1 Wednesday, 31 January 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.21 p.m.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva, you are to continue with your
8 MR. SACHDEVA: Good afternoon, Mr. President, Your Honours, and
9 thank you.
10 Mr. President, Your Honours, given your decision yesterday with
11 respect to the composite exhibits, I briefly need to go back to the
12 35-page exhibit to tender two pages from that composite exhibit, because
13 at the time I understood that they were admitted. It will take me a
14 couple of seconds.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Please do that.
16 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you. The 65 ter number is 2465, and if I'm
17 correct, I am referring to pages 6, 7, 8 and 9. If they can be brought
18 up, that would be great.
19 WITNESS: WITNESS W-138 [Resumed]
20 [Witness answered through interpreter]
21 Examination by Mr. Sachdeva: [Continued]
22 Q. Good afternoon, Witness 138.
23 A. Good afternoon.
24 Q. Do you see a document on the right-hand part of the screen there?
25 A. Yes, I do.
1 Q. What is that document?
2 A. This is an expert report pursuant to a request to conduct an
3 expert analysis following an impact of a projectile.
4 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we please move now to the last page, and that
5 is page 9 of the document.
6 Q. Witness 138, do you see a stamp on that page?
7 A. Yes, I can see it in the lower right-hand corner. I can see the
8 stamp there. This is a valid stamp used to certify documents of this
10 Q. And do you see the name Emir Turkusic on the left-hand side?
11 A. Yes, he carried out an analysis of all the physical evidence that
12 was brought in from the site, and he signed here in the lower left-hand
13 corner. And there's also the signature of his chief, who, in effect,
14 certified this document.
15 Q. Does this document appear to you to be an authentic document from
16 the CSB in Sarajevo?
17 A. Yes. This is the kinds of documents produced there. This is the
18 report following an expert analysis. I would see documents of this kind,
19 but I did not see this specific document because it wasn't shown to me
20 after the analysis had been carried out.
21 MR. SACHDEVA: Very well.
22 Mr. President, Your Honours, I would like to offer these into
23 evidence, these particular four pages.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, they are admitted.
25 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P130, Your Honours.
1 MR. SACHDEVA:
2 Q. Now, Witness 138, before I move on, I just want to briefly ask you
3 one question with respect to the first incident we were talking about
4 yesterday; that is, at Geteova number 12. Do you remember discussing that
5 incident yesterday?
6 A. Yes, I do.
7 Q. When you were on site doing your investigation, did you notice any
8 combat activity or military activity at that location at that time?
9 A. There was no combat activity there or military activity. The only
10 incident was the explosion, and this is a civilian neighbourhood. These
11 are apartment buildings, private homes, and there were no military
12 facilities there.
13 MR. SACHDEVA: I'd like to bring up Exhibit -- it's part of
14 Exhibit 185, and that is -- for the benefit of Mr. President and Your
15 Honours, that is the composite exhibit related to the TV tower incident.
16 And I am asking to bring up the sketch, the introduction to the sketch,
17 and they are pages - for the benefit of the court deputy - 20, 21, and 22
18 of the exhibit.
19 And might we go into private session very briefly, with your
20 leave, Mr. President.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, private session.
22 [Private session]
11 Page 1266 redacted. Private session.
11 [Open session]
12 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
13 MR. SACHDEVA: If we could move to page 4 of -- the fourth page of
14 this set of photographs, please.
15 Q. Witness 138, did you take these two photographs?
16 A. Yes, I took those photographs.
17 Q. Please explain to the Trial Chamber what these photographs are
19 A. This is a photograph that we're look at now depicting the damage
20 caused by the explosion of the projectile. This is the eastern wall of
21 studio C, and the explosion occurred at the lower section of the wall,
22 creating a large crater in the ground and damaging the foundations of the
23 wall itself.
24 Q. And this one?
25 A. This is, once again, the photograph of the damage but close up.
1 You can see marking -- a piece of evidence marked with number 1. I can't
2 recall what it was, but you can see in the key what it refers to.
3 Q. When you say "key," you mean on the sketch; is that correct?
4 A. You can see all the damage itself on the black part here. You can
5 see something that is marked with number 1, and then below the photograph
6 there is some text, and there you should have the explanation of what it
7 was that I actually marked with this number 1.
8 Q. Can you see that explanation now?
9 A. Yes. Number 1 is used to mark the damage to the wall to help me
10 know what was what.
11 MR. SACHDEVA: Could the court usher -- sorry, court deputy please
12 move to page 6 of this exhibit, and if we could move to the lower
14 Q. Witness 138, did you take that photograph?
15 A. Yes, I did.
16 Q. Do you see an arrow on that photograph?
17 A. Yes. I put the arrow in there. It shows the damage to the wall
18 facing the studio C wall, the eastern wall of the studio C.
19 Q. When you say "damage to the wall -- to the eastern wall of studio
20 C" -- sorry. "the damage ... facing the studio C wall," how was that
21 damage caused?
22 A. On this photograph you can see quite a lot of damage. You can see
23 that all the glass was broken and that windows were punched out, but this
24 damage is different. You can see here a burn mark, which indicated to us
25 that this was probably caused -- in fact, it was caused by a projectile
1 hitting this wall causing this damage and then bouncing off to land
2 finally next to the wall of the studio C. All the other damage, you
3 cannot find the burn marks next to them, which means that the rocket
4 actually caused this burn mark on this wall as it hit against it. And the
5 rest of the damage was caused after the explosion itself. It was caused
6 by the fragments of concrete, iron and steel, and all the other objects
7 that were flying in all directions after the explosion.
8 Q. So in terms of the sequence that you spoke about yesterday, this
9 mark on this wall comes after the projectile bounced off the roof and
10 before it exploded; is that right?
11 A. As for the trajectory of the projectile itself, the first point of
12 impact of the building was on the roof; we saw that on the sketch and on
13 the photographs. It continued along its path, hitting this wall,
14 ricochetted off again, and bounced off back at the wall of the studio C,
15 and then it exploded right there at the bottom of the wall.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: May I ask the witness, how is he in a position to
17 tell us about the trajectory, the movement, of this projectile, that it
18 bounced from one wall to the next? I mean, what is the basis of your
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When we arrived at the site as a
21 team, as I said, there was an investigative magistrate and an expert who
22 carried out an expert analysis of the fragments of this projectile. A
23 great deal of physical damage was caused, and the inner courtyard had high
24 walls. And we couldn't really figure out how it actually managed to fall
25 in, so we did investigate this matter. We climbed up on the roof and we
1 found this first impact site, and then we concluded that the projectile
2 ricochetted and then we followed the direction of the -- possible
3 direction of the projectile, and that led us to the -- this mark on the
4 wall. It tallied with the direction that we concluded was one of the
5 possible directions, and then we concluded that this was the only possible
6 explanation for the actual trajectory of the projectile.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: You referred several times to "we," "we did
8 this." Who constitutes "we"?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was not the only one to determine
10 the trajectory. The entire investigating team, headed by the
11 investigative magistrate, the inspectors from the security services
12 centre, from the Novi Grad police station, the expert for this kind of
13 projectile who provided his report, we all came to the conclusion that
14 this was what actually occurred.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: You had an expert for this kind of projectile who
16 was part of the investigating team?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, he did give us his report. I
18 don't know whether he really was an expert. I'm not in a position to
19 judge that.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva, is that -- are we going to hear
21 from that person?
22 MR. SACHDEVA: We are, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Pardon?
24 MR. SACHDEVA: We are, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: We are. Okay, thanks.
1 MR. SACHDEVA:
2 Q. Witness 138, just following on from Mr. President's question to
3 you, how did you establish that the impact on the roof was related to the
4 explosion in the atrium? How was it established?
5 A. The television building was not targeted by shells in those days,
6 and there had been no marks on this building previously. When we
7 inspected, when I inspected this mark, it was fresh. The gravel and all
8 those things, they were freshly disturbed. And if a mark is old, you can
9 really determine that quite easily. You can see dust on it. Because of
10 the peculiar climate in Sarajevo, dust settles fairly easy. We have dust,
11 we have fog and things like that, so this was definitely a fresh mark.
12 Q. When you say "a fresh mark," just to be clear, which mark are you
13 referring to?
14 A. As for the roof itself, it was covered first with some kind of a
15 tar board. It was all broken up, and then there was gravel on top of it.
16 It is very easy to determine -- when you see a stone that has been broken,
17 it is easy to determine whether this was done recently or whether some
18 time had elapsed.
19 Q. So you're talking about the mark on the roof?
20 A. Yes.
21 MR. SACHDEVA: I'd now like to just go through the photographs
22 very quickly and for the witness to identify that they were his
23 photographs, and then tender them into evidence. So we would start from
24 this page and go to the end, and that is to page 36.
25 Q. Witness 138, did you take these photographs?
1 A. Yes, I took those photographs.
2 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I'd like to offer these set of
3 photographs into evidence.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, they are admitted.
5 Mr. Tapuskovic.
6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we saw the bodies of
7 victims. Can the Prosecutor please explain to us, is this pertaining to
8 the RTV building incident, since we have not heard yet that there had been
9 any casualties in this incident. All of a sudden we see photographs that
10 seem to have nothing to do with the event that we've been dealing with
11 over the past two days, and it has not been stated at all whether these
12 victims are, in fact, related to this incident at this site.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva, lay the foundation for these
15 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes, Mr. President, I was going to get to them.
16 If we could move to the -- perhaps they can be removed from the
17 screen for a moment.
18 Q. Witness 138, were there any casualties in this incident?
19 A. Yes, one person was killed in the explosion of this projectile, as
20 far as I know. I received this information after collecting all the
21 physical evidence, and then we went to photograph the body.
22 Q. Did you personally photograph the body?
23 A. Yes, I did photograph the place where the body fell down when this
24 person died and the place where this person was taken to.
