1 Thursday, 1 February 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.17 p.m.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a number of administrative and other matters

7 before you begin, Mr. Tapuskovic, your cross-examination. The first one

8 relates to you, so you might as well rise. It relates to the conversation

9 that you had asked us to enter into evidence, and we are considering

10 marking it for identity. But before doing so, we'd like to find out,

11 since the evidence didn't make it very clear, is this a note or a

12 transcript, or what is it?

13 Please don't make a long speech. Just let us know.

14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this is a

15 conversation that was taped in General Smith's office. General Nicolai

16 was examined about this. There are certain things in that conversation

17 that Nicolai confirmed. The only thing that's still not certain is who

18 conducted the actual conversation. He denied.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: In what form is it? Is it in a transcript or a

20 note or a letter? How is it contained?

21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] It was translated. We received a

22 translation, and it was represented to be a conversation conducted from

23 Mr. Smith's office. Following Mr. Nicolai's testimony, the only thing we

24 didn't know was whether he actually talked through an interpreter or

25 perhaps it was General Smith himself who talked. At any rate, this is

1 something that occurred in General Smith's office previous --

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

3 [Trial Chamber confers]

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: I know that Mr. Docherty is not here, but there

5 is absolutely no prejudice. We'll mark it for identification.

6 The second matter relates to agreed facts, and this issue was

7 raised at the Pre-Trial Conference on the 10th of January. During the

8 conference, the parties were asked by me to meet and discuss the matter

9 and report back to the Trial Chamber by Friday, 19th January. Today is

10 the 1st of February. We haven't had any report from the parties. So,

11 Mr. Tapuskovic and the Prosecution, you must get together and report by

12 Wednesday of next week on this issue.

13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I can inform you

14 that we have met. We have received a new offer about that. There are a

15 number of facts that I'm sure we can go through by the deadline set by the

16 Chamber. However, bearing in mind all the evidence that we have so far

17 heard in this trial, a number of problems crop up in this respect. I do,

18 however, believe that we shall be able to agree on a lot of these facts

19 that have been offered.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

21 The next matter is a scheduling matter. Tomorrow, Friday, we will

22 sit as scheduled, but early next week the Trial Chamber will issue an

23 order indicating how Fridays will be used. Some Fridays we intend to sit

24 for the entire day, other Fridays for half the day, and some Fridays we

25 will not sit at all. But that order will be issued early next week.

1 The last matter relates to the witness's evidence in

2 examination-in-chief, so I'm addressing you now, Mr. Witness.

3 WITNESS: WITNESS W-138 [Resumed]

4 [Witness answered through interpreter]

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Do you remember that I asked you how you would be

6 able to identify from the holes the direction from which the shots came,

7 and you answered that you were able to do that by stretching a cord or

8 some thread from one hole to the other; and I further asked you what was

9 there distinctive about the hole made by the bullet. And I'd like you to

10 answer that again. What is the area that is peculiar or distinctive about

11 a hole made by a bullet which makes you know the direction from which it

12 came?

13 Just concentrate on the hole. I'm clear about the evidence you

14 gave concerning the use of a thread or a cord stretching from one hole to

15 the other. I just want you to concentrate on the hole and perhaps any

16 markings on it or anything resulting from the impact which would indicate

17 to you the direction from which the bullet came.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One thing I need to confirm at the

19 beginning. At the outset you spoke about damage that occurred as a result

20 of a projectile and then you mentioned a bullet. I will explain about the

21 projectile first.

22 The evidence I have given so far have been photographs of damage

23 caused by a projectile which hit one side of the building. When the

24 projectile hit that wall, I knew exactly what side it was, whether it was

25 the east side, the west side, the north side or the south side of the

1 building. So the projectile hit that part of the building.

2 As a result of the explosion that occurred, damage was caused

3 around the hole itself. The projectile tore through the wall and caused

4 further damage inside. The same thing applies to the bullet, except the

5 bullet did not explode. It created a small opening and then the bullet

6 flew on. It tore a hole through another door, and then finally inside we

7 found the cartridge. There was no other damage except for the entry hole

8 so to speak.

9 When you have a shell, it's easy. You can see exactly how an

10 explosion occurs and how it causes damage to a wall. If the wall is

11 facing east, then it's not logical for a hit to have arrived from that

12 side but rather from the opposite side, from the west side.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Witness, I was asking you about the hole itself

14 made by the bullet, whether there is anything about the hole resulting

15 from the impact of the bullet which might tell you where it came from.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. This sheet of foil is split in

17 half and then this goes into the room, into the inside of the room, which

18 tells me that the bullet came from somewhere outside and then tore into

19 the room.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: So the foil is split in half. Is there anything

21 additional which might indicate the direction from which the bullet came?

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I had nothing else. That was

23 all I established.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: All right.

25 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, if I may, I'm sorry to interrupt and

1 maybe this is not the appropriate time, but I just want -- if I may just

2 follow on two things that Your Honour raised at the beginning regarding

3 administrative matters.

4 The first is another matter that we discussed at the Pre-Trial

5 Conference was the subject of intercepts and Your Honours pressed the

6 Prosecution to try to seek agreement about authenticity and perhaps be

7 able to therefore drop some witnesses. We have -- that's an --

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let me finish this matter first.

9 MR. WHITING: Oh, I apologise. I thought you had finished.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: No. A Judge wants to ask a question.

11 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.

12 Mr. Witness, during your testimony yesterday, you also testified

13 about a few shelling incidents, and you mentioned that there was a

14 shelling of a bus and a shelling on a house.

15 My question to you is the following: Were you able, during your

16 investigation, to determine the nature of the projectile that had been

17 fired at the bus and at the building; and more, specifically, were there

18 mortar grenades or were they modified air bombs, as we have heard about in

19 earlier testimonies?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Whenever I carried out an

21 investigation, I would find remains of mortar shells, those that don't

22 explode but rather just stay there. Whenever I found that, I was able to

23 ascertain that those were shells.

24 As for other projectiles or missiles, such as bullets or

25 anti-aircraft machine-guns, when those were fired, there is no angle. If

1 it's a fragmentation bullet, it splinters into pieces. So I just say it's

2 a fragmentation bullet. I sent the remains for analysis, and I can say

3 that it is a fragmentation bullet and not a mortar shell.

4 When you have modified ones, there were rocket motors which I also

5 saw whenever I arrived at the scene. We would call those missiles

6 modified ones, and this was later confirmed by expert reports, because

7 these remains would then be forwarded to experts for further analysis.

8 I spoke yesterday about the difference - and I can tell the

9 difference - between various types of bullets. This is the sort of

10 information that I would share with the inspector by way of instructions,

11 but it is not necessarily accurate. Sometimes 10 or 15 days later we

12 would get the expert report, depending on the amount of time that an

13 expert took to write a report, and the expert would sometimes say, "I

14 sometimes had 120-millimetre shells, I thought they were 120-millimetre

15 shells, when in actual fact they were 82-millimetre shells." However, the

16 victims were killed by mortar shrapnel. Whether it was a 120-millimetre

17 shell or an 82-millimetre shell was a matter of lesser consequence which

18 was subsequently established and confirmed by the expert.

19 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you, Witness. I appreciate what you have

20 just told us. My question was, however, a bit more specific, because I

21 wanted to know if you were able, during your investigations, to ascertain

22 what kind of bomb had exploded on the incidents that you mentioned

23 yesterday from the Geteova Street number 5 and from number 12, I believe

24 it was, and on the bus. Can you -- if you can, verify or explain to the

25 Court which kind of bomb hit those three targets.

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The case -- the incident that

2 occurred at Geteova Street number 5, that sky-scraper was hit by a

3 modified missile, a projectile. The incident at Geteova Street number 12,

4 which occurred before the one at house number 5, a modified projectile --

5 a modified projectile exploded in front of the building against the

6 ground. Then there was another one that hit a building and the bus was

7 hit by a fragmentation bullet and pieces, remains, of this fragmentation

8 bullet, shrapnel, were found inside the bus.

