Source : Perth Now news
Nine paid $700,000 in a secret settlement to Ben Roberts-Smith’s mistress, it can be revealed after a court non-publication lapsed.
Person 17 was a key witness for Nine and journalist Nick McKenzie in their blockbuster defamation battle with the decorated former soldier and Victoria Cross recipient.
Mr Roberts-Smith lost the landmark legal battle over a series of stories that made war crime allegations relating to his deployment in Afghanistan.
After he sued The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and Canberra Times, Federal Court Justice Anthony Besanko in June 2023 ruled against Mr Roberts-Smith and found – to the civil standard – that he was involved in the murder of four unarmed men.
Mr Roberts-Smith unsuccessfully appealed to the Full Court of the Federal Court and he was denied special leave to appeal to the High Court, extinguishing his legal avenues to overturn the judgment.
Person 17, whose name and identity was suppressed, told the Federal Court during the trial that Mr Roberts-Smith had punched her in the left side of the head.
It was an allegation Mr Roberts-Smith denied at the trial and Justice Besanko found that he was not satisfied that the assault occurred.
Following the trial, Person 17 threatened to sue Nine and McKenzie.
Two weeks ago, Justice Nye Perram dismissed Nine’s application for a 50-year non-publication order over the company’s deed of settlement with Person 17.
Details of the deed of release, including that she was paid $700,000 and a confidentiality clause, can be revealed after a separate non-publication order lapsed at midnight.
Mr Roberts-Smith last year unsuccessfully attempted to reopen his appeal after leaked recordings of McKenzie were published.
In the recordings, McKenzie told the woman that he was given the information by Mr Robert-Smith’s ex-wife Emma Roberts and her friend Danielle Scott about Mr Roberts-Smith’s legal strategy.
“They’ve actively like briefing us on his legal strategy, in respect of you,” McKenzie said in the recording which was played to the court.
“We anticipated most of it, one or two things now we know which is helpful.
“I’ve just breached my f***ing ethics in doing that, like this has put me in a sh*t position now, like if Dean (Nine lawyer Dean Levitan) knew that and Peter (Nine lawyer Peter Bartlett) knew that, I’d get my arse f***ing handed to me on a platter.”
In May last year, Sky News published an email sent by the woman to Nine executive Tory Maguire threatening to publicly expose allegations that McKenzie was given confidential and privileged information.
“If you have to lie & cheat to win, then you shouldn’t be playing the game at all,” she said in the email.
Justice Perram on February 2 denied Nine’s application for a non-publication order over the deed of release, noting that most of the information was already in the public domain.
“The information in the deed has entered the public domain in the form of a number of news articles which were published between 4 May, 2025 and 7 May, 2025,” Justice Perram said in his judgment earlier this month.
He said the suppression order “lacked utility”.
Following the dismissal of his appeal, Mr Roberts-Smith claimed that Nine silenced Person 17.
“It is extremely disappointing that the Full Court chose to exclude critically relevant evidence of the unethical conduct of journalist Nick McKenzie,” he said in a statement in May last year.
“I have only ever asked for a fair and just hearing – that has not occurred.
“Thanks to the journalism of Sharri Markson, it has become known that the Nine board unashamedly used its power, influence, and money to secure the silence of a witness 10 days before my appeal commenced in February 2024.
“That witness was prepared to give direct evidence of Mr McKenzie’s use of my privileged material during the trial.”
A Nine spokesman said the deed was not a nondisclosure agreement and did not prevent Person 17 from giving evidence.
He said Justice Perram had determined all of the key details were already in the public domain and the expiry of the non-publication order revealed nothing new.
“Multiple courts and esteemed judges emphatically found that Ben Roberts-Smith was not a war hero, he was a war criminal,” the Nine spokesman said.
“We make no apology for our commitment to journalism that uncovers the truth about criminal actions that would otherwise have never come to light.
“Nick, Chris Masters and the entire investigations team deserve unending credit for their pursuit of the facts and ultimately getting justice for those victims and their families.”