25 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we go to -- very quickly to page 8 of the
1 photographs, please.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.
3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we were supposed to
4 hear by now when this person -- where this person was killed. We've been
5 discussing this incident for two days, and we have yet to hear where this
6 person was killed. I don't know whether it's a he or a she. And
7 that's -- we cannot really discuss this unless we know it.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Had you finished with your intention to lay the
9 foundation for the photographs?
10 MR. SACHDEVA: No, Mr. President.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: We have heard that the witness took some
13 MR. SACHDEVA:
14 Q. Witness, you said that you took some photographs of the place
15 where the person was killed, is that right, in this incident?
16 A. I can see the page in my photo file with the photographs that I
17 took. Number 3 marks the spot where the body was found. The staircase
18 inside the inner courtyard leading to the main building of the
19 radio-television, and the lower photograph is yet another photograph of
20 the body itself.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, is this a photograph
23 of the site where this person was killed?
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, I mean, those are questions that you might
25 find it proper to ask in your cross-examination.
1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I think the Prosecutor should
3 MR. SACHDEVA: Well, actually, I was just going to ask for this
4 sketch to be put on the ELMO so that Witness 138 can show the place on the
5 ELMO where the person was killed.
6 Perhaps we can just clear the screen of the photographs.
7 Q. Witness 138, can you just, first of all, with your pointer, point
8 to the place where the person was killed in this incident.
9 A. I cannot say for sure that this is where he was called [as
10 interpreted]. Blood-stain was found there. This is the staircase leading
11 from the atrium to the main building. It is possible, though, that he was
12 here, that he was pushed away by the blast, and that he started bleeding
13 there. But we did find blood-stain somewhere midway down the staircase,
14 and we marked this place with number 3. So this is the blood of the
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is that where you found the victim?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. When we arrived, the victim was
18 taken inside the building and photographed. In the photograph that we saw
19 a minute ago, traces of blood were found, a puddle of blood was found, and
20 I marked it with 3, and that's what it says in the legend attached to the
21 sketch of the scene. According to eye-witnesses, the body was taken from
22 the staircase to the building.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Proceed.
24 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Q. How did you -- how was it established that this person was,
1 indeed, killed from this incident?
2 A. That was the only body recovered or found inside the building.
3 Upon our arrival to the scene, the colleagues who were in charge of
4 information and interviews with witnesses acquired this information. And
5 also on the basis of the evidence found on the spot, the blood on the
6 stairs, et cetera, we established that this person had been killed at this
7 exact location.
8 Q. Can you please mark where you pointed to, to where you found the
9 blood by the staircase. Can you just mark that with the letters BS in
10 red. Thank you.
11 A. [Marks].
12 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I'd like to offer that into
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.
15 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P132, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Witness, please, was there only one
17 person who died, or were there other casualties but you only made one
18 photograph of this person?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To my knowledge, there was one
20 victim and I photographed this victim. It is possible, though, that in
21 other cases that I dealt with, that there were other casualties; however,
22 in this particular incident, there was only one casualty. I am not -- I
23 was not authorised to interview witnesses, which was shown later in the
24 reports compiled by other members of my investigating team pertaining to
25 the casualties, their personal details, et cetera. And all of this
1 constitutes a whole file pertaining to this particular case.
2 The only information that I had at that moment I inserted into my
3 file, including the photographs, et cetera; however, it is possible that
4 in their official report there are some supplementary information that
5 they had acquired from people in hospital who had been wounded, et cetera.
6 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we please move back to the photographs and go
7 to page 10 of the photographs. I'll try and be brief because the pictures
8 aren't particularly nice to view.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: I agree.
10 MR. SACHDEVA:
11 Q. Do you see those photographs on the screen?
12 A. Yes, I do. I took these photos and they're an integral part of my
13 photo file.
14 MR. SACHDEVA: Perhaps we can remove the photographs now so I can
15 ask a question without it being on the screen.
16 Q. Witness 138, is there anything you can say with respect to the
17 marks on the back on those photographs -- well, how do the marks on the
18 back of the victim correspond to the explosion at the wall at studio C?
19 Is there anything that you can say about that?
20 A. An interesting thing, when we examined this body, we noticed a
21 multitude of wounds all over the backside of the body, from his feet all
22 up to his head, and before that we had never had a body with this kind of
23 marks. It is probably stated in the post mortem report that this was
24 caused by fragments of the concrete that dispersed and hit this person in
25 his back.
1 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, there are a few more photographs --
2 I mean, I can take the witness through them, but at this stage I would
3 like to offer this set into evidence, with your leave.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
5 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P133, Your Honours.
6 MR. SACHDEVA: May we now, again, go to Exhibit 185, and to pages
7 528. And, Mr. President, could we please, with your leave, move into
8 private session very briefly.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
10 [Private session]
11 Page 1278 redacted. Private session.
1 [Open session]
2 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
3 MR. SACHDEVA: And could the court deputy bring up pages 13 to 16
4 of the same exhibit, 185. Thank you.
5 And for the benefit of the Court, the translation ERN is 00683940
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.
8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] What I said a while ago, I'm
9 making tremendous effort from the very beginning, with the help of all my
10 spectacles, but I can't read anything else apart from the signature. If
11 we don't have this enlarged, it is completely useless. Then it would have
12 been much better if we could have hard copies in our hands, because with
13 my spectacles I'm unable to read this.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: It has been enlarged, I think. No? In English,
15 yes, but in B/C/S ...
16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the President, please.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: It has been enlarged in the English text, and I
18 believe the B/C/S is a little clearer now.
19 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Just slightly, believe me.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, we must be thankful for small mercies.
21 MR. SACHDEVA:
22 Q. All right. Witness 138, do you see that document on the
23 right-hand side of the screen?
24 A. Yes, I see the document. That's another report drafted by a
25 colleague of mine following the event in question.
1 Q. What kind of report is it?
2 A. This is an expert report of the evidence collected with regard to
3 an explosion.
4 MR. SACHDEVA: And if we could very quickly move to page 16, that
5 is, the last page of this exhibit.
6 Q. Witness 138, do you see a stamp on that page?
7 A. Yes, in the -- I can't see it now. A moment ago it was in the
8 right-hand corner. There was a name and a stamp, and in the left-hand
9 side corner there's a signature. To the right is a signature of the head
10 of the department, and to the left is the signature of the person who
11 conducted the examination.
12 Q. Does that stamp appear to be -- appear to you to be an official
13 stamp from the CSB?
14 A. Yes, that's an official stamp.
15 Q. And does this document appear to you to be an authentic document
16 from the CSB in Sarajevo?
17 A. Yes. This kind of reports and expert reports looked like this.
18 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I offer that document, pages 13 to
19 16, into evidence.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.
21 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P135, Your Honours.
22 MR. SACHDEVA: Now, lastly with respect to documents in this
23 incident, I have a series of stills that were taken from the DVD,
24 360-degree photograph, which I would like to present to the witness, and I
25 have copies for Your Honours and counsel.
1 Q. Witness, do you see a photograph there on the ELMO?
2 A. Yes, I can see it.
3 Q. What is that a photograph of?
4 A. This is an aerial photograph of the TV building, and you can see
5 this section where the incident in question took place.
6 Q. Can you point to the -- to the place of the first impact on this
8 A. This is the place of the first impact, which we explained when we
9 discussed the sketch. It has been sketched and photographed.
10 Q. Could you please take your pen and mark at that place -- mark on
11 that place the letters FI.
12 A. [Marks].
13 Q. Now, with a straight line, can you follow the direction of the
14 projectile into the atrium from that point, please.
15 A. [Marks].
16 Q. And can you just please tell the Trial Chamber, the second -- the
17 left-hand set of circles that you see on the left, does that indicate
18 where the atrium or the courtyard is?
19 A. This right-hand side circles is the roof of studio C, and the left
20 one that I'm showing now signifies the atrium where the projectile landed
21 and exploded.
22 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, I'd like to offer that
23 still into evidence.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.
25 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P136, Your Honours.
1 MR. SACHDEVA:
2 Q. Now, Witness 138, when you were investigating that incident, did
3 you at any time notice any military activity there or in the vicinity of
4 the TV building?
5 A. I didn't notice any military activity inside the building or
6 around it.
7 Q. Did you see any ABiH mortars or tanks or military hardware in the
8 building or in and around the building?
9 A. No, I didn't see any.
10 Q. Now, after this incident, did you investigate -- did you go to
11 investigate another incident on that day?
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: Excuse me, counsel. Before we leave this
13 incident - and I understand from your question to the witness that we're
14 moving on to the next incident - but before we leave the TV incident,
15 could I please ask you to ask the witness if the direction of the
16 projectile, as the witness showed to the Chamber, where -- if that is in
17 any way revealing the place from which the bomb was shot. What is north
18 and what is south on this picture? And if this is the incoming direction
19 of the bomb or the projectile, then where was the projectile shot from?
20 MR. SACHDEVA: Very well, Your Honour, I will ask that question.
21 Perhaps the still could be put back on the ELMO for that question.
22 Q. Witness, in your on-site investigation, did you -- you and the
23 team determine the direction of fire of the projectile on that day?
24 A. No. The only thing that we did was to determine from which
25 direction it had come. That wasn't part of my remit. Probably it had
1 been established afterwards wherefrom it had been fired. We just
2 established the place of the explosion, the direction from which it had
3 come, and other pieces of evidence surrounding the event itself. But we
4 didn't establish the source of the fire. It came from the west, but from
5 which particular location I cannot say.
6 Q. Yes.
7 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes, I was just going to ask the witness if he
8 could indicate north and south and east and west on the map -- on the
9 photo, sorry.
10 THE WITNESS: [Marks].
11 [Interpretation] So S indicates north, which is down here.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: That's at the bottom, is it?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Maybe a few degrees to the left.
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you, Mr. Witness.