9 So this is not a rifle bullet. Those were scattered bits from a

10 fragmentation bullet, and what I established at the time was that most

11 probably this came from an anti-aircraft machine-gun. That was submitted

12 for analysis and then an expert probably wrote something up later on in

13 relation to what happened with that bus.

14 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you very much.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Now, Mr. Whiting.

16 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, and I apologise again for jumping the

17 gun.

18 Your Honours had pressed us on the issue of intercepts at the

19 pre-trial hearing. We have provided a list of all the intercepts to the

20 Defence and ask if they could inform us which ones they agree to and which

21 ones they dispute. There are a small number that was done for when one of

22 the witnesses testify, but there are some that are outstanding. I wonder

23 if Your Honours could set the same deadline for us to report to Your

24 Honours with respect to the intercept so that we could just get that

25 moving along.

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. The same deadline is set, that is, next

2 week, Wednesday. The Chamber expects, requires, a report on the matter of

3 the intercepts.

4 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

5 The only other issue is, I understand from what Your Honours have

6 said that we will be sitting tomorrow as scheduled. Do Your Honours know

7 about next week, the 9th of February, Friday? Because we're already

8 planning for next week's witnesses, so it would be helpful to know if

9 we're going to be sitting that day or if it's going to be a half day or

10 not a day, if Your Honours know.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Okay. We will let you know by tomorrow, yes.

12 That's about next week, Friday.

13 Now, Mr. Tapuskovic, you are to begin your cross-examination. The

14 Prosecution spent about 6 hours and 40 minutes, by my reckoning in

15 examination-in-chief. Of course, you're not obliged to spend that amount

16 of time. And to avoid the Prosecutor jumping up every minute to say that

17 you are misquoting the evidence, I would suggest that where you have a

18 doubt about what was said in chief, that you make an inquiry of the

19 witness to have it verified so that we can have accuracy. Of course, it's

20 entirely a matter for you, otherwise, how the cross-examination is

21 conducted. But I'm just dealing with this as a pragmatic matter that has

22 arisen time and again in this trial.

23 Please commence your cross-examination.

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'll respond

25 briefly.

1 I hope that during my cross-examination the Prosecutor will not

2 have to object, since I have made an enormous effort about this. I

3 believe they will not have to spring to their feet even once.

4 There is one particular spot -- reference to the transcript. I

5 copied that. I'll deal with that particular portion of the transcript in

6 relation to a specific incident.

7 I can also say that I have made a huge effort, and I will do my

8 best. I have the right to use up as many as six hours, but I will be

9 doing my best to perhaps use up no more than half a day. If it takes

10 longer, I will have to go on for a little longer. I will make an enormous

11 effort to do as you bid me and perhaps even wrap up by the beginning of

12 the second session of today.

13 One thing I wanted to ask you at the outset was something else.

14 At the end, I will probably have time, I'll probably have plenty of time,

15 and I hope to be able to wrap up my cross-examination today, at least

16 according to my calculations. I wish to be granted several minutes to

17 explain a certain problem. I would not like to be going into that now,

18 but if I could please be given several minutes once my cross-examination

19 is over to address this issue.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, go ahead. The Prosecutor will no doubt be

21 happy to learn that he can conserve his energy. He will not have to jump

22 up.

23 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] My entire file in relation to

24 this witness is what you see in my hands. There's nothing more. I'll

25 only be asking things that are important to my client, above all, of

1 course, as well as issues that might help the Chamber understand the

2 situation with the indictment. The first question, this is an issue that

3 was raised a while ago.

4 Cross-examination by Mr. Tapuskovic:

5 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, Witness, you were asked a while ago to say

6 what shells were used to hit certain targets. Can you please tell me what

7 shell was used to hit the TV building?

8 A. I can answer that question for you. The building was hit by a

9 modified projectile.

10 Q. Thank you. The first thing I would like to ask you is, how about

11 artillery weapons, aircraft weapons, bullets, machine-guns, snipers? You

12 don't really have any expert knowledge of those, do you? Nor do you know

13 anything about calibres, about mortars, about weapons that were used in

14 this conflict. You are no expert in the field; is that a fair

15 assessment? Or are you saying quite the opposite, that you know a great

16 deal about the weapons that were used? Which is the case, sir?

17 A. First of all, it's not true that I don't know about them. It's

18 also not true that I'm overly familiar. I can analyse traces caused by

19 certainly projectiles. I can identify the projectiles behind certain

20 traces and certain evidence found at the scene. My task is to record the

21 traces, mark them, photograph them, sketch them, and send them for

22 analysis, submit them for analysis.

23 I was taught about ballistics at the course that I took, and that

24 is quite sufficient for me to identify what caused the explosion, whether

25 it was a modified projectile, whether it was from a gun, from a mortar or

1 whatever.

2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I have to apologise in advance.

3 I hope you don't hold that against me, Your Honours.

4 Q. It's the same thing as if you, for example, took a sewing course

5 and you never managed to make a decent suit. Wouldn't that be an apt

6 simile, sir? Did you ever fire an air bomb yourself?

7 A. No, and thank God for that.

8 Q. Thank you very much. We'll get to that later on. You can confirm

9 that as a member of --

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Sachdeva.

11 MR. SACHDEVA: I'm sorry, I just notice that counsel has his

12 microphone on while the witness is speaking, and I don't want the voice

13 undistorted to come out. That's all.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We must be very sensitive to that. I have

15 been chided several times, and your microphone must be off when you're not

16 speaking.

17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Unfortunately, I'm an elderly

18 person. It may happen again, but I can only promise to do my best.

19 Q. Can I confirm -- I suppose I'm allowed to say this, aren't I?

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Since this matter is very important since it

21 relates to protective measures, I suggest that your assistant to your

22 right be assigned the job of turning your mic off when you're not

23 speaking.

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Absolutely. That is very

25 helpful. Thank you.

1 Q. Witness, you can confirm, as a member of the police, that the

2 police were part of the combat units, because sometimes you were part of

3 the operations conducted by the BH army. Might that be a fair statement?

4 A. I conducted on-site investigations following an incident.

5 Q. Can you tell me if you knew about the preparations for an

6 offensive, the offensive that eventually was launched on the 15th and the

7 16th of June, 1995? Did you know about that, sir? Is that when it began?

8 A. No, I'm not familiar with that.

9 Q. Thank you. What about all these bombs, all these incidents that

10 you have spoken about for three days? Did all of these not occur in the

11 summer months of 1995?

12 A. Yes. I provided the dates yesterday. It's all in my various

13 reports, and yes, it's true.

14 Q. Were there not ongoing uninterrupted clashes between the BH army

15 and the army of Republika Srpska at the time in those months?

16 A. Frankly, I don't know about those operations. I wasn't privy to

17 that sort of information. I never went to the headquarters or to the

18 front line. I was at the police station. I was the person in charge of

19 on-site investigations. I would go there, and I really don't know about

20 anything else.

21 Q. Thank you very much. So as a policeman, an expert in on-site

22 investigations, with expertise in the elements referring to mortars and

23 other weaponry, you were involved within a team in investigations, and

24 that was exclusively with people from the police; is that correct?

25 A. No, not only people from the police. An investigating judge was

1 there, directing the investigation.

2 Q. Was the investigating judge with you when this little girl was

3 killed that was -- a 10-year-old girl was killed, the one that was

4 mentioned often here? Were you there?

