The Substantial Truth
“…theoretically at least, Ben Roberts-Smith could be prosecuted for War Crimes under Article 8 of the Rome Statute. But the criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt is a much higher bar to be leapt than mere proof on the balance of probabilities, and the ICC already has its hands more than full.” The recent […]
Heroes and Villains
Some years ago I attended a breakfast at the Sheraton Hotel on the Gold Coast, at which the then highly-respected – and now much-maligned – Victoria Cross recipient, Ben Roberts-Smith, was the featured guest speaker. In his riveting address, Mr Roberts-Smith enthralled his audience with a detailed account of his service with the Australian Defence Force in Afghanistan, including the extraordinary events that saw him bestowed Australia’s highest award for valour and devotion to duty in the theatre of war. As anyone who has heard the war hero’s harrowing tale of combat and courage under fire could tell you, it’s a hell of a yarn. And boy, did he tell it well.
The Man In The Arena
When I first started doing trial work as a young lawyer I was constantly surprised and intrigued by the persistent inconsistency between different eyewitness accounts of the exact same incident. Particularly when dealing with a violent or otherwise shocking event, such as a car crash or a brutal street brawl, no two witnesses seemed to remember the same event in the same way. For a defence lawyer it was the welcome stuff of reasonable doubt, but I soon learned it was also just a fact of life. When people are confronted by emergent and traumatic circumstances, their brains can only take in so much detail, and the fact two witnesses remember one event in completely different ways doesn’t necessarily mean either one is telling fibs. Quite the contrary.