15 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, is that clear enough?
16 I could ask the witness to mark the direction in -- with the English
17 letters. No? Okay.
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: If he's able to, yes.
19 MR. SACHDEVA:
20 Q. Witness 138, before you mark anything, could I -- please mark the
21 direction north with the letter N, if you haven't done so already.
22 A. [Marks].
23 Q. And then please, just for completeness, continue with west -- W
24 for west --
25 A. [Marks].
1 Q. -- south and east, please.
2 A. [Marks].
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Does the witness have any idea whether the Serb
5 troops were at that time placed at any particular position?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, Sarajevo was surrounded from
7 all sides and I know that on the west side as well they were there, but I
8 don't know precisely where their positions were.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: And the ABiH forces, do you know whether they
10 would have been placed at any particular position at that time?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Probably the BH forces were in
12 this -- within this same ring, because otherwise they would have been
13 broken through into the town, and therefore I presume that the Bosnian
14 army had set up their ring around the town as well.
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
16 Mr. Prosecutor, can I ask you to ask the witness to identify the
17 TV building on one of the maps that you have provided the Chamber with,
18 because we would like to see where the incident took place in geographical
19 terms in Sarajevo.
20 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes, absolutely, Your Honour. What I had intended
21 to do, because there were quite a few incidents within a particular area,
22 which I thought at the end of my examination of these incidents, I would
23 ask the witness to mark en masse the positions that we've discussed in the
24 examination on a map, and for it to be tendered in one go, so to speak.
25 But I can do it in another fashion if it's more agreeable to Your
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: That's up to you, but it will facilitate the
3 Chamber's understanding if at one point we are offered the locations in
5 MR. SACHDEVA: Absolutely. I was intending to do that.
6 Might I just inquire, I would like to have the recently marked
7 still, with your leave, Mr. President, admitted into evidence as a
8 separate exhibit.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it will be admitted.
10 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer].
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: I understand this has already been admitted, so
12 we'll keep it as the same number -- or will you wish it to be marked
14 MR. SACHDEVA: I was just under the understanding that with the
15 markings of north, south, east, and west, it had not been admitted at that
16 point. But since they were added, I think it would be preferable to have
17 it as a separate exhibit, if it's convenient for the court deputy.
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, let's have it as a separate exhibit.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours and counsel, this is one document,
20 one physical document, and I can't split it. What I can do is assign a
21 new exhibit number. The old exhibit number was P136. The new exhibit
22 number would be P137, and P136 would just not exist any longer, if that's
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Court Deputy.
1 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer].
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: The exhibit will be 136, with the marks.
3 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 Q. So, Witness 138, after the investigation into the TV incident, did
5 you conduct another investigation on that day?
6 A. Yes. After this incident we went to the Geteova Street where
7 there was a building, an apartment building, at number 5. This had also
8 been struck by a modified air bomb.
9 Q. Do you remember, approximately, what time did you get there?
10 A. I can't remember this, but it is contained in the official
11 report. But I do know that in terms of the time-line, I first did an
12 on-site investigation at the TV building and then went to do the on-site
13 investigation there at this other location.
14 Q. Who did you go -- who did you go there with for that
16 A. I was accompanied by an investigative magistrate and part of the
17 team that had conducted the investigation at the TV building. But I do
18 think that a part of the team remained at the TV building because there
19 were quite a few inspectors from the security services centre and an
20 expert who went on searching for the fragments and investigating the
21 explosion, whereas we had to do the on-site investigation at the Geteova
22 Street location. The names of those who took part in the investigation at
23 number 5 Geteova Street are contained in the official report.
24 Q. For this investigation did you complete an on-site investigation
1 A. Yes, I did a forensic report. I did the photo file on the basis
2 of the photographs that I had taken.
3 MR. SACHDEVA: Could the court deputy bring up 65 ter 767, and
4 it's pages 18 and 19.
5 And, Mr. President, could we please move into private session,
6 with your leave.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Private session.
8 [Private session]
11 Page 1288 redacted. Private session.
17 [Open session]
18 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
19 MR. SACHDEVA:
20 Q. Witness 138, did you take this photograph?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. Just very briefly describe what this photograph depicts.
23 A. This is an area in front of an apartment building. You can see
24 Alipasino Polje. This is part of Alipasino Polje called "B faza." This
25 is a road passing by the apartment buildings. This is an asphalt road.
1 And these are all the traces that are left there after the projectile hit
2 the building.
3 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we move to the next page, please.
4 Q. Do you see the top photograph there on the screen, Witness 138?
5 A. Yes, I can see this photograph. I took this photograph. It
6 depicts the damage to the northern side of the building caused by this
8 Q. And this apartment block is on the street, Geteova number 5; is
9 that right?
10 A. Yes, that's number 5 Geteova Street. That was the road that was
11 covered in debris that we could see on the previous photograph.
12 MR. SACHDEVA: And if we could scroll down to the ...
13 Q. Is this a photograph of the same building?
14 A. Yes, the same as the previous photograph.
15 MR. SACHDEVA: May we move to the next page, please. You can just
16 keep both of them on the screen.
17 Q. Again, Witness 138, just briefly describe these two photographs
18 and tell the Trial Chamber if you took them.
19 A. Yes, I took both of the photographs, and they are all part of my
20 photo file. On the upper photograph you can see damage caused by the
21 explosion of the projectile, and the lower photograph depicts the entrance
22 to the building, the access route to the building, and all the debris, the
23 rubble, that fell down in this area after the explosion.
24 MR. SACHDEVA: May we move to the next page, please.
25 JUDGE HARHOFF: Counsel, could you please ask the witness if he
1 could indicate on this last picture - if you could turn to what we had
2 just before - to indicate, if he can, the direction -- the entry direction
3 of the modified air bomb into this building, if that is possible.
4 MR. SACHDEVA:
5 Q. Witness 138, from the top photograph, are you able to indicate the
6 direction of entry of the projectile; and if you are --
7 A. Yes, I can. I will mark with an arrow.
9 The arrow marks the point where the projectile entered the
10 building. It is difficult to indicate the direction from which the
11 projectile had come from. It is difficult to mark it on this photograph.
12 Perhaps I should have just marked the spot with an X.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is that because you are uncertain about the
14 direction from which the projectile came?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. Because of the angle from which
16 this photograph was taken, the place where I was when the photograph was
17 taken actually causes these problems. It was not -- this photograph was
18 taken right in front of the location; otherwise, I would have been able to
19 show you the direction. When I am shown the map in front of me, I will be
20 able to show you that, because then you can see the position of this
21 building and then I will be able to show you the direction from which the
22 projectile came.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Before you do that, can you tell me what
24 experience or knowledge do you have that would enable you to give that
25 kind of information. By that I mean the direction from which the
1 projectile came. Do you have any experience or knowledge in projectiles?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, on the basis of the physical
3 evidence I found at the scene - and I know this building because I had
4 been to buildings like that many times before and I know where the
5 staircase is located - the supports of the projectile were found here,
6 because they got embedded into the building. You can see here the
7 large-scale destruction. Three floors were destroyed. It is difficult to
8 say this on the basis of this photograph, but we as a team that got there,
9 and on the basis of all the evidence we were able to find in the building,
10 we were able to determine the direction. But my colleagues had
11 eye-witnesses who confirmed -- the eye-witness reports confirmed this
12 because they had seen the projectile.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: That's the team -- that's the team which includes
14 an expert in projectiles?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: But I have to wonder whether you have enough
17 experience or expertise in this area to give valuable evidence on these
19 But let us proceed.
20 MR. SACHDEVA: Perhaps we can have this photograph admitted into
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, on the basis of the answers which he gave,
24 we wouldn't admit this because he has said that he is unable to identify
25 the direction on the photograph, although he thinks he could on a map. So
1 perhaps you could put a map to him. And also because he has said he
2 doesn't have any specific expertise in this area. So we won't admit this
4 MR. SACHDEVA: Very well, Mr. President. I'll just move through
5 the rest of the photographs just so the witness can authenticate that they
6 were his photographs.
7 Q. Witness 138, did you take these two photographs?
8 A. Yes, I took this -- these photographs.
9 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we move to the last page. Thank you -- the
10 previous page.
11 Q. Did you take these two photographs?
12 A. Yes, I took these photographs.
13 Q. And the same for these two, did you take these two photographs?
14 A. Yes. Yes, I did.
15 Q. Now, in this incident --
16 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we just hold the photographs for a second,
18 Q. Did you establish whether there were any casualties in this
19 incident, Witness 138?
20 A. Yes, there were casualties. At first I received the report that
21 two persons had been killed.
22 Q. You said: "At first I received the report that two persons had
23 been killed." Did you receive different information after that?
24 A. No. In my report I put things that I learned at the site, and
25 then through later inquiries conducted by my colleagues, I did not learn
1 anything about any possible further casualties, people who were killed or
2 wounded. And I remember just one name of one person who was a casualty in
3 this incident.
4 Q. Did you take photographs of the casualties in this incident?
5 A. I think I did. The photo file should contain those photographs.
6 I can't remember now, but if there are photographs in this photo file,
7 then I did, yes.
8 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we move to the next one and keep it on the
9 frame very, very quickly, and then for the next one as well, please.
10 Q. Witness 138, did you take those photographs?
11 A. Yes, I did.
12 Q. And did you take those photographs?
13 A. Yes, I did.
14 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, could we have the
15 photo file admitted into evidence.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
17 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P139, Your Honours.
18 MR. SACHDEVA: Under seal, if I may.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, under seal.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Under seal, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Registrar, I got mixed up in the numbers. I
22 think we jumped directly from P136 to 138. Could you please check if that
23 is correct.
24 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: We are at the time for the break.
1 Mr. Sachdeva, two hours had been estimated for this witness, and
2 so for you've had three hours and 40 minutes. I am to say that the
3 underestimation will not affect the time allocated to the Prosecution to
4 present its case.