5 A. Believe me, I cannot remember exactly who was on the team. There

6 were so many investigations for me to remember that. However, in all the

7 reports you will find the list of officials involved in the

8 investigation. Whether it was headed by the investigating judge or under

9 the law, it was allowed for an inspector to do that from the security

10 services centre, or from the KDZ. It's all on paper. And I cannot

11 remember specifically this incident of the little girl being killed that

12 you are mentioning.

13 Q. That is very interesting. We have been listening to the

14 Prosecutor for three days. I haven't seen almost no document signed by an

15 investigating judge. How is that possible?

16 A. It was not up to me to sign these documents. I just confirmed

17 that these were appropriate CSB documents produced by the Minister of the

18 Interior. However, why there were no documents signed by an investigating

19 judge, it's not up to me to say. I confirmed that these were my

20 documents; I confirmed their authenticity and their form.

21 Q. I do appreciate that soldiers and high-ranking officers visited --

22 had not visited the scenes because they could have been shot at. But how

23 is it possible that there was not a single military expert who has perfect

24 knowledge about the area of weaponry attending the investigation? I never

25 saw a single report compiled by a military expert about the use of the

1 weapons that you have been testifying about for the past two or three

2 days.

3 A. That's probably a question for the investigating judge directing

4 the investigation. I know that I was appointed by an investigating judge,

5 and the other members of the team were skilled enough. Whether there were

6 any military experts on the team to determine the type of the weapons, I

7 cannot say.

8 Q. Thank you. In view of your experience that you acquired over the

9 years - you started in 1993 and then you went on in 1995 - my question

10 is: In 1995, I'm particularly interested in the 28th of August, 1995,

11 when the incident of Markale 2 took place, did you participate in the

12 investigation as a police officer?

13 A. No, I didn't.

14 Q. Not a single one?

15 A. You asked me about a single incident. I said no.

16 Q. I asked you about the first one, Markale 1.

17 A. No, I didn't conduct that investigation.

18 Q. You were questioned yesterday about 65 ter document number 00139,

19 page 1. I'm not going to show it to you, for the benefit of the witness.

20 But do you remember the report in which you mentioned a bomb with a Nazi

21 eagle and a swastika?

22 A. Yes, I remember that photograph and I took it.

23 Q. My first question would be as follows: When I ask this question,

24 we might need to go into private session, but first I will ask you

25 something else.

1 You went on to say, and the Prosecutor didn't read that, and it

2 reads:

3 "A Nazi eagle and a swastika was also found with a production --

4 with a number of the grenade which was probably originating from the

5 Second World War," and then you took a photograph of it.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Why isn't my mic responding to -- it's gone off

7 now.

8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] It's okay now. The light is on.

9 So I have to repeat it. I don't know if the witness has heard me.

10 Q. So the bomb with a Nazi eagle and a swastika and a serial number,

11 and you said that this grenade had originated from the Second World War;

12 is that correct?

13 A. Under the photograph all of this is written. I said that there

14 was a swastika; there was a symbol with wings and there was a serial

15 number. I don't have this photograph in front of me, but I said that it

16 most probably originates from World War II. I think that's what is

17 written underneath the photograph.

18 Q. Yes, you took the photograph; I understand that. But I couldn't

19 find this photograph anywhere in the file, in order to look at it and see

20 what it is all about.

21 A. It's an integral part of my photo file of the shelling of the

22 Pavle Goranin neighbourhood that we discussed yesterday. Ten shells

23 landed, plus one modified projectile. That is the incident that I was

24 talking about.

25 Q. I'm talking about that incident as well. There was fierce

1 shooting on that day. Was there any shooting by the BH army on that day?

2 A. I was in the police station, which is in close proximity, and I

3 showed that yesterday. These shells, including this unexploded one, fell

4 on the neighbourhood in the school yard. They hit the facade of the

5 buildings and one of the residential buildings was hit. I remember

6 clearly. I was there. I heard the detonations, but I heard that it was a

7 quiet day. But I underwent a stress on that day. But whether there was

8 any fighting elsewhere, I don't know. But there was no operation from

9 this location.

10 Q. As an expert in explosives and other things that you mentioned,

11 how can you explain -- how could this bomb fly through the air at all? It

12 came from World War II, and I don't know what kind of artillery weapon

13 could have been used to fire it. Are you suggesting that it was fired by

14 the assistance of a launcher or not?

15 A. These were gun shells that were fired from guns. They weigh

16 several kilogrammes, and I don't believe that they can be fired by a

17 launcher. Two shells did not explode; one was found intact with clear

18 symbols, and the second one ricochetted, flew over a number of metres and

19 hit a house. It was so powerful that it could not have been launched from

20 a launcher.

21 Q. So you're suggesting that the army of Republika Srpska had guns

22 from the Second World War?

23 A. No, I'm not suggesting that. I'm just saying that these shells

24 had these symbols on them. I didn't say that the guns were from World War

25 II.

1 Q. So what could have been used to launch these projectiles in order

2 for them to reach the specific location? Can you explain that?

3 A. Probably the calibre of the ammunition is the same, but maybe it

4 is an outdated production. I just documented what I saw on the

5 projectile.

6 Q. Since Belgrade and the whole of Serbia throughout the Second World

7 War was being bombed, and there were a lot of unexploded bombs, are you

8 suggesting that this bomb had been brought from somewhere in Serbia in

9 order to be fired from a gun at Sarajevo? Is that what you are

10 suggesting?

11 A. I'm just telling you that the fact is that at the place of the

12 explosion I found this projectile and what I saw on it. I found it

13 peculiar as well, but I had to photograph what I had seen. And I put that

14 in my report. That's how it is. I'm not suggesting anything about what

15 has been brought and from where. I just want to say what I -- that that

16 is what I found and that is what I photographed. I'm not making any

17 suggestions.

18 Q. Can you answer this question: This photograph that is in the

19 file - unfortunately I was not able to find it - was it shown in the media

20 in Sarajevo and worldwide, thanks to your report?

21 A. This is the first time I hear of it.

22 Q. Was that the basis for the allegations that were often put

23 forward, that this kind of bomb could have been launched only by Serbian

24 Nazis?

25 A. Believe me, I don't know, and I don't want to discuss that. I did

1 my job professionally. I photographed it. I made no suggestions

2 whatsoever. There was a serial number on the projectile, plus the eagle

3 and the swastika. Whether anyone else made use of that, I'm not going to

4 go into that.

5 Q. I must make a direct suggestion to you because I have certain

6 proof in that regard. You have planted this projectile. You brought it

7 to the location and then you used it for propaganda purposes. And based

8 on that, it was often written in newspapers that the Serbs were Nazis,

9 using even bombs from the Second World War. It was absolutely impossible

10 for it to come from the positions of the army of Republika Srpska. Can

11 you answer that?

12 A. Yes, I can. There is no reason for you to accuse me of planting

13 it. You have no proof of that. In the photo file, there is a photograph

14 which shows that the projectile ricochetted an asphalt surface and hit the

15 corner of a building. You probably can find a witness statement who said

16 that their house was hit, that there was a detonation, that there was an

17 explosion, in which case --

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Witness, just answer the question directly. It's

19 a very serious accusation that has been put to you and you must answer

20 it. The accusation is that you planted the projectile. Give us a direct

21 answer to that.

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. I had not brought it. I

23 just photographed the projectile that was found at that location.

24 JUDGE MINDUA: Excuse me, Mr. Tapuskovic.

25 [Interpretation] Witness, just a question which comes to mind

1 while Defence counsel is putting questions to you about these bombs with

2 Nazi insignia on them.

3 According to your experience, are you able to determine how this

4 bomb is -- the symbols that were on the bomb itself, had they been put

5 there by the manufacturer or by the people who use it, do you think?

6 Because sometimes pilots or the military are able to draw symbols on the

7 bombs they use.

