Ben Roberts-Smith secures hospital records after claim ‘mistress’ faked pregnancy

Hospital documents have been handed to Ben Roberts-Smith’s lawyers that could be key in determining if his ‘mistress’ faked a pregnancy.

A hospital has handed over documents which could be important in stacking up Ben Roberts-Smith’s claim his “mistress” may have faked a pregnancy and abortion.

The SAS veteran‘s defamation trial is on hold because of Sydney’s Covid-19 outbreak, but administrative hearings are continuing in the background in the Federal Court.

Mr Roberts-Smith‘s lawyer, Paul Svilans, asked the court on Wednesday for documents produced by Greenslopes Private Hospital.

The contents of the documents were not revealed, but it is understood they could be crucial to determining the credibility of one of Nine’s key witnesses.

Nine newspapers, who are being sued by the soldier, claim Mr Roberts-Smith was having an extramarital affair with a woman who is known only as Person 17 in the final months of 2017.

Mr Roberts-Smith denied the woman was his “mistress”, as she was described by Nine, and said he was secretly separated from his wife at the time.

Nine claimed Mr Roberts-Smith punched Person 17 in the face while at a hotel in Canberra after she drunkenly embarrassed him in front of dignitaries, including Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, in early 2018.

Ben Roberts-Smith’s legal team has been given hospital records that could be key to a claim made by the soldier about a woman he dated in 2017-18. Picture: Sam Mooy / Getty Images

Mr Roberts-Smith denies that, with the court hearing Person 17 was caught on CCTV falling down a staircase – he repeatedly said that was the cause of her head injury.

His barrister, Bruce McClintock SC, called the woman a “fabulist”.

The elite soldier told the court he had tried to break up with Person 17 multiple times and, during one bust up in early 2018, she claimed she was pregnant.

Mr Roberts-Smith told the court he feared Person 17 was lying about the pregnancy to manipulate him – but she flew to Brisbane for an abortion at Greenslopes.

The SAS veteran said he sent private investigator John McLeod to follow Person 17 and film her at Greenslopes.

Mr Roberts-Smith told the court she appeared on Mr McLeod‘s video to walk out of the hospital well-dressed and picked up her luggage without physical difficulty.

But, he continued, when Person 17 met him at a hotel she had a bandaged arm and appeared frail.

Mr Roberts-Smith said he and Person 17 argued upstairs when he confronted her with the video and she changed her story twice.

Person 17, Mr Roberts-Smith told the court, said she had the abortion earlier at a different hospital and then changed her story again to say she had a miscarriage.

Medical records from Greenslopes could be the key to determining the truth.

Mr Roberts-Smith is suing Nine over claims he committed domestic violence against Person 17 and committed multiple unlawful killings – war crimes – while in Afghanistan. He says the claims are false and highly defamatory.

The trial itself is expected to resume on July 19, but Sydney‘s extended lockdown will run at least until July 16.

Ben Roberts-Smith is suing Nine after it published allegations he punched his ‘mistress’ in the face and killed six unarmed Afghans while deployed. Picture: Defence

Even if the lockdown lifts on time, the trial may not be able to resume because most of Nine‘s witnesses live interstate, chiefly in Western Australia.

Those witnesses, many of whom are former or serving SAS soldiers, would be subject to WA‘s strict border quarantine controls which include weeks of quarantine for anyone returning from a Covid hotspot.

The court previously heard those witnesses and their lawyers would be, by and large, unable to fly to Sydney and then spend weeks in quarantine upon their return home.

Video links are not an option for the SAS soldiers giving evidence for and against Mr Roberts-Smith for a few reasons including national security concerns and because of the disadvantage it could cause for cross examination.

The court, on Wednesday, heard other documents are still being passed between lawyers and the Commonwealth government to determine if they disclose national security information.