5 We're adjourned for 20 minutes. The Chambers will be consulting
6 on some matters during the break.
7 --- Recess taken at 3.47 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 4.11 p.m.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please continue, Mr. Sachdeva. The Chamber
10 apologises for the late start. We had to carry out some consultations.
11 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President, Your Honours.
12 Could I start with having exhibit, which is the map, 2878 brought
13 up onto e-court, please. Is it possible for this to be enlarged a little
14 bit. Okay, thank you.
15 Q. Witness 138, is that a map of Sarajevo?
16 A. Yes, that's a map of Sarajevo.
17 Q. Now, are you able to point out where the TV, the radio-television,
18 building is on that map?
19 A. Yes, I can.
20 Q. Witness 138, here's how I want you to do it: First take the
21 pointer and mark to it -- just point to it at the moment, please.
22 [Technical difficulty]
23 MR. SACHDEVA: Would it help if he simply -- if Witness 138 simply
24 identifies it with a pen.
25 If it's proving difficult right now, I can move on.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let's move on, Mr. Sachdeva.
2 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes, Mr. President.
3 Could we have Exhibit 767 -- sorry, 65 ter number 767, page 17 of
4 that 65 ter number brought up, please. For the benefit of the Court, the
5 English translation is ET 00375008.
6 Q. Witness 138, do you -- do you see a B/C/S document on your screen
7 there, Witness 138?
8 A. Yes, I do.
9 Q. And what is that document, please?
10 A. That's an official report of the inspector from the security
11 services centre.
12 Q. And does this report pertain to the incident at Geteova number 5
13 on the 28th of June, 1995?
14 A. Yes, it does. It's a document drafted by this official and it
15 pertains to this incident.
16 Q. Does this document appear to you to be an authentic document from
17 the CSB in Sarajevo?
18 A. Yes. You can see the heading, you can see the name of the
19 official employed in this institution, and you can see his signature.
20 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, I'd like to offer that
21 into evidence, that is, page 17, I understand, of Exhibit -- of 65 ter
22 number 767.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.
24 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P140, Your Honours.
25 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, for the next exhibit, might we move
1 into private session, with your leave.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, private session.
3 [Private session]
6 [Open session]
7 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
8 MR. SACHDEVA: If the court deputy could bring up pages 23 through
9 to 27 of 65 ter 767.
10 Q. Witness 138, same questions for this document. Do you see a
11 document on your screen at the moment?
12 A. Yes, I can see the document. This document that I can see is one
13 of the documents relating to this case. It has been compiled by a CSB
14 inspector. I can't see his name at the moment.
15 MR. SACHDEVA: Just for the Trial Chamber, the English translation
16 is 0037 -- sorry, ET 00375014 to 00375018. Could we have the B/C/S
17 version up on the screen, please. That's page 23 of the exhibit -- of the
18 65 ter number 767. Thank you.
19 Q. Witness 138, what is this document?
20 A. That's an expert's findings who examined the evidence collected at
21 the scene.
22 MR. SACHDEVA: And if we could quickly move to page 27 on the
23 B/C/S version.
24 Q. Witness, do you see a stamp on that page?
25 A. Yes, I do, on the right-hand side of the document, including the
1 name and the signature.
2 Q. And is that an official stamp of the Ministry of the Interior or
3 the CSB?
4 A. Yes, that's an official stamp of the Ministry of the Interior.
5 Q. And does this document appear to you to be an authentic document
6 from the CSB in Sarajevo?
7 A. Yes, it is.
8 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, with your leave, I'd offer that into
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we'll admit it.
11 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit Number P142, Your Honours.
12 MR. SACHDEVA:
13 Q. Now, Witness 138, after you investigated the -- this incident, the
14 one we've just spoken about at Geteova number 5, did you also conduct
15 another investigation on that day?
16 A. Yes. After the incident at number 5 Geteova Street, we went to
17 Safeta Hadzica Street where also a projectile had exploded.
18 Q. Whereabouts in Safeta Hadzica Street did you go to?
19 A. The explosion took place in the area around the heating plant.
20 There was a boiler-house -- boiler-house and the so-called Kuwaiti
22 Q. What was the Kuwaiti infirmary?
23 A. It was an out-patient clinic for civilians, for the patients
24 living in this civilian area.
25 Q. And the heating plant that you just said a moment ago, was that a
1 military or a civilian installation?
2 A. No, it was a civilian facility. That was a plant that had been --
3 existed there from before, and they served for providing heating of this
5 Q. Now, you said that a projectile had exploded at Safeta Hadzica
6 Street. I want to ask you: How did you come to know about this incident?
7 A. I was at the Novi Grad police station. This is where my
8 headquarters was. And the explosion happened in the vicinity of the
9 police station; or, in other words, the police station itself was at the
10 center surrounded by all these three locations of explosions that I
11 investigated on that day.
12 Q. When you said that you were at the Novi Grad police station, why
13 is that significant?
14 A. Well, in this period my department was in the building of the
15 security services, and in order to reduce the risk of travelling to and
16 from the work or walking around the town, a certain number of people were
17 relocated to police stations. I was living in this area and it was more
18 convenient for me to go there and work on the cases that happened in that
19 particular neighbourhood. Some of my colleagues were transferred to other
20 police stations.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Prosecutor, this incident is at Safeta
22 Hadzica Street?
23 MR. SACHDEVA: That's correct, Mr. President.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: What's -- do you have the number of the house?
25 The reason I'm asking is that in the Chamber's ruling under 73 bis, we
1 excluded evidence being led on incident number 16 of the 28th of June,
3 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, this -- the number of the street is
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Forty-four?
6 MR. SACHDEVA: That's correct.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is this a pharmacy?
8 MR. SACHDEVA: That's correct, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's excluded. We excluded it, so no evidence is
10 to be led on this.
11 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, with your leave, might
12 I make a submission on that point?
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: No, it's not open to you. We have already
14 decided that evidence was not to be led on this incident, under Rule 73
15 bis. What would your submission be?
16 MR. SACHDEVA: My submission would be that it -- would be this:
17 That from the invitation of the Trial Chamber, we put forward a proposal
18 to drop a certain -- a few incidents in terms of proving them beyond a
19 reasonable doubt in detail, as with the other scheduled incidents.
20 However, the Prosecution did indicate clearly that we would lead evidence
21 of these incidents in a more general nature, so as to assist in proving
22 the campaign, the general campaign, and the widespread and systematic
23 nature of the campaign of shelling and sniping. And with Your Honours'
24 order and decision wherein it had granted -- it granted the Prosecution
25 motion in full, it was the Prosecution's understanding that such evidence
1 could be led in a more general fashion, so as to prove widespread and
2 systematic nature and the general campaign. That would be my submission.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is this related to the submission that the
4 Prosecution made about leading evidence on unscheduled [Realtime
5 transcript read in error "scheduled"] incidents? Is this the same thing?
6 MR. SACHDEVA: Actually, it does tie in to that, because of course
7 to prove a campaign we have, indeed, a -- specific incidents appended to
8 the indictment; however, they are simply illustrative incidents. And we
9 also intend to prove unscheduled incidents. And so, in our submission,
10 while we have been prohibited in leading detailed evidence on these
11 incidents, the Prosecution submits that the incident has, in a sense, been
12 transferred to the category of unscheduled incidents.
13 And in terms of notice ...
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Go ahead. I had my mike on and I've been chided
15 about that, so I was turning it off.
16 MR. SACHDEVA: Excuse me, Mr. President. Thank you.
17 What I was going to say is, with respect to notice, and that is
18 before this witness was to testify, of course the procedure is that the
19 Prosecution discloses to the Defence the exhibits that we intend to use,
20 and of course the exhibits pertaining to this incident were included in
21 that list. And, of course, this incident is on the present 65 ter summary
22 of this witness; and as such, the Prosecution is of the -- it's the
23 Prosecution's submission that the Defence does, indeed, have ample notice
24 of this incident.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: I think it's not a question of notice. Just let
1 me say that the transcript doesn't have my question correctly -- what I
2 asked was whether this was related to the submission that the Prosecution
3 made about leading evidence on unscheduled incidents. I'll consider your
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.
7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it is good that
8 this issue has been raised at this particular moment. Yes. What my
9 learned colleague is saying, yes, all of this has been disclosed; however,
10 the way these things have been dealt with in these days is within the
11 human powers. However, everything else exceeds the limits of human
12 capability of any team.
13 Why am I saying this? In a few days you're going to rule on a
14 witness that is supposed to come and testify here in a similar fashion as
15 Mr. Witness of today, and it's up to you to decide. The testimony of this
16 witness, yes, it is true we did receive 23 binders, and for this witness
17 we have been allocated one hour. Once this witness arrives, I will be
18 compelled to bring all these 27 binders for you to see and judge whether
19 it is impossible for me and my team to deal with this. But this exceeds
20 my powers, and this witness is identical to the one currently being
22 Under such circumstances, we absolutely believe that it's
23 impossible to achieve or to get minimum conditions for fair proceedings.
24 We can dispute or try to dispute every single incident, and it's up to you
25 to rule the incidents that are contained in these binders in a
1 less-convincing way than it was the case so far, in our view.
2 After our submission, we expect that you are going to rule very
3 soon, but this witness is scheduled to testify next week. So, quite
4 simply, this is beyond human capability and normal proceedings. And I
5 appreciate your raising this issue because very soon you'll be facing this
6 problem. Only one hour has been allocated for this witness, and the
7 documents relating to this witness are -- contain about 10.000 pages, just
8 to say the least.
9 So we're all going to find ourselves in a situation that we're
10 going to have a witness and hundreds and hundreds of incidents and
11 thousands and thousands of pages relating to his testimony, and this is
12 the result of very fierce fighting rather than the intention to kill
13 people in a most reckless way.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Tapuskovic.
