a practice of "blooding" (which the applicant denies) the blooding of Person 4 had occurred before the mission to W108.
269 The respondents on the other hand, submit that the need for "blooding" still existed because Person 4 shot at Objective Depth-Charger after other SASR operators had shot and killed him or, at the very least, the responsibility for killing Objective Depth-Charger could not be "securely" attributed to Person 4.
270 In his evidence, Person 4 described the mission as involving a clandestine infiltration where he and the rest of Person 5's patrol were behind a gate in an alleyway next to a compound. Person 4 said that he was third in the order of march as the gate was opened and they rushed out and engaged the target. Person 6, as the lead planner, was first out followed by Person 5. Person 4 agreed that he, together with Persons 6 and 5, rushed out and engaged the target.
271 Person 18 was on the mission and involved in the engagement in which Objective Depth-Charger was killed. He was in a different position from Persons 6, 5 and 4. He was on a ladder next to a high wall with Person 14 who was also on a ladder. Person 18 said that Person 6 on the ground as the commander engaged first followed by Persons 18 and 14 followed by (Person 18 believed) Person 73 as Person 6's 2IC. Person 18 said that if anyone else engaged thereafter, he did not see it or hear it and that they would have been engaging "dead bodies". Person 18 said that he could not see anyone else below from his elevated (or overwatch) position. He said that he could hear Person 6's M14 engage and that Person 4 did not have an M14. Person 4 would have had an M4 rifle. In cross-examination, Person 18 said that he could not rule out Person 4 engaging, but the first he had heard of it as a possibility was during the week before he was cross-examined in March 2022.
272 Person 5 gave evidence that the mission was a kill/capture mission which was planned by Person 44. Person 44's patrol took up an overwatch position. Person 6's patrol and Person 5's patrol were on the ground. Person 5 said that he, Persons 4, 18 and the applicant were at the front. They ran out with Person 6 and the rest of his patrol. He and Person 4 engaged Objective Depth-Charger first. Persons 14 and 73 were in another part of the compound on telescopic ladders.
273 Person 5's account of the engagement was unsatisfactory because it changed from his evidence-in-chief to cross-examination and then in the course of cross-examination. Under cross-examination, Person 5 said that Person 4 shot and killed Objective Depth-Charger and that he