8 So this is my question: Do you know how the bomb is? Is it a

9 Second -- World War II bomb or not? Was the insignia put there by the

10 manufacturer or by the users, do you think? Thank you.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have to say that as soon as I saw

12 this bomb, I can say that I had never seen anything like that before. I

13 noticed that it was engraved by a machine, not by hand, which means that

14 this serial number was embossed by a machine; also the swastika and all

15 other symbols. And that was the first time I saw something like that.

16 That is why I photographed it and sent it for further analysis by an

17 expert. That was my first encounter with a projectile of that nature.

18 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, yesterday, during

20 this witness's testimony, you requested him to explain -- and I wrote it

21 down. He said as follows: "We did that." You asked him to answer the

22 question what that meant, what did he mean by, "We did that," and he

23 responded that they had conducted investigations.

24 Q. Mr. Witness, is that correct?

25 A. I don't know specifically what you referring to, "We did that."

1 If His Honour asked me if we conducted the investigation, we did that.

2 There was always a team on the ground.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, I remember quite clearly. You referred

4 quite frequently to "We went there," "We did this" and "We did that," and

5 I asked you, "Who constituted 'we'?" and you answered, "The team."

6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm going to offer to the Chamber

7 document DD00377. That's a witness statement given by this witness on the

8 11th of March, 1997. I would like this statement to be shown to the

9 witness. Page number 2.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva.

11 MR. SACHDEVA: Sorry, Mr. President, just to ensure that we go

12 into private session if the witness's statement is being shown.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. If the witness's name is there, then we

14 have to go into private session. It's the witness's statement, so I

15 presume his name is there, so we'll go into private session.

16 [Private session]

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 1365 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 [Open session]

19 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.

20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. I will be asking you about the TV building incident. Can you

22 please look at paragraph 5. You say that the incident occurred only 150

23 metres west of your police station. Is that not true, sir?

24 A. I see the sentence. What about this being true or not?

25 Q. Is it true that your police station was at a distance of 150

1 metres from the TV building?

2 A. No.

3 Q. You say: "The incident occurred a mere 150 metres from my police

4 station."

5 A. That was in reference to the incident described in the passage

6 above, in the paragraph above.

7 Q. Two paragraphs down the page, is that also not in reference to the

8 TV building incident?

9 "In this case, we didn't find any traces of rockets. There is a

10 possibility that the projectile dropped its motor during the flight."

11 A. We found traces on the roof. It's not that we found no traces of

12 the rocket. We didn't find the rocket motors; that's what I was saying.

13 You saw the photographs; you saw the explosion -- what the explosion was

14 like. The experts stayed behind and looked for their evidence, any

15 remaining bits. I found nothing at the time and that is why the documents

16 reflect just that.

17 Q. In other words, we can say that nobody ever found those rocket

18 motors. It's impossible to explain how the bomb ever reached the TV

19 building. Can you explain that?

20 A. I can't say nobody ever found those. I didn't find those. The

21 investigation carried on for several days pursuant to a decision by the

22 investigating magistrate. He can have other people look for it. I

23 photographed the situation as it was on the day I came there, and that's

24 what was eventually entered in the report.

25 Q. Witness, what I'm putting to you is this: You fired that rocket,

1 or, at any rate, someone from your own team, in order to stage this, the

2 intention being to mock justice, to laugh in the face of justice. I'm

3 putting it to you that you misused your powers and that you personally or

4 someone else from your team did this or brought this about. Can you

5 answer that question, please?

6 A. The answer is no, I didn't do this.

7 Q. I will show you another document --

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: You have answered no, that you didn't do this,

9 but the question also related to that act being carried out by some other

10 member of your team. Are you able to answer that as well? Did anybody

11 else from your team carry out the act?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, we didn't do that.

13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have a document.

14 The document that is the most reliable document before a court like this,

15 because it's a document by the UN and by the UN observers. The document

16 states clearly who fired that air bomb and where it was fired from. We

17 have sufficient copies available for everyone. I can show this document

18 to everyone and I can show it to the witness as well, because it was him

19 personally or someone from that team who had fired a bomb at the TV

20 building in Sarajevo.

21 There's the B/C/S, and we have the English, too. I received this

22 a long time ago. I was going to use it at a later stage, but I believe

23 the Chamber should be familiar with this document this early.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let me see if I understand you correctly. You

25 say you have a document from the UN and the UN observers which show that

1 the firing was done by him personally or by someone from his team; is that

2 what you are saying?

3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Show the document to the Chamber, and show it to

5 the prosecuting counsel.

6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The Prosecutor is familiar with

7 this document. They have known about it for a very long time.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'll take a minute to have a look at it.

9 [Trial Chamber confers]

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: What do you wish to do with this document,

11 Mr. Tapuskovic?

12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I want to read to the witness

13 about the fact that the projectile which hit the TV building had been

14 fired from territory under the control of the BH army. The flight was a

15 low one, and what happened eventually happened. After that, he ran over;

16 he carried out an on-site investigation of something that he himself had

17 caused. He conducted an on-site investigation to prove that the

18 projectile had been fired by the Serbs, whereas --

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: You want to put the statements in this document

20 to the witness.

21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Of course.

22 Q. Sir, Mr. Witness, you have in front of you the report of the

23 sector staff of the UN Military Observers; can you see that. It is sent

24 by the UNMO staff, Sarajevo Sector; is that correct?

25 A. I'm reading.

1 Q. June 1995, can you see that, too, sir?

2 A. Yes, I see that. June 1995.

3 Q. It goes on. "Prepared by Captain Hanson, Operations Officer."

4 Can you see that, too?

5 A. Yes, I can.

6 Q. "Approved by Captain Second Class Allan, Deputy Commander." Can

7 you see that?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And then it says: "Subject: Special report about the impact of a

10 projectile against the TV building." Can you see that?

11 A. Yes, I can.

12 Q. Let us move on to the next paragraph:

13 "20092 OB June, one military observer of the UN who, when arriving

14 at the PTT building, parked his vehicle in the lower area, the parking

15 area, observed the following." Can you see that?

16 A. Yes, I can.

17 Q. "Heard and saw an outgoing projectile across the parking place and

18 road from grid BP," and then he states the grid reference. "The place is

19 in BH territory approximately 1.800 metres from the nearest confrontation

20 line." Can you see that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And then: "Dust was seen and a low-flying projectile heading

23 towards the TV building." Can you see that?

24 A. Yes, I can.

25 Q. And then: "The projectile was following a low trajectory,

1 travelling directly from firing point to target, and hit the TV building

2 on the northern side, facing the British Cymbelline building." I can't

3 read that word. Is that correct?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Is that what it says?

6 A. Yes.

7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will not read any

8 more. There are other issues being raised here that might be

9 interesting. But what I'd lake to ask the witness now is:

10 Q. Having read the document, again, were you the ones who organised

11 this whole thing, who staged this whole thing?

12 A. No, we were not the ones who organised this whole thing.

13 Q. Did you get an order to go there quickly and conduct an on-site

14 investigation, just like you described to the Judges yesterday?

15 A. No, I didn't go anywhere quickly. I didn't run anywhere. I

16 waited for the remaining members of the investigation team to arrive, and

17 it wasn't before then that we set out to -- set out for the scene of the

18 explosion.

19 Q. What about this? Isn't this something that was shown by all TV

20 stations worldwide, especially the people in Sarajevo, and what people

21 talked about was yet another heinous crime by the Serbs, simply because a

22 media building had been targeted?

23 A. The journalists were probably just doing their job. I was doing

24 mine. I had a lot on my plate that day. I conducted an on-site

25 investigate, and I have no idea what the journalists later reported to the

1 world. All I know is that there were journalists inside the TV building.

2 Some of them were injured. As for what else they were doing, I don't

3 know. I suppose they were doing their job, just as I was doing mine.