15 Anything in reply before I give the ruling?
16 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I'm unaware of the witness learned
17 counsel is referring to.
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm not dealing with that. I'm dealing with the
19 question that you raised.
20 MR. SACHDEVA: If I'm being given another opportunity to say
21 something, all I would say is that we have been -- I can see counsel is on
22 his feet.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.
24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this witness has
25 already been announced. I can give you his name, his full name. He's not
1 a protected witness. His name is Cerimagic.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, we are dealing with a submission
3 made by the Prosecutor. When we come to that issue, we'll deal with it.
4 I invited you to speak on that issue, not on something else.
5 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, what I was about to say is that, as
6 Mr. President and Your Honours are aware, we have been, and we intend to
7 lead evidence of a more general nature from other unscheduled incidents,
8 and this incident has, in the Prosecution's submission, been transferred
9 to that category, and it would -- it would, in the Prosecution's
10 submission, would be illogical for us to not be allowed to lead evidence
11 of a more general nature of this incident.
12 And I would also add that this incident is one where we do not
13 allege that there were casualties, firstly; secondly, it's a short and
14 compact incident and it essentially will take 5 to 10 minutes of
15 examination time.
16 And those are my submissions, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva, the Chamber is not with you on this
20 issue. In our view, your analysis is not correct.
21 Under Rule 73 bis, the Chamber has a discretion to identify a
22 number of crime sites or incidents in respect of which evidence is not to
23 be led by the Prosecution. In exercise of that discretion, the Chamber
24 did identify those sites and this incident is one of those. An
25 unscheduled incident cannot be, by definition, an incident in respect of
1 which the Chamber has expressly exercised its discretion and decided that
2 evidence should not be led in relation to it. An unscheduled incident is
3 an incident other than one of those incidents that the Chamber has
4 identified as an incident in respect of which evidence should not be led.
5 I note that paragraph (F) of Rule 73 bis does allow the Prosecutor
6 to file a motion to vary the Trial Chamber's decision as to the number of
7 crime sites or incidents in respect of which evidence may be presented, so
8 that was a facility open to the Prosecution, but that has not been
10 In the circumstances, the Chamber will maintain the ruling that it
11 made when it exercised its discretion under 73 bis (D) and will not allow
12 evidence to be led on this particular incident.
14 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes, Mr. President. Then I shall move on to
15 another incident.
16 Q. Witness 138, you had just started to talk about an incident at
17 Safeta Hadzica Street on the 28th of June. Now, what I want to ask you
18 is: Did you investigate another incident at that location during the
19 summer months of 1995?
20 A. Yes, I did investigate another incident, a shelling incident, at
21 that location.
22 Q. Are you able to tell the Trial Chamber exactly where on Safeta
23 Hadzica Street that incident occurred?
24 A. That was a shelling of this very neighbourhood itself. There are
25 several streets there Majdanska, Safeta Hadzica, and Prvomajska, the 1st
1 of May Street, and this the area bordered by those streets was shelled.
2 Q. Do you recall when that incident occurred?
3 A. I think it was on the 26th of May, 1995, but it is in the report.
4 Q. Can you briefly tell the Trial Chamber what happened in that
5 incident on that day.
6 A. In that area, from the police station where I was down to the
7 Majdanska Street, several shells fell and so did a modified air bomb.
8 Q. And how were you informed of this incident, and how did you --
9 well, how were you informed of this incident?
10 A. As I've already said, I was in the police station, the Novi Grad
11 police station, and I heard the explosions of the shells. And then later
12 on the shift leader, who was on the ground floor, told us where the shells
13 had impacted and where this projectile had exploded.
14 Q. And do you know where exactly the shell had impacted?
15 A. We went to the site later on and I did photograph the entire site,
16 and the site of the explosion of the modified projectile which had hit a
17 roof of the apartment building at number 52 Majdanska Street, destroying
18 several apartments.
19 Q. Did you produce a report from your on-site investigation that day?
20 A. Yes, I did. I did a forensic report and I photographed the area.
21 Q. Just going back very briefly to what you said earlier. A moment
22 ago you said: "Several shells fell and so did a modified air bomb." With
23 respect to the several shells, can you give any more description about
24 these shells?
25 A. Well, I can say that when those shells exploded, or rather, when
1 they hit, some exploded and some did not. I know that we inspected the
2 area we found an unexploded shell and we also found a shell that had
3 bounced off the asphalt area, hitting a house that was located there; it
4 did not explode. It simply broke apart because of the force of the
6 Q. Was there anything in particular with respect to the markings of
7 these shells that you remember?
8 A. Yes, I remember that on this unexploded shell there was an
9 interesting thing. There were some numbers there. There were some Nazi
10 symbols there, the swastika and some other symbols, Nazi symbols, in
11 effect; they were carved into the shell. It looked as if it was, in fact,
12 engraved by a machine into the shell.
13 Q. And do you recall if there were any casualties from this incident?
14 A. I do remember that there were casualties, but I can't recall their
15 names and their number.
16 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I'd like to offer -- to show the
17 witness a document and ask your leave to move into private session for
18 this, please.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, private session.
20 [Private session]
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in open session.
23 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we move to the next page, please.
24 Q. Witness 138, do you recognise this photograph and did you take it?
25 A. Yes, I took this photograph. This is a close-up of the explosion
1 site that we could see on the previous photograph, marked with an arrow on
2 the previous photograph.
3 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we move to the sixth page, please.
4 Sorry, I think it's the one before that. That would be -- just
5 the photograph before this one.
6 Q. Witness, did you take this photograph?
7 A. Yes, I took this photograph.
8 Q. And what is it?
9 A. This is the location on this apartment building where the
10 projectile struck. This is what it says underneath the photograph, the
11 location on the apartment building Safeta Hadzica Street, number 102,
12 between the third and the fourth floor where the third projectile hit.
13 When I say "the third projectile," it is not -- we do not know the
14 sequence of the projectiles, but this is the sequence in which we
15 investigated the impact sites of those projectiles. So we went first to
16 the first one, the second one, the third one -- that's the third one that
17 we investigated.
18 Q. And do you know what kind of projectile this is or this was caused
20 A. These were shots fired from cannon -- shells fired from cannon.
21 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we move to the third-last page of this
22 exhibit -- 65 ter number. That's the one.
23 Q. Witness, do you see that photograph on your screen?
24 A. Yes, I can see the photograph. I took this photograph, and it
25 depicts the entrance to number 52 in Safeta Hadzica Street, where a
1 projectile -- a modified projectile hit and exploded on the fifth floor.
2 Q. Are you able to see the marks of the explosion on that photograph?
3 A. No. This is the ground floor of this building, this is the
4 entrance to the building, so you cannot see any marks of the -- made by
5 the explosion of this modified projectile.
6 MR. SACHDEVA: If we move to the next page, please.
7 Q. Witness, what does this -- what does this photograph depict?
8 A. This photograph depicts a part of the apartment -- the fifth floor
9 apartment that was destroyed. Since this is the last -- the top floor of
10 this building, you can see the damage, no walls, no roof, nothing.
11 Q. And what was this damage caused by?
12 A. The damage to this building was caused by an explosion of a
13 modified projectile. The photograph that we saw a little while ago where
14 the shell exploded or hit between the third and the fourth floor, the
15 damage is much less, which means that the modified projectiles have a much
16 higher destructive power.
17 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we now move to -- I actually want the -- I want
18 to tender these photographs into evidence, this series of photographs;
19 however, I suspect I would have to show the witness each one of them, and
20 I can do that if need be.
21 Can we move to the second page of 65 ter number 766, please.
22 Q. Witness, did you take this photograph?
23 A. Yes, I did.
24 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we move to the next page, please.
25 Q. And this one?
1 A. Yes, I did.
2 Q. And what was this damage caused by?
3 A. The photograph that I've just seen depicts a car that was hit by a
4 shell that exploded on impact.
5 Q. And is this photograph on the screen a picture of the same car?
6 A. Yes, that's another photograph of the same car.
7 MR. SACHDEVA: If we could move to -- not to the next page but the
8 page after that, please.
9 Q. Did you take this photograph, Witness?
10 A. Yes, I did.
11 Q. And what is it?
12 A. Number 4 marks the crater caused by the projectile in the yard of
13 Dzemaludin Causevic elementary school -- I'm sorry, Musovic. The letters
14 here are quite small.
15 MR. SACHDEVA: And the next page, please.
16 Q. Witness, same question for this photograph: Did you take it?
17 A. Yes, I took this photograph, and there's an explanation stating
18 that this is a crater caused in the asphalt playground of the Dzemaludin
19 Musovic elementary school.
20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this event is not
21 among the scheduled incidents. We don't have it. Which incident in the
22 indictment does this refer to?
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Prosecutor, what incident is this?
24 MR. SACHDEVA: This incident is incident 10 on the -- in the
25 amended indictment, that's Safeta Hadzica Street, number 52.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: What was the date?
2 MR. SACHDEVA: 26th of May, 1995. We charged -- we charged a
3 modified air bomb explosion, but in this series of photographs there were,
4 as the witness has been saying, other shells that landed.
5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, but this is a school that
6 we're talking about. The school is not there.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, eureka, I found it. It's very
8 much there. And I expect you also have it. You haven't looked well
9 enough, or perhaps you're still having trouble with your eyeglasses.
10 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] No, no, I don't. But a school is
11 mentioned here and no school is mentioned in the indictment; that is why I
12 got up. No school is mentioned here in the indictment, whereas schools --
13 the school was mentioned in the testimony. And I've had -- I have had
14 problems with my eyeglasses all my life.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Well, the mere fact that he mentioned a
16 school and the school is not mentioned in the indictment wouldn't exclude
17 the evidence being led if the evidence substantially relates to the
18 incident in the indictment in other terms.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Can we move to the next picture, please.
