding that Australia should be proud of those men in the SAS, who represent the majority in the SAS, and that today is a day of some small justice for the Afghan victims of Ben Roberts-Smith.
Today is a day of some small justice for the Afghan victims of Ben Roberts-Smith.
Roberts-Smith claims he shot the man because he was a 'squirter' – a Taliban insurgent fleeing the compound.
All three of them support that coherent and essential narrative.
Again, the Victoria Cross recipient does not dispute the killing occurred, but he claims the man was shot lawfully.
It is inconsistent with a legitimate engagement because it implies a level of premeditation for want of a better word.
That is only consistent with the illegitimate nature of the killing because there is no reason to conceal a killing which is a lawful engagement.