4 Q. Perhaps that is why NATO later targeted the TV building in

5 Belgrade. I won't be going into that. That would be speculation on my

6 part. But in other words, based on --

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, no comments.

8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. Witness, you not only wrote --

10 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Well I have to say this -- Your

11 Honours, I have to say it: I'd be thrown out of the courtroom if I said

12 anything like that in a Serbian court. Fortunately I am here now and I

13 can confront the witness in no uncertain terms.

14 Q. Witness, you lied in your report, did you not?

15 A. No, I didn't. There are photographs --

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva is on his feet.

17 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I have to object to this -- well,

18 largely to this question. It seems to me that counsel has shown the

19 witness a document prefaced on the fact that him and possibly members of

20 his team fired this shell. And as Your Honours can see and as counsel

21 knows, there is no such mention at all in this document about who fired

22 this shell, let alone the witness or any member of his team.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: But he is not saying that the lie is based on the

24 document, derived from what is in the document. I'd agree with you if

25 that was what he was saying. It seems to me that he is just putting to

1 him that his testimony is false, and I believe he is entitled to do that.

2 That is his case.

3 MR. SACHDEVA: Excuse me, Mr. President, may I continue?

4 I agree with that, of course. What I would say is that in the

5 witness's report and in his narrative of the sketch, all the witness does

6 and all the witness has done is determine the direction of fire. When I

7 started off my examination-in-chief, the witness clearly stated that he

8 was not able to determine the origin of fire. And it is my understanding

9 that in his evidence he has never stated the origin of fire.

10 And so it's incorrect, in my personal submission, for counsel to

11 put to the witness that he is lying in this regard.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: All right.

13 Well, let me ask Mr. Tapuskovic to clarify. When you say the

14 witness is lying, in relation to what evidence does that relate?

15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Based on this document and

16 everything else that was done during the on-site investigation, I am

17 convinced that it was either him or someone close to him - and I'm going

18 to demonstrate that in the latter part of my examination, that the witness

19 stage-managed other things as well - I believe that either the witness or

20 someone standing close to him fired this projectile and then ascribed this

21 to the Serbian side, and I stand by this statement categorically.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: You have put that to him and he has said no, so

23 let us move on.

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. Not only that you did what I claim you had done, you did something

1 even worse, and I'm going to tell you what it is.

2 The body of your friend who was killed was brought by you -- I

3 don't know where he was killed or how, in the fighting. I'm sorry for any

4 lost life. But I put it to that you that you brought the dead body of

5 your friend, with the help of someone else because you couldn't do it on

6 your own, and placed it in the atrium or the room where you allegedly

7 photographed him. Did you do that or not?

8 A. No, I didn't.

9 Q. And this small amount of blood that was found on the scene where

10 he was allegedly shot, did you smear that blood there?

11 A. No. A pool -- a puddle of blood was found. I marked it with a

12 number, I photographed it, and I sketched it.

13 Q. That's not a puddle of blood at all. If a person gets killed,

14 there should be much more blood. I put it to that you that it's not the

15 blood that belongs to this person that was killed at that location. I'm

16 putting it to you that you planted the blood traces there.

17 A. No, I didn't.

18 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm going now to

19 present another document to the witness. Can you please bear with me for

20 a minute. It's one of his statements.

21 May I just sit down for a second, please, Your Honours.

22 [Trial Chamber confers]

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, proceed, Mr. Tapuskovic.

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. You claim that you had brought him into the building.

1 A. I don't remember saying that I brought him into the building, and

2 in any case, it wasn't me who did that.

3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I'm not going to

4 correct that. We have to go through the same procedure in order to

5 present to the witness the statement dated the 24th of April, 2006. Can

6 the witness just take a look at it in order for us to save time, please.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Mr. Prosecutor, is there any need for

8 caution here in relation to the protective measures?

9 MR. SACHDEVA: Well, if my friend is going to be showing the first

10 page and any page with his name on there, I understand that we're in open

11 session, so for that part of the examination, perhaps we can go into

12 private session. I understand that maybe the monitor is not being

13 broadcast, so in that respect, it's okay.

14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness confirm that he

15 signed this, what is on the table.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Are we in an open session or in a

18 private session?

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: We are in open session.

20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] But the witness has to be shown

21 page 2, and I believe he has it already. I'm just going to ask the

22 witness one thing.

23 Q. If you please look at the first, second, third, fourth paragraph.

24 Here it is.

25 "At least some of the -- at least one policemen was killed in the

1 explosion at the TV building on the 28th of June, 1995, when he ran to the

2 impact area before the war had exploded."

3 How is it possible, when you have a bomb flying at a low velocity,

4 seen by everyone, incapable of killing anyone, how is it possible for any

5 person to run exactly to the place where the bomb is expected to land?

6 Can you explain that?

7 A. Yes, I can. I made this statement in 2006; that's 11 years after

8 the event. There was discussion about this immediately after the

9 investigation. When this man was killed, I didn't even know that he was a

10 policeman. I learned that only later. He was at the place where there

11 was a parked bus. There's a photograph of a destroyed parked bus. That's

12 the northern side of the atrium.

13 According to the statements, and that's why I say here, the

14 witness said that immediately prior to the explosion the policeman was

15 close to the bus. When the grenade ricochetted, the policeman ran across

16 the atrium by the place where the explosion took place in the staircase.

17 And according to the marks on his back caused by the explosion, it

18 indicates that he had his back turned to the place of explosion. Some

19 witnesses claim that he was near the bus when the explosion took place,

20 that he had been found at the staircase and then he was taken to the place

21 where he was photographed.

22 Q. Witness, you said something completely different yesterday. You

23 did not -- had not seen the policeman before he had been brought. You had

24 not seen him running towards the place where the bomb was going to land.

25 You told us a completely different story, and I must put it again to you:

1 You are lying.

2 A. I told you a minute ago that I made this statement in 2006, 11

3 years after the incident. It is only reasonable to expect that you heard

4 stories and discussions in police stations that this man was a policeman.

5 That's why I said that it was a policeman who was killed, and that is the

6 person who I was referred to.

7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I must say this

8 directly to the witness:

9 Q. I believe that by stage-managing the shooting at the TV building

10 and this fabrication with the body of his friends and everything that he

11 did, you, sir, committed a war crime, number 1; and secondly, you are

12 obstructing justice and misleading the Court.

13 A. That is not true.

14 Q. Thank you very much. In the light of what you did, I put it to

15 you, and kindly answer me: You must be fully aware of how things were

16 staged on Vase Miskina Street, in Markale -- in Markale 2; you must be

17 fully aware and familiar with that.

18 A. I just told you that I didn't conduct an investigation on Markale

19 1 and Markale 2.

20 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, what counsel appears to me to be

21 doing is making statements from the bench, evidence from the bench, as in

22 Markale 1 being staged, for example. On what basis does he say that?

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, I mean, that's his case. He is entitled to

24 put it. In fact, he has a duty to put it. Those are his instructions. I

25 mean, he will bring evidence. If he doesn't bring the evidence, then it

1 falls to the ground. But he must put his case, and that is his case.

2 Go ahead.

3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, when the witness

4 was questioned -- correction, when Mr. Nicolai was questioned, in response

5 to the Prosecutor's question, he replied that those were the bombs and he

6 used the word "sow," s-o-w. I'm not exactly sure what kind of language

7 I'm now talking, but everybody is familiar with that term.

8 Q. Can the witness explain what the word "sow" means?

9 A. The sow is a female pig.

10 Q. Right, because that is a big pig that just causes damage and soils

11 the place that it enters, but it cannot endanger anyone's life. It just

12 makes the place dirty and that's all. Were these bombs exactly something

13 like that?