22 Q. Witness, did you take this photograph?
23 A. Yes, I did. And in this photograph, the sixth projectile that we
24 investigated fell in the area between the elementary school and the
25 building on number 102 Safeta Hadzica Street.
1 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we move to the next photograph, please.
2 Q. Witness, did you take this photograph; and if you did, please
3 explain what it is.
4 A. Yes, I did. This is an unexploded projectile that landed behind
5 the building on 70 Safeta Hadzica Street.
6 Q. Did you find this projectile on the day that you were doing the
8 A. Yes, I did. It was found on the same day, and this number 7
9 indicates the seventh location that we reached in the order of our
11 MR. SACHDEVA: If we could jump two pages and go to the one after
12 that, so the third page from here, please.
13 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
14 MR. SACHDEVA:
15 Q. Witness, did you take this photograph; and if you did, what is it?
16 A. Yes, I took this photograph. And one can see in it a projectile
17 marked number 8, or the eighth location in the sequence of our
18 investigation. After hitting the house, it did not explode; it only
19 disintegrated due to the power of impact. This yellow powder marked 0 is
20 an explosive charge from this shell.
21 MR. SACHDEVA: And if we could move to the last one, please.
22 Q. Did you take this photograph, and what is it, please?
23 A. Yes, I did. This photograph shows a part of the projectile found
24 on the fifth floor, or number 52 of the same street, and it's marked
25 number 9.
1 Q. And where does this projectile -- what kind of projectile is it?
2 A. It was -- this is a part of this modified projectile, and I think
3 this is a rocket carrier -- there is an expert witness findings and
4 report, because the expert was sent to investigate and examine what kind
5 of projectile was in question.
6 MR. SACHDEVA: I believe there's one more page. Very well.
7 Mr. President, I'd offer these photographs into evidence.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we'll admit them.
9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P144, Your Honours.
10 MR. SACHDEVA: Could we now bring up Exhibit 13 -- 65 ter number
11 139 and pages 5, 6, 7 from that, please.
12 Q. Witness 138, do you see a document there on your screen?
13 A. Yes, I do.
14 Q. And what is that document, please?
15 A. This is an official report, or rather, expert's findings, an
16 official finding of the Ministry of the Interior.
17 Q. And which incident does this report pertain to?
18 A. It pertains to the report that we had seen previously on the
20 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we go to page 7 of this document, please.
21 Q. Witness, the same questions. Do you see a stamp on that
22 document -- on that page?
23 A. Yes, I do. I see the stamp, the signature of the person who
24 certified this, and also the name and the signature of the investigator.
25 Q. Just to be clear, is that an official stamp?
1 A. Yes, it's an official stamp used to certify this type of document.
2 Q. Does this document appear to you to be an authentic document from
3 the CSB in Sarajevo?
4 A. Yes.
5 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, I'd offer that into
6 evidence, that is, pages 5, 6, 7 of 65 ter number 139.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, the Chamber admits it.
8 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P145, Your Honours.
9 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, I have a hard copy of
10 the map that I was trying to work on beforehand. Could that be placed on
11 the ELMO.
12 I've been told that the e-court map is working, and perhaps we can
13 try it that way first.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, let's try the e-court map.
15 MR. SACHDEVA: That would be 2872, 65 ter.
16 Q. Witness 138, let's try again. Is that a map of Sarajevo?
17 A. Yes, it is. I'm looking at the map of Sarajevo.
18 Q. Are you able on that map to, first of all, indicate where the TV
19 building is?
20 A. I'll do my best.
21 MR. SACHDEVA: Perhaps it could be zoomed up a little bit.
22 THE WITNESS: [Marks].
23 MR. SACHDEVA: And maybe it can be moved towards the -- I think
24 it's left, to show the left-hand side of the map. Thank you.
25 Q. So, Witness 138, please mark by the TV building the letters TV.
1 A. [Marks].
2 Q. Now, from -- are you able to see the roof of the building where
3 the first impact occurred? If not, that's fine. But if you are, please
4 just put the figure -- sorry, the letter R right beside it.
5 A. It's impossible in this kind of map. It's approximately somewhere
6 where the upper line of the T letter is. But in this type of map, it's
7 not very easy, and I wouldn't like to be -- to make a mistake.
8 Q. Very well. Are you able to draw a line in the direction from
9 where the projectile came?
10 A. [Marks].
11 Q. Please, on top of the arrow, just place the letter P.
12 A. [Marks].
13 Q. Now, just to be clear, how did you establish the direction of
14 fire, namely, from where that arrow indicates?
15 A. Based on the physical evidence that I already explained, this
16 arrow indicates that it was coming from this direction.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Was it the witness who established the direction
18 from which the projectile came or the team with which he was working?
19 MR. SACHDEVA:
20 Q. Witness --
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Did you hear my question? Was it you who
22 established the direction from which the projectile came or the team of
23 which you were a part?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The whole team established that.
25 But at this particular instance it was very clear, because there were two
1 marks that the projectile left; therefore, it would have been able for me
2 myself to establish where it had come from.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is it your evidence, then, that in some cases you
4 are able, independently of the team, to establish the direction from which
5 a projectile might have come, but in other cases you are not so able?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I said is that based on certain
7 marks that the projectile leaves, it is possible to establish the
8 direction where it comes from. I -- for that I need two bench-marks, and
9 I did have them in this particular instance.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: But suppose you didn't have those bench-marks to
11 guide you, would you have been able to do it independently of the team in
12 another instance?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. It depends on the type of
14 explosion. When you have a mortar shell exploding, based on the traces
15 that it leaves, it's impossible to detect the source of the shell.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Sachdeva, please continue.
17 MR. SACHDEVA:
18 Q. Witness --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: It is possible to
20 detect the source.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: From what you said, I gather that there are some
22 instances when you would need the team, as a whole, to identify the
23 direction from which a projectile might have come. Can you give me an
24 example of that?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The judge was conducting the
1 investigation and he set up the team. It wasn't me who did that. So
2 based on the traces of explosion, if it happens that we had an explosion
3 like the one on 52 Safeta Hadzica Street, when the projectile hit the
4 western side of the building, it was very simple to determine where it had
5 come from. Even in the case -- in case of an unexploded projectile, you
6 have ricochet and you have these two marks, so it's simple to determine.
7 If you have only one mark, like with mortar shells but also -- but based
8 on its traces, it is possible to determine the incoming direction.
9 When you have an explosion of a modified projectile, as was the
10 case on number 5 Geteova Street, the projectile was embedded in the
11 western side of the building and damaged it. However, there was no damage
12 on the eastern side of the building; therefore, it is very easy to say
13 that it had come from that particular side.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. I don't believe you have understood
15 the question that I asked.
17 MR. SACHDEVA:
18 Q. Witness 138, I just want to clarify one thing that you said in
19 response to Mr. President's questions. When you talk about mortars, are
20 you able to determine the direction of fire, as opposed to the firing
21 position or the origin of fire? What are you able to do?
22 A. I can only determine the direction of the incoming projectile.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please continue.
25 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Q. And, Witness 138, just please clarify for us, you have told the
2 Trial Chamber that on some occasions you are able to determine the
3 direction -- the direction of fire of a projectile and in some cases you
4 are not, and the team assists in that regard. Can you give an example of
5 those cases where you yourself are unable to determine the direction of
6 fire of a projectile.
7 A. It wasn't my duty to establish exactly the angle in topographic
8 maps; however, I can determine the direction. I cannot say exactly
9 whether it has come from the west or what, but there was always a person
10 there with a compass determining the angle and the number of degrees of
11 the angle of the incoming direction. But based on the traces I was able
12 to determine the direction.
13 For example, let me tell you about number 5 Geteova Street. A
14 portion of the building on the west side exploded; therefore, nothing
15 happened on the east side or the southern side of the building. Based on
16 the projectile embedded in this building, one can clearly see that it had
17 come from the west.
18 And whenever I had two points or two bench-marks on the basis of
19 which I claimed it came from the west, another member of the team, working
20 with a compass, established the exact direction. But based on the traces
21 it was possible to determine whether it came from the west, from the east,
22 from the south, or from the north.
23 Q. And in respect to the TV building, did you have those bench-marks
24 from where you were able to determine approximately the direction of fire
25 of the projectile?
1 A. Yes, I did, the exact place of explosion. And we had a marker on
2 the roof which indicated the first place of touch. That was the first
3 bench-mark. And the second bench-mark was the place of impact. So we had
4 these two bench-marks, one where the projectile ricochetted and the second
5 one where it landed. So we could have, based on these two, established
6 the incoming direction.
7 Q. Well, how did the -- as you put it, the first place of touch on
8 the roof of the TV building enable you - and I'm talking about you
9 yourself - to determine the direction of fire?
10 A. According to the place of explosion itself. If we look at the TV
11 building now, the explosion took place to the right from the touch point
12 between the modified projectile and the building. It ricochetted and it
13 went down to the eastern wall of studio C, and this is where it exploded.
14 If we had found any marks on the other side of the building - and we
15 didn't - one could have assumed that it came either from the north or the
16 west. However, according to the damage that we detected, we could
17 establish the direction, the incoming direction, of the projectile.
18 Q. Well, with respect to the marks on the roof, were you able to
19 establish anything from the marks on the roof with respect to direction of
20 fire? That's what I'm asking.
21 A. Upon inspection of the damage to the roof, as I just explained,
22 there was a tar layer on the roof and a layer of gravel and this tar roof
23 was twisted in the direction of the incoming projectile.
24 MR. SACHDEVA: Okay. I want to move back to the map. The map is
25 still on the monitor.
1 Q. Can you now, for the benefit of the Court, mark the place where
2 you conducted an on-site investigation on the 22nd of June, 1995, at
3 Geteova number 12, I think it is.
4 A. That's number 12 Geteova Street.
5 Q. Can you above the cross just place the letter G and the figure 12,
6 as small as possible, please.
