military's top brass. In para 112, it is said that the alleged victim fell down some stairs as she left the event causing further embarrassment and that the police had been told that by the time the pair arrived back at the hotel, the applicant "was allegedly furious and she was subjected to an act of domestic violence". In other words, the woman's behaviour is put forward, not as a reason events may not have occurred as alleged, but as an explanation for a high level of anger on the part of the applicant, that is to say, a possible reason for the assault. Further, I consider it significant that there is a compelling inference in para 120 that the applicant lied in asserting that no affair had ever occurred because it is contradicted by "copious evidence". Furthermore, it is implied that he made a complaint of being stalked by the alleged victim only after being alerted that Fairfax Media knew of the allegations reported to the police as well as the "mysterious" Danielle Kennedy.
87 The notion that in some way the reference to the view of the applicant's supporters as to the motivation of those making the allegations negates or qualifies the imputation of guilt in some way is not sound because the reference is then neutralised or substantially reduced in force by the reference in para 95 to the fact that the argument that critical accounts of the applicant amount to tall-poppy syndrome "sits uneasily" with the testimony of many who served in the SAS, including in Afghanistan. Furthermore, in the following paragraph, there is a reference to the fact that other Victoria Cross recipients for actions in Afghanistan have faced no such challenges and in para 97, it is said that most significantly, the allegations about the applicant and his patrols had, according to regiment sources, been made under oath before the Inspector-General and that that is a step for those witnesses that is well beyond simply "muttering darkly to colleagues and journalists" (emphasis added).
88 I accept the applicant's submission that the reporting of the applicant's response in the articles comes too late to remove the meaning in the mind of the ordinary reasonable reader. The defamatory imputations of guilt are not removed by the applicant's denials at the very end of the articles.
89 The effect of the references to the applicant's achievements and public positions might otherwise have had on the mind of the ordinary reasonable reader is negated, or substantially negated, by the fact that there are a number of statements in the article which suggest that the references to the applicant's public profile are there so that they can be contrasted with his true character. The heading to the article is "Beneath the Bravery of our most decorated soldier" and after the reference to a number of the applicant's achievements, the article poses the