14 A. I had no contacts with the pig.

15 Q. I have no doubt about that. But I put this to you: You planted

16 dead bodies of people killed elsewhere in order to prove that these kinds

17 of bombs can also kill; is that correct?

18 A. No, it's not correct.

19 Q. Thank you. In order to demonstrate to you that you were capable

20 of doing that, I'm going now to move to this incident that was extensively

21 being dealt with - that's a terrible tragedy - when this little girl was

22 killed.

23 Let us look at what you did in this particular instance.

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] For that purpose, I would kindly

25 ask --

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Proceed.

2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. Let us see how you, as such a skilled police investigator,

4 conducted this investigation. I have no other choice, although I'd rather

5 not have these pictures shown. Although this is still being dubbed as a

6 victim of the Serbian aggression, because I have a question in this

7 respect. I would appreciate if we can see these two photographs that are

8 a terrible story of a terrible plight of a little girl. That's P125, page

9 4, and I think it's 125, page 5.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Didn't the Prosecutor show them?

11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, that's why I am saying

12 that they have already been tendered.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: So I will allow them to be put on the screen for

14 no longer than 30 seconds.

15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] No longer than five seconds, Your

16 Honour. There is no need for any longer time. And then I'm going to ask

17 my question.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Go ahead, yes.

19 It's not those.

20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I have the number here. P125 --

21 oh, here it is. That would be enough. Can we stop this. I'm also unable

22 to look at this picture.

23 Q. Mr. Witness, you said that you took these pictures in the morgue.

24 A. I said yesterday that it wasn't me who took these two photographs.

25 Q. But you did say that they were taken in the morgue.

1 A. I said that it wasn't me who took the photographs. And they were

2 taken in the morgue.

3 Q. That's how I understand it. Is there a sofa in the morgue? Is it

4 possible, really, that there is a sofa in the morgue? Does this not prove

5 that this photograph was taken in a flat?

6 A. As far as I can remember, by just looking at the photograph, this

7 is no sofa; this is a concrete table on which bodies are dissected. There

8 is an aerial view, as it were, of the body, and you can see a part of this

9 concrete table used to dissect bodies.

10 Q. It may be my mistake, but I'll check that so we don't need to show

11 the pictures again.

12 What about these photographs, these positively horrific

13 photographs? Did these not make the round of the world on that day and

14 the following days? All the TV stations across the world were displaying

15 these horrific images, saying that this child was a victim of the Serb

16 aggression.

17 A. I'm not familiar with that.

18 Q. I saw the images myself at the time. I was, myself, truly shaken

19 by the fact that I was a member of that nation. The reaction was

20 particularly strong from the non-governmental organisations in Serbia who

21 asked us to go down on other knees and do penance for other people's

22 sins. Did you hear them repeating that by some sort of litany all the

23 time, that we should bear the sins committed by someone else, even those

24 committed by some other people belonging to our own nation?

25 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I don't -- in my submission, the

1 commentary is in appropriate or unwarranted, I would submit.

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, we don't allow commentary. I thought it

3 was a question.

4 What is the question, Mr. Tapuskovic?

5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. My question was: Did he read in the papers, did he see on

7 television, that we in Serbia were being asked all the time to repent, as

8 should all those who were involved in the conflict, not just the Serbs?

9 I'm asking him whether he read about this or saw this in Serbia at the

10 time. If not, not.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Did you read that in the newspapers?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: We have to take a break now.

14 We'll break for 20 minutes.

15 --- Recess taken at 3.47 p.m.

16 --- On resuming at 4.08 p.m.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, proceed.

18 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I couldn't find my way around the

19 document back then, so I forgot to tender these into evidence as Defence

20 exhibits. Those two, D00-0319, the statement, his statement, and

21 DD00-0377, for those two --

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Are those the statements that you just showed the

23 witness?

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: On what basis are you tendering them? The

1 witness didn't confirm anything in the statements. You can put them in

2 when you're presenting your case and you can bring somebody who can

3 substantiate what is in the statement. But the witness didn't

4 substantiate anything in it, he didn't acknowledge any of the propositions

5 that you put as being derived from the statement, so as far as I'm

6 concerned, they are not to be admitted. They must await the presentation

7 of your case, or, indeed, some other Prosecution witness through whom they

8 may properly be tendered into evidence.

9 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, he denied his own

10 statements, so at some point he must not have been telling the truth. He

11 denied his own statements, allegations made in his own statements. He

12 denied it. He said it wasn't true. He said he never said that.

13 Therefore, that must be evidence.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: His own statements are already in evidence,

15 aren't they? We're not dealing with his statements. You're dealing with

16 the UN documents, the two --

17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] No, no. I would like to have

18 that document marked for identification, for that document to be marked

19 for identification. But I'm talking about his two statements.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: There's a misunderstanding. I had the impression

21 you were speaking about the UNMO document which you had asked the witness

22 to read and on the basis of which you put certain questions. You want

23 this to be marked for identification?

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: Yes

25 [Trial Chamber confers]

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we'll mark it for identification.

2 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, the UNMO document will be marked for

4 identification with the reference D31.

5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The statements that I showed the

6 witness, that is, DD00-0319 and DD00-0377, I tender those two into

7 evidence.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Prosecutor, yes.

9 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, I would object to the

10 tendering into evidence of these witness statements.

11 Firstly, counsel has said that he has denied material in those

12 statements. I am of the opinion that this has not been the case,

13 firstly.

14 Secondly, counsel can put propositions from those statements to

15 the witness and the witness gives his evidence in court under oath, and

16 typically those statements are not to be tendered into evidence. It's

17 perfectly proper for counsel to confront the witness with what he has

18 maintained in the statement, but those statements do not, in the

19 Prosecution's submission, go into evidence.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: We are not with you, Mr. Prosecutor, in your

22 submissions. It's the witness's statement and it's for the Chamber to

23 make of it what we think.

24 So we will have them tendered into evidence, and please give them

25 a number.

1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the witness statement dated 11 March

2 1997 will become Exhibit D32, while the witness statement dated the 24th

3 of April, 2006, will become Exhibit D33.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

5 MR. SACHDEVA: Might I ask that they be tendered under seal, since

6 they will have --

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Under seal.

8 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes.

9 THE REGISTRAR: Of course, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, thank you.

11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'll be dropping a

12 number of questions.

13 Q. Witness, you allege that the girl was killed by a piece of an air

14 bomb that tore through a wall and into the room where this girl was. Is

15 that what you say?

16 A. That's what the report says. The girl was lying in a cot, in a

17 flat. I didn't photograph that, and I explained the reasons.

18 Q. My question was clear. You conducted the on-site investigation,

19 didn't you? In your report we find the claim that the bomb tore through

20 the wall, killing this girl who was actually inside the flat. Is that not

21 true?

22 A. I wrote that in my report on the day I completed the on-site

23 investigation.

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown

25 P124. This is a photograph showing the wall of that building. If

1 possible, can we please zoom in as much as possible so that we may be able

2 to see the actual impact of this piece of the air bomb. Can we zoom in,

3 please.

4 Q. Witness, you say that the bomb tore through this wall; right?

5 A. I wrote in my report that a girl had been killed by the

6 projectile. It's not the entire bomb that tore through the wall; it was a

7 piece a fragment of the bomb that did.

8 Q. Just in order to avoid any misunderstanding, Witness, I must read

9 to you -- read back to what you said on the 13th of January in this very

10 courtroom. The page is 1213, and the line is 21 through 25. You say as

11 follows:

12 "I arrived with the team at the scene, and I inspected the scene.

13 I found traces or evidence of an explosion which I marked with numbers. I

14 photographed the evidence."

15 You say you made -- put together an entire set of the photographs

16 of the scene and the surrounding area, and you also sketched the scene,

17 you made a sketch of the scene. This was a provisional sketch, a

18 provisional report, whereas you appear to have completed the final version

19 of the report upon your return to the police station. Is that right?