7 A. [Marks].
8 Q. Can you do the same for the incident at Geteova number 5, on the
9 28th of June, 1995.
10 A. [Marks].
11 Q. Can you mark the place at Safeta Hadzica Street where the incident
12 occurred on the 26th of May, 1995, please.
13 A. This place is here on the map bordered by Prvomajska Street, now
14 called Majdanska. At the time this was all Safeta Hadzica Street, and
15 this is this area here. You can see the school here and the police
16 station as well.
17 Q. Can you, to the right-hand of that cross that you just put, place
18 the letters SH, please.
19 A. [Marks].
20 Q. Now, do you know where the military barracks, Viktor Bubanj
21 barracks, are located; and if you do, if you can mark that on the map,
23 A. It should be here.
25 Q. To the right of that cross, can you please but the letters VB.
1 A. [Marks].
2 Q. Now, in the area where you've marked the two incidents on
3 Geteova Street and the one on Safeta Hadzica Street, were there any other
4 military facilities?
5 A. No, there were no military facilities. That was a residential
6 area, apartment buildings and office buildings that had all been there
7 since before the war.
8 Q. Was there a -- was there an office that soldiers used to use in
9 that area?
10 A. Well, there were some offices there used intermittently by
11 uniformed soldiers.
12 Q. And how large were these offices, roughly, in square metres, if
13 you can tell us?
14 A. Well, I am familiar with the offices because I pass by often.
15 These are offices maybe 50 or 60 square metres in surface.
16 Q. And are you able to tell the Court how many soldiers would
17 typically be in those offices?
18 A. Well, quite frankly, I don't know. I'd see uniformed people
19 there, but what they had there, how many people were there, bearing in
20 mind that this was an area of about 50 to 60 square metres, I really
21 didn't know that.
22 Q. Can you mark on the map where those offices were with the
23 letter -- with the figure O, please.
24 A. [Marks].
25 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I'd like to offer this still into
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Prosecutor, could you ask the witness also to,
3 just for clarification, identify on the map where the police headquarters
4 were, where the victim -- the witness, sorry, was present when some of the
5 shellings happened.
6 MR. SACHDEVA:
7 Q. Witness 138, you've told us that you were occasionally in your
8 police station in Novi Grad. Can you mark that also on the map with the
9 letter P -- actually, not P because there's already a P there. PS,
11 A. It is located here between G12 and SH, and it will be a little bit
12 difficult for me to write this down.
13 MR. SACHDEVA: Does that clarify it for Your Honour?
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes, thank you.
15 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I offer this still into evidence.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. And it's time for the break, but let us
17 hear the exhibit number.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will become P146.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: We're adjourned for 20 minutes.
20 --- Recess taken at 5.46 p.m.
21 --- On resuming at 6.06 p.m.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva, we must be concluding this
23 examination-in-chief. You have to consider whether the level of detail is
24 necessary for the case that you are presenting.
25 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes, Mr. President, I intend to finish shortly.
1 Before I start again, has the map been admitted into evidence?
2 Might it be removed, please, from the screen? Thank you.
3 Q. Witness 138, I just am now going to ask you very briefly some
4 questions about another incident that you investigated. Do you remember
5 an incident involving a bus that you investigated?
6 A. Yes, I do remember investigating an incident involving a bus.
7 Q. And when was that, please?
8 A. I can't recall the exact date, but I do remember this
9 investigation. I don't know the exact date.
10 Q. Do you know the year?
11 A. I think it was in 1995, but I don't know exactly.
12 Q. Now, just explain very briefly what was the incident that you
13 investigated. What happened?
14 A. I think -- in fact, I did do this bus -- one bus incident. It was
15 an Elektroprenos bus that was moving towards Dobrinja, and it was hit at
16 the intersection of the Deveta Transverzala and Safeta Hadzica Streets.
17 The buses continued moving with the injured passengers and reached us in
18 Dobrinja -- in fact, it reached Dobrinja where the injured received
19 medical treatment. I went to the location where the bus was parked, and I
20 photographed the physical evidence that I found on the bus and inside the
21 bus. I drafted an official report and made a photo file.
22 Q. Yes, I'm going to show you your report in a moment. Just -- you
23 said it was an Elektroprenos bus. Was that a military vehicle or a
24 civilian vehicle?
25 A. No, it was a civilian bus for civilian transport. A girl was
1 killed on that occasion. There were civilians in the bus, and
2 Elektroprenos is a company that existed before the war and in fact it
3 still exists.
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.
6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Perhaps I can't see this, but I
7 don't think that it is contained in any of the counts of the indictment.
8 I don't know what incident we're talking about.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Prosecutor.
10 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, my learned friend is
11 correct. It's not an illustrative incident as in the ones that are
12 appended to the indictment; it is, however, an unscheduled incident that
13 the Prosecution submits it's entitled to lead evidence on.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Please proceed.
15 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President.
16 Q. 138 -- Witness 138, first of all, how did you come to know about
17 this incident?
18 A. I was in the police station in Novi Grad, and I was informed about
19 this incident by my boss, who had received a report from the scene itself.
20 Q. And you said you went to the incident -- sorry, you went to the
21 location where the bus was parked and photographed the physical evidence.
22 Where was that location?
23 A. The bus was parked in front of the infirmary in the Dobrinja
25 Q. And was that where the bus was hit?
1 A. No. The bus had been hit at the crossroads of the -- at the
2 intersection of the Deveta Transverzala and Safeta Hadzica Street.
3 Q. Yes, I'm going to ask you to show that location in a moment on the
4 map, but how did you establish that that was where the bus was hit?
5 A. After the examination and the inspection of the bus and all the
6 physical evidence there, we took photographs, I took photographs of the
7 bus, and we learned from the eye-witnesses that that was where the bus was
8 hit. After the inspection and photographing the bus, we went back to this
9 location and we found evidence indicating that this was the place where
10 the bus had been hit. We found broken glass there, so that was the
11 location where the bus had been hit.
12 Q. Just concentrating on that location where you found broken glass,
13 how did you know that the glass was -- indeed, glass from the bus and not
14 from other vehicles or from other sources?
15 A. This is a very busy intersection. Before that there had been no
16 activities that would have resulted in any glass breaking. The broken
17 glass had been recently broken at that time. The quantity of the broken
18 glass also indicated that this was glass originating from the bus.
19 Q. How did you know that it was broken glass that had recently --
20 that was recently broken? How did you know that?
21 A. Well, on the basis of the glass fragments, you can draw
22 conclusions whether the glass had been broken recently, immediately before
23 the inspection, or whether it had been there for some time. Cars passing
24 over it, dust, and so on, would have left traces on the broken glass, but
25 this glass had no such traces.
1 Q. So let me just see if I understand you. Are you saying that if
2 the glass had dust traces on them, it would have been glass that had been
3 there for some time?
4 A. Yes, that is correct. At the location where this glass was, this
5 broken glass was, it was shiny, glimmering, and this indicated to us that
6 this was something that had happened recently.
7 Q. Now, from your inspection of the bus, were you able to establish
8 where the damage -- where on the bus was damaged -- damage sustained?
9 A. The bus was hit on the right-hand side. The round hit the window,
10 which is why there was so much glass. It was actually hit in a place
11 between the first and the second windows. That would be the front
12 right-hand side of the bus. It was hit at the place where the roof and
13 the side of the bus meet.
14 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. Court Deputy, could we have map 2872 brought
15 up, please. And if it could be zoomed in, please. And maybe if it could
16 be moved so that the left-hand side of the map is showing a little bit
17 more. That's correct. Thanks.
18 Q. Witness 138, are you able to see where the -- where the
19 investigation concluded the bus was hit?
20 A. Yes. I can indicate the position.
21 Q. Can you indicate -- can you indicate that position with the letter
23 A. That's the intersection, and I will put letter B there.
25 Q. Which direction was the bus travelling -- in which direction was
1 the bus travelling at the time it was hit?
2 A. It was moving along this road. It says here Ive Andrica, but this
3 is in fact called Deveta Transverzala Street, and it was moving in the
4 direction of Dobrinja, along this road.
5 Q. Just for clarity, is the street name Deveta Transverzala Street,
6 is that a new or an old name?
7 A. Well, in fact, only the beginning of this street is called Ive
8 Andrica Street and this whole neighbourhood is divided into a number of
9 what we called Transverzala sections, and this is the ninth such section,
10 "Deveta Transverzala" in B/C/S.
11 Q. Can you, with an arrow, draw a line in the direction in which the
12 bus was travelling, please.
13 A. [Marks].
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.
15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the only thing I'm
16 interested in now - and I think the Prosecutor was supposed to do that - I
17 don't even know, I didn't hear the date when this occurred. Could we
18 please see whether this is in the period relevant for the indictment. Let
19 us first determine that. What is the date?
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, that's basic and important.
21 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I, of course, am leading evidence of
22 an incident within the indictment period. I understand the concern of my
23 friend. I intend to show the witness an investigation report that he
24 produced, and that I submit will clarify the matter. I just want the
25 witness to mark this incident on the map. I can do the document now.
1 It's not a problem.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: No, well, stick to the procedure you had planned
3 to follow, and you'll get to the date shortly.
4 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes. Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Q. Now, the line that you have drawn on the map, can you just -- just
6 for clarity, which direction is that? Is that north to south? South to
7 north? East to west? Can you tell us, please.
8 A. This is the direction in which the bus was moving, from south to
9 north, or rather, from north to south, along the Deveta Transverzala
11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.
13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in order to be able
14 to follow the examination-in-chief at all, I would have to know what the
15 date is. I have to know that. I can't follow the examination-in-chief if
16 I don't know the date. This is not cross-examination by the Prosecutor in
17 which I can then sit here and wait for the Prosecution to come to that
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: I have already ruled on this matter. The
20 Prosecutor is going to get to the evidence which will disclose the date.
21 MR. SACHDEVA:
22 Q. Witness, can you also now mark the place where you saw the bus for
23 the first time; in other words, where the bus had come to park.
