Oliver Schulz hearing: Ex-soldier ‘can’t recall’ day farmer shot

A senior ADF member has told a court there were few cases where photographs of an enemy killed in action would have been taken ‘in situ’.

Oliver Schulz arrives at the Downing Centre in Sydney on Thursday. Picture: Nikki Short

You can now listen to The Australian's articles. Give us your feedback.

You can now listen to The Australian's articles.

A former senior ADF member has told a court there were few cases in wartime Afghanistan where photographs of an enemy killed in action would have been taken “in situ”, and that bodies were sometimes moved, as he gave evidence in a hearing for war crime-accused Oliver Schulz.

The soldier, who cannot be named for legal reasons, also said he had no recollection of the day in Afghanistan 12 years ago when local farmer Dad Mohammad was allegedly fatally shot three times by SAS soldier Mr Schulz in a field, including whether he saw Mohammad’s body in the ­village of Dehjawze or whether he spoke to Mr Schulz about it ­afterwards.

Mr Schulz, aged 43, was charged with the war crime of murder in March 2023 after footage emerged of the alleged shooting of the unarmed Afghan man.

He was the first ADF member to ever be charged with a war crime in Australia.

Prosecutor Philip Strickland SC, on the fourth day of a committal hearing at Sydney’s Downing Centre Local Court, asked the soldier – who was part of the same mission as Mr Schulz on May 28, 2012, but in a different troop – whether photos were normally taken of an enemy killed in action (EKIA). He responded “Yes”.

Investigators were reportedly told the Afghan man was found dead with a radio on his person and had dropped a mobile phone connected to their insurgent target, known as Young Akira.

The soldier, who was one of numerous ADF witnesses this week, was then asked if “it’s important … to ensure the photo is of the body where it is found when shot.” The witness replied “No”.

When asked why, he said the photograph was simply “information” to relay back to base.

“I’m not trying to take a photograph of exactly what’s happening. This is combat,” the soldier said, adding if they were under fire, “I might drag the body over to the wall (and) take a photo there”.

“The only reason you take a photo is information,” he explained, so you could send the image back to decipher if “this is the guy”.

“It doesn’t have to be in situ,” and he didn’t think it “ever was”.

Earlier, Mr Strickland asked the soldier if he saw Mohammed on May 28, 2012. “Not that I can recall,” he replied.

Mr Strickland: “Did you see him being shot?”

“No,” the soldier responded.

Mr Strickland: “Did you see him before he was shot?”

“No.”

“Did you ever see his body after he was shot at the location in the village?”

“Not that I recall.”

“Does that mean you may have, but for some reason it’s an incident you’ve forgotten?”

“Yes.”

“Because you’ve seen many deaths of enemies killed in action?”

“Yes.”

He later said he had no recollection of speaking to Mr Schulz about Mohammad’s death on May 28 or afterwards.

The soldier also said he didn’t recall “anything that happened … or (that was done)” by him on that day, when asked, including “capturing or detaining the target Young Akira”.

The soldier agreed that he had seen “some footage on television in relation to 2012”, but he wasn’t sure whether it was the Four Corner’s episode which exposed the alleged killing. He did not, however, recognise whether he had been to that Afghan village from the media he watched.

On Tuesday, another soldier on rotation with the ADF in Afghanistan on May 28, 2012, also said that day did not “stand out” in his memory. “A lot of that tour, including the previous one, became all one big mesh,” he said.

That man was asked whether he ever witnessed anyone placing an object that hadn’t been found on a deceased person near Mohammed before pictures were taken, to which he responded no.

A summary report also reportedly stated Mohamed was “tactically manoeuvring” and dis­played “hostile intent” before he was shot.