20 That's what you said yesterday or two days ago; I'm not certain.

21 A. That's right.

22 Q. Is it true that on 1236, page 1236, that page, lines 5 through 13,

23 you were asked by the Prosecutor about this. You said you conducted a

24 regular on-site investigation and took photographs, as usual, and that the

25 actual victims were photographed by other members of the team. Is that

1 right?

2 A. What I said is that there was no victim for me to photograph at

3 the scene. Following approval from our boss, the actual victim of this

4 incident was later photographed in the morgue.

5 Q. In other words, you were the first to arrive on the scene, weren't

6 you? You did not go into the room, did you, the room in which you say

7 this young girl had been killed. You didn't even try to look at anything

8 inside the room. Rather, you made some drawings outside in the street.

9 Would that seem to be correct?

10 A. At the moment this occurred, I knew nothing to indicate that

11 anybody had been killed. I did say that yesterday. When I arrived at the

12 scene, I knew nothing about that.

13 Q. So this most dreadful horrific hair-raising event that occurred,

14 you spent so much time making your drawings but you never bothered to find

15 out that there was a victim, a little girl; right?

16 A. Yes, that's quite right. To put it simply, I didn't know at the

17 time.

18 Q. Very well. You go on to state this. The reference is still the

19 same.

20 "In this specific case" - and that's when you arrived at the

21 police station - "in this specific case, that was what my bosses had

22 agreed to do." Do you agree that my reading of that was this: Did they

23 agree -- or did they order you to, in fact, not go there at all?

24 A. No. You misunderstand me. When I say that my bosses agreed on

25 something, what they agreed on was a different matter, about me leaving

1 that area and going to the morgue, to avoid risking my life. Sarajevo was

2 being shelled, shells were falling, so this job was done on my behalf by a

3 colleague from the same department. Our bosses just sent us to different

4 places in order to reduce the amount of actual footwork.

5 It was one of my colleagues who did the job. He went to the

6 morgue following approval from the bosses. I'm not talking about the

7 bosses of this particular team. I'm talking about my boss in my

8 department and his boss, too. They had agreed that we could do it like

9 this. We reduced the footwork. We reduced the fuel that we used up; we

10 didn't even have to use vehicles. So it was my colleague. And when I

11 talked about our bosses agreeing, that was what it was in reference to.

12 It wasn't anything to do with the on-site investigation or what happened

13 there.

14 Q. So you were a lot more interested in saving up on your fuel. Is

15 that what you're trying to suggest, sir?

16 A. No. I just wanted to save my hide. That's what I was trying to

17 save.

18 Q. All right. Once it had been established that this child had lost

19 her life, was anybody sent over to actually make a sketch inside the flat

20 to see where the child was, to mark the evidence, to find the hole in the

21 wall torn by this dreadful weapon? Did anybody go and do that? Wasn't

22 that the fundamental thing to do when carrying out an on-site

23 investigation and when you have a death, anybody's death, let alone the

24 death of a 10-year-old girl?

25 A. I didn't go there because I had been told about this. Nobody told

1 me to go there. Why wasn't this done? I don't know. I don't think there

2 was anybody left in the flat.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Can you tell us exactly what information you

4 received before you went to the scene?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All I was told was that some sort of

6 a projectile had exploded and that people had been injured. I didn't know

7 who been injured or how many. I did not know that anyone had actually

8 been killed.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: How soon after --

10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the President, please.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: How soon after receiving that information did you

12 arrive at the scene?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't remember exactly now, but I

14 know that we were waiting for our colleagues from the security services

15 centre. They were in downtown Sarajevo. Once they arrived, we took off

16 together. Up until that point in time, it was the police securing the

17 scene to the extent that it could be done at all.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Well, give me an approximate time. Was it

19 half an hour or an hour before you arrived at the scene?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think the exact time we got there

21 is stated in the report, but it must have been over an hour.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: When you arrived at the scene, you're telling

23 counsel that you went to the street and started making markings on the

24 street. You didn't go into the house to make any inquiry about the

25 injured?

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't arrive on my own. I never

2 conducted an investigation alone. It wasn't part of my procedure to go

3 into the house and actually interview any witnesses. This is something

4 that was done by one of my colleagues. What I did was photograph the

5 scene, inspect the scene of the explosion, and that's what I did. I

6 didn't actually head into the house to ask any questions.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: So your colleagues -- some of your colleagues

8 immediately went into the house.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. And I think they compiled

10 their own reports about that.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

12 JUDGE HARHOFF: Witness, could you, in extension of President

13 Robinson's questions, tell us whether the hole that is shown on your

14 photograph there actually went through the wall? It's a bit difficult to

15 see, and this is why I, too, would have fancied that if you had taken a

16 photograph from within, then we could have seen that there is a hole all

17 the way through the wall and not just in the wall. But can you clarify as

18 to whether the markings that you have made here on this photo was a hole

19 that went through the wall, all the way through the wall?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Frankly, I don't know.

21 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.

22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Mr. Witness, how is it possible that you don't know? How do you

24 explain that? Did you go closer to look into this hole, to see whether it

25 goes all through the wall, and if it endangered anyone's life? How is

1 that possible?

2 A. When I came there, I went from the place of the explosion. I had

3 no information about casualties. I found blood-stains outside the

4 building; therefore, I didn't have any information that there was any

5 casualty in the building. Later on, my colleagues were given this

6 information, and there is an official report to that effect, and I made

7 these photographs as you see them.

8 Q. That was not what I asked you. We saw your drawing. It was being

9 shown by the Prosecution for more than an hour. What I'm asking you,

10 Mr. Witness, is did you go closer to look into the wall, to see if it goes

11 all the way through the wall? How is it possible that you didn't do that?

12 A. I didn't check that. All I know is that the damage was caused by

13 an impact of a projectile.

14 Q. No. I put it to you that you had been instructed to tell a lie,

15 and you're lying again. Is that true?

16 A. No, it's not true.

17 Q. Can you explain to the Chamber at all how is it possible that in

18 such a terrible incident involving a loss of life of a 10-year-old child,

19 how is it possible at all that no one went into the building, into the

20 flat, to see on the spot whether there was any blood there and primarily -

21 primarily - whether there was a hole through the wall? You don't have

22 this information and that is why you are making this up.

23 A. Whatever I did --

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: I just to remind you, Mr. Tapuskovic, that in

25 answer to me, he did say that some of his colleagues went into the

1 building, so it would be incorrect to put that no one went into the

2 building. That is not his evidence anyhow.

3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] It was probably my mistake.

4 Q. But even if they did go into the building and into the flat, how

5 can you explain, then -- how is it possible that you have no photographs

6 of that? Okay, the child was removed. But there was no photograph

7 showing that there was a lot of blood. There must have been a lot of

8 blood when this child was dying. No member of your team photographed the

9 scene. You didn't show us any traces of blood. And most importantly, you

10 didn't photograph anything in this case, that is, the interior, a

11 photograph of the interior. Why did no one do that?

12 A. I'm telling you that my colleagues entered the building. I didn't

13 say that they went into the flat. I don't know and I had no information

14 about any child being killed. Most probably they also didn't have that

15 information.

16 Based on later information to the effect that this girl had been

17 killed, they probably compiled their reports. I didn't enter the flat,

18 and I didn't even know that I was supposed to go there and that there was

19 anyone killed there. That was subsequently received information. Why my

20 colleagues went and looked -- whether they looked for people who were in

21 the flat. But I myself didn't go into the flat to photograph the scene,

22 and that is what I said yesterday.

23 Q. But the photograph of this child was broadcast around the world in

24 order to illustrate the atrocities committed by Serbian criminals; is that

25 true?