24 A. The map is zoomed in in such a way that I can't really show it,
25 but I've put a dot here where Dobrinja is.
1 Q. That's fine. Can you put the letter D there, please, where the
2 dot is.
3 A. [Marks].
4 Q. Now, you told the Trial Chamber just a moment ago that the damage
5 was sustained on the right side of the bus. Did the location of the
6 damage enable you to determine the direction in which the projectile came
7 and hit the bus?
8 A. Yes. On the basis of the damage, it can be said that the
9 projectile had come in from the right, which indicated to us the direction
10 from which the round had been fired.
11 Q. When you say "right," can you tell us in terms of west, east,
12 north, south.
13 A. At the time when the bus entered this intersection, it was hit
14 from its right. That would be from the west, if you look at this map.
15 Q. Can you draw a line indicating the direction of fire, please.
17 A. [Marks].
18 Q. And can you put on top of the arrow the letter P.
19 A. [Marks].
20 Q. Now, on that map are you able to locate the hill called Mojmilo
22 A. Yes, I can. It's here, the green area here, where it says "Novi
24 Q. Can you just please mark that with the letter M.
25 A. [Marks].
1 Q. Given the fact that the bus sustained damage on the right-hand
2 side -- on the right-hand side, would it have been possible for the shots
3 to have come from Mojmilo hill?
4 A. No. In that case a bus would have sustained a direct hit from the
5 driver's side or from the left side of the bus.
6 Q. And when you examined the bus, did you see damage on the driver's
7 side and the left-hand side of the bus?
8 A. No. It had damage only the way that I described it a little while
10 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, I'd like to offer this
11 still into evidence.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
13 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P147, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: And are we getting to the date now?
15 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes, Mr. President.
16 And before I ask for this 65 ter number to be brought up, might we
17 go into private session, with your leave, Mr. President.
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
19 Private session.
20 [Private session]
11 Pages 1333-1334 redacted. Private session.
25 [Open session]
1 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
2 MR. SACHDEVA:
3 Q. Witness 138, I know it was a long time ago, but in the very
4 beginning of my examination you told the Trial Chamber that you were
5 involved in an investigation of sniping incidents. Do you remember that?
6 A. Yes. I remember investigating sniping incidents.
7 Q. And again, very briefly, what was your role when it came to
8 investigating sniping incidents?
9 A. Upon receiving a report on an injury or a killing, we would go to
10 the scene. My duty was to examine the scene, to find physical evidence
11 with respect to the action that had been taken, to photograph the scene,
12 do the measurements, and based on the traces, to determine the direction
13 of the firing.
14 Q. Does the name Jasmina Tabakovic mean anything to you?
15 A. Yes. I am familiar with that name in connection with the on-site
16 investigation that I was involved in in May 1995.
17 Q. Do you recall the exact day in May 1995?
18 A. I think it was the 15th of May, 1995, and I also wrote an official
19 report, and it should bear an exact date. But I do think it was the 15th
20 of May.
21 Q. What happened on that incident?
22 A. I carried out the on-site investigation on the 15th of May, and
23 the incident happened on the 14th of May at 15 minutes before midnight.
24 An investigation report -- an on-site investigation should typically be
25 done on the following day because we were not equipped for doing
1 night-time investigations. A bullet came through a window. There was no
2 window-pane in this window but only a plastic sheet. The bullet
3 penetrated the plastic sheet at a certain level that I recorded, and it
4 hit Jasmina Tabakovic above her left breast. It went through her body and
5 exited below her left shoulder blade. It hit the cupboard and got
6 embedded in the wall. As a result of this hit, Jasmina Tabakovic died.
7 Q. Now, you said a bullet came through the window. A window of what?
8 A. It was a window of the room where she was.
9 Q. And the room was part of -- was it part of an office? Was it part
10 of a private house? Can you tell the Trial Chamber that.
11 A. When I say "room," I don't mean office that was in the flat of
12 Jasmina Tabakovic. It was in an apartment building in Dobrinja. She was
13 in that flat.
14 Q. Now, when you went to the --
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: When was this investigation carried out?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was carried out on the 15th of
17 May, and as I said, I cannot remember the exact date. But I do remember
18 that it took place on the 14th of May, at 2345 hours.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: But in any event, would it have been the day
20 after the incident?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct. We were able to
22 conduct investigation in daylight.
23 MR. SACHDEVA:
24 Q. Witness 138, were you able, on that occasion, to determine the
25 direction in which the bullet came from?
1 A. Yes. Based on the traces, I could establish where the bullet had
2 come from.
3 Q. When you say "traces," what traces do you speak about?
4 A. That means the penetration of the bullet through the plastic
5 sheet, through the cupboard, and the bullet that we recovered from the
6 wall behind this cupboard.
7 Q. Were you able to establish a line from the damage in the plastic
8 sheeting to the cupboard?
9 A. The procedure of recovering this kind of clues indicates that when
10 you have a damage through the plastic sheet and the damage to the wall
11 itself. So we took a piece of rope and connected these two points, and we
12 were able to establish the exact trajectory of the bullet.
13 Q. And in which direction was it concluded the bullet came from?
14 A. The bullet came from Dobrinja 1, that means from apartment
15 buildings in the Dobrinja neighbourhood.
16 Q. Which party to the conflict controlled the area comprised --
17 comprising Dobrinja 1?
18 A. That was the area under the Army of Republika Srpska.
19 Q. And you said that you found a bullet in the flat. From that
20 bullet, were you able to establish the weapon that was used?
21 A. That bullet was sent for expert examination, but at a glance it
22 was obvious that it was a rifle bullet.
23 JUDGE HARHOFF: Prosecutor, could you ask the witness if he can
24 inform us of the calibre.
25 MR. SACHDEVA:
1 Q. Witness 138, are you able to tell the Court the calibre of the
2 weapon that was used?
3 A. In my report I said that it was 7.62-millimetre rifle bullet, but
4 the proper procedure was that I was bound to send this slug for expert
5 examination. These were just -- this was just initial information that I
6 provided for further investigation by inspectors. However, my statement
7 could have been disputed by an expert witness who inspected this slug in
8 the laboratory of the CSB. But in agreement with our -- my superiors, I
9 was allowed, in this brief description, to specify the calibre, although
10 further analysis was able to dispute or confirm my claims. As far as --
11 according to my knowledge at that time, I was able to say that this was a
12 7.62-millimetre ...
13 Q. Now, Witness, I wanted to ask you about, lastly, another sniping
14 incident that you investigated. Do you remember an incident on the 3rd of
15 March, 1995?
16 A. Yes, I remember this incident. It happened in an apartment
17 building on Emile Zola Street, in the Dobrinja neighbourhood.
18 Q. Briefly tell the Trial Chamber what happened in that incident.
19 A. Upon receiving a report about the incident, I went to the scene,
20 and my supervisor told me that in the ground floor flat on Emile Zola
21 Street, a woman had been hit. I believe that her name was Semka Kozadra.
22 Q. Did you produce a report from your investigation?
23 A. Yes, I did. I photographed the scene and recovered the physical
25 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I'd like to move into private
1 session, with your leave, to bring up the next document.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Private session.
3 [Private session]
11 [Open session]
12 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
13 MR. SACHDEVA:
14 Q. You said that a bullet was found in the corridor. Are you able to
15 establish -- were you able to establish the weapon from which it came
17 A. I didn't say that the casing was found but the bullet was found on
18 the floor of the corridor, and it was a 7.62-millimetre rifle bullet,
19 which was also sent for forensic examination to be verified by an expert.
20 Q. Was the woman who was hit, did she -- was she killed or was she
22 A. No, she was wounded. And before the on-site investigation team
23 arrived, she had been transferred to the Kosevo Hospital.
24 Q. And in this investigation, were you able to establish the
25 direction from where the bullet came from?
1 A. Yes, I was. Based on the penetration of the blanket, which served
2 as a visual shield, how it passed through the room, how it passed through
3 the plastic sheet and the door of the room, we were able to reconstruct
4 the trajectory. And we did it in the same way by stretching a piece of
5 rope, and thereby establishing the direction from which the bullet had
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: May I ask you, then, what was there about the
8 plastic sheet and the door that enabled you to determine the direction
9 from which the bullet came? What was there about the passage of the
10 bullet through the plastic sheet and the door that enabled you to
11 determine the direction from which it came?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The hole in the plastic sheet and
13 the hole in the blanket, the hole in the window and the door, so all these
14 holes indicated where the bullet had passed through. At this time all the
15 glass was virtually broken and people used plastic sheets provided by the
16 humanitarian organisations in order to cover the windows. So when a
17 bullet passes through a plastic sheet on the window it leaves a hole
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, but I still have to press you further as to
20 what was there about the hole. What was so specific about the hole that
21 enabled you to make this determination? I mean a hole is a hole.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When a bullet passes through a
23 plastic sheet, on either side the sheet is penetrated and it breaks on the
24 side from which the bullet came, and it showed that the hole and the size
25 of the hole showed that -- and indicated that it was caused by this
1 particular bullet. There were no other damage on the sheet, and it
2 confirmed that the bullet passed through. Maybe it's difficult to explain
3 now, but when you see it with the naked eye, I knew precisely that this
4 hole was caused by the passage of a bullet.
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, continue. We just have -- we have a couple
7 minutes now.
8 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President. This is the last
9 document I'm going to show the witness, and then I'm done.
10 Can we move into private session for this last document, please,
11 because it's -- with your leave, Mr. President.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
13 Private session.
14 [Private session]
20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.02 p.m.,
21 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 1st day of
22 February, 2007, at 2.15 p.m.