An SAS patrol commander deployed to Afghanistan alongside Ben Roberts-Smith has denied saying a rookie soldier should be “blooded” by making a first kill.
Mr Roberts-Smith is suing Nine newspapers for defamation after being accused in a series of articles of killing unarmed Afghans while deployed with the SAS.
He denies the allegations.
Nine, which is mounting a truth defence, has said it could back up the stories in court.
The patrol commander, known as Person 5, took the stand on Tuesday as the first witness to be called by Mr Roberts-Smith, following weeks of testimony from Nine witnesses.
He responded “never” when asked if he ever said to anyone during a 2009 deployment that the team was going to ”blood the rookie”.
He explained he understood the term to mean “when a new member or young member gets his first kill in battle”.
“Blooding has been used for centuries by armies,” Person 5 said.
He also denied ever killing a person in confinement or ordering a person under his command to do so.
The “blooding” allegation relates to an Easter Sunday mission in 2009 when several SAS teams, one of which was led by Person 5, undertook to clear a compound known as Whiskey 108 near the Afghan community of Kakarak.
Nine has claimed in a defence document supplied to the court that Person 5 said the patrol needed to “blood the rookie”, referring to a soldier known as Person 4.
The newspapers also claimed an Afghan man was detained during the Whiskey 108 mission and fatally shot by Person 4.
“In the presence of (Mr Roberts-Smith) xjmtzywPerson 5 ordered Person 4 to execute (the Afghan man),” Nine wrote in its defence.
“Pursuant to that order Person 4 placed (the Afghan man) on his knees and shot him in the back of the head.”
The defence said it could be inferred Mr Roberts-Smith was complicit and approved of the order because he was allegedly present but did nothing to stop it.
Person 4 has previously declined to testify about those allegations on the grounds of self-incrimination.
Mr Roberts-Smith denies any execution took place.
Person 5 described the Whiskey 108 mission in detail, responding to a series of questions from Mr Roberts-Smith‘s barrister Arthur Moses SC and drawing on an aerial photograph of the compound with gold, silver and black markers.
Nine‘s lawyer complained on two occasions the evidence given by Person 5 hadn’t been put to earlier witnesses and the judge said he would consider the objection after lunch.
Person 5 was asked why he chose Mr Roberts-Smith to be his second in command on the 2009 deployment and said it was an “easy choice”.
“I had seen how capable he was … all the reports came back said he was still performing,” he said.
He said he had a “very good” relationship with the Victoria Cross recipient, whom he first met 20 years ago, and that the pair still spoke about once a month.
Mr Roberts-Smith was present in court on Tuesday, seen sitting on a bench in the back wearing a suit and blue tie, but did not speak.
The hearing continues.
