Thread by @GrayConnolly

Massively buried lede here: "That referral and the subsequent investigations have produced two briefs of evidence, which have sat with the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, Sarah McNaughton, SC, for more than a year."
Why?

smh.com.au/national/the-u…

One of the clouds hanging over Brereton is the actual evidentiary foundations of his report & all its damning conclusions. What may be acceptable for an Inspector-General's inquiry will not always be acceptable for a criminal trial in a Ch III court before a jury.

"Those statements have been gathered by a small AFP team of investigators which, since June 2018, has been probing some SAS members over allegations they directed the murder of Afghan prisoners." How were these statements made? What inducements were offered? How long ago?

Why is this being leaked out in the press? Who is to pressured here?

"Officials dealing with aspects of the investigation and prosecution structure, but who are not authorised to speak publicly, told The Age and Herald that critical decisions were at risk of being stalled"

The really buried lede - the CTH's prosecution is going to rely on Afghans giving evidence .... from years ago.

"They include deciding which ex-special forces soldiers should receive immunity from prosecution and how to safeguard witness safety in Afghanistan and Australia."

Bear in mind that as the post-Brereton Report faffing about just faffs on, there is the Ben Roberts-Smith defamation trial going on .... hard to comprehend how a civil trial canvassing many of the same issues has gone on before these trials of alleged war crimes.

It was always open to the Govt to receive the Brereton Report and have the Commonwealth DPP review it, quietly. Instead - for reasons best known to the PM on down - the report was made the subject of massive press conferences & briefing. A case of reaping now what was sown.