1 A. I don't know about that.

2 Q. Besides, you didn't do that on your own. You were just following

3 orders of your bosses; is that true? And then they organised the whole

4 thing in order to establish a link between this dead child and an air

5 bomb; is that correct?

6 A. I was doing my job and I explained in what way I was doing it.

7 Q. By making your sketches, you conceded to be an instrument in this

8 kind of manipulation. This is what I put to you. Yes or no?

9 A. You are just claiming that without asking any question. You just

10 now asked me the question.

11 Well, my job, and I said that at the beginning of this testimony,

12 was to make sketches and to fix the physical evidence. It wasn't up to me

13 to claim anything, and my job was to record only what I saw on the scene.

14 Q. I put it to you that you had been ordered to do what you did; you

15 knew very well what you saw, that the bomb didn't penetrate the wall. You

16 knew very well, just like everybody else knew, that this little child was

17 killed. But perhaps this child had been killed someplace else, maybe by a

18 Serbian shell but maybe by a shell of the BH army, and this child was used

19 in that way in order to prove a crime while the perpetrator had not been

20 identified. And this bomb, which was known as "sow," could only make so

21 much damage as the animal can make the mess.

22 A. My job was not to go on the scene on my initiative. You say that

23 somebody forced me to do that. The hierarchy is well known. My duty was

24 to conduct an investigation. I had been informed, it was the job of an

25 investigating judge to set up a team. I wasn't being manipulated. Nobody

1 told me to do this or do that; photograph this or photograph that. I

2 marked the physical evidence with numbers, and I explained what I found on

3 the scene.

4 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, of course, the

5 procedure in this Court is a mixed procedure. It mixes common law and

6 civil law; it mixes both systems.

7 So what you're doing might be acceptable, but as far as I'm

8 concerned, I mean, this witness is under oath. He is a policeman, an

9 investigator. When a crime has been made committed, he does his job. He

10 goes on site to do his job. And you, as a Defence counsel, you're

11 entitled, of course, to challenge his findings, but when you are saying

12 that he lied, that he was sent by the authorities to make up -- to make up

13 something, you know, for ideological reasons, you have a right to say this

14 but you have to prove it.

15 And if I look at the transcript and what you've said so far, you

16 are always repeating that he's lying, that he was working for -- that

17 everything was staged and so on. But so far I have seen no evidence to

18 back all this, to back that he was working under orders and that he was

19 working for an ideology.

20 As a policeman, he's doing his job, his investigation. It might

21 be that the bodies that he inspected might have been planted there. I

22 don't know by what force. Maybe he doesn't even know about it. But he is

23 under oath.

24 Your job is to prove all this. If you just repeat this, we're not

25 going anywhere. And it was a comment I wanted to the make, because,

1 remember, this is a witness who is under oath.

2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, look, what I wanted

3 to hear from him was an explanation for some obvious things, and he failed

4 to provide this explanation. I still maintain that the bomb that hit the

5 television building and this incident as well was a fabrication that can

6 easily be proven.

7 I attended a trial as amicus curiae, and by His Honour Mr.

8 Robinson I had been cautioned on a few occasions that I have to ask the

9 question directly if I want to challenge the credibility of this witness,

10 and that I was expected to clearly state my position.

11 What I've learned over the years in this court is that I find it

12 very difficult to say to someone that they are lying. I had almost been

13 thrown out of the courtroom in Sombor when I told the witness that he was

14 lying. If I am denied the possibility in this court, where I have been

15 acting for about two years, to say to the witness that he was lying, if I

16 had any powers, this witness should not have been allowed to leave this

17 court because he was obstructing justice. Obstructing justice, preventing

18 justice, is a serious crime. This kind of manipulation is also a serious

19 crime that is punishable everywhere in the world.

20 During this examination, and it seems that I'm going to prolong

21 it, it seems that he told a lie so many times, and I will demonstrate this

22 to you. Therefore, I'm compelled to say and use this word, although I

23 find it very difficult, to call him a liar. I kindly ask Your Honours to

24 trust me on this.

25 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] I believe that we understand each

1 other. But my concern is that I want to have a demonstration of what you

2 are putting forth. Just stating it is not enough. We need to have it

3 backed.

4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Then maybe I should just sit

5 down. It seems that I didn't ask any relevant question. Maybe I should

6 sit down if you believe that my sole intention is to call this witness a

7 liar. And he, indeed, is lying and I'm going to repeat this as many times

8 as necessary. That is what I learned in this court, and I think that's an

9 excellent thing, that when someone is not telling the truth, to tell them

10 that they are lying.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: For the record, the statement attributed to me

12 was Judge Mindua's. That's the last statement from the Bench.

13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Maybe, Your Honours, Mr. Robinson

14 didn't read everything. I know what I said.

15 In order not to be accused of politicising, but it is true that

16 this kind of stage-managing was the reason that compelled the

17 international community to interfere eventually and this witness took part

18 in the --

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let's not waste time. If you have nothing more

20 to cross-examine on, let us terminate it.

21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I said that I am going to use

22 half the time that the Prosecutor used, and I'm going to skip many

23 questions that I originally intended to ask. I'm not going to ask any

24 irrelevant questions that are not going to be beneficial to these

25 proceedings.

1 Now I will kindly ask for a document to be displayed. Let me

2 first close this.

3 Before I move on to this question, but it deals with the same

4 topic and it has to do with the statement that he had given many years ago

5 and which is going to be the backbone of my further cross-examination.

6 Q. But before that, Mr. Witness, after what we have heard, the BH

7 army or the BH police also had these air bombs known as "sows" at their

8 disposal.

9 A. I don't know.

10 Q. But they also had proper aerial bombs.

11 A. I don't know.

12 Q. Do you know anything about a meeting of the Presidency of

13 Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Supreme Command? And I will present this when

14 the time comes. There was a conversation between Izetbegovic and

15 Silajdzic, they were virtually completing with each other, and Izetbegovic

16 was boasting, precisely at the time when this offensive was ongoing, that

17 the army had manufactured 800 bombs.

18 Since the indictment claims that the army of Republika Srpska was

19 the only one who had these bombs, I would like to ask you if you know

20 that?

21 A. No, I don't know about that.

22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Now I have to present a document

23 that I have in my hands, which is being translated. I had asked for it to

24 be urgently translated, but I didn't receive it yet. The number is

25 DD00-0403. There is no signature on this document, and it's written in

1 B/C/S. Can we please have it on our monitors.

2 Let us move on to page 1. This is a document dated the 12th of

3 August, 1994. Two days before that date, General Dragomir Milosevic took

4 over command of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

5 Q. And if you can follow this document on your screen, you will see

6 that this is a military document signed by Brigadier General Enver

7 Hadzihasanovic. It says here that it was received on file of the BH army

8 and certified by the BH army. In this letter, it shows that an enormous

9 quantity of weapons was being forwarded to the 1st Corps.

10 Let me read a couple of things from this letter just to see

11 whether you know anything about that. If you don't know, just say so.

12 And if you can give me very brief answers, preferably yes or no.

13 Do you understand me, sir?

14 A. Yes, I do.

15 Q. "Strictly confidential. Considerable successes of the army of

16 Bosnia-Herzegovina in the last two months."

17 Can you see that, sir, at the very beginning, at the top?

18 A. Yes. Yes, I do, below the date.

19 Q. Then it goes on to say:

20 "In order to present these results," et cetera, et cetera, I will

21 not read any further, "the territories that have been freed," et cetera.

22 Look at this bullet 2 or dash 2:

23 "According to available information, 300 soldiers had been killed

24 by the Chetniks."

25 Can you see that?

1 A. No, I cannot.

2 Q. The second item?

3 A. That's not what it says.

4 Q. What does it say?

5 A. It says different. You said that they were killed by Chetniks but

6 I don't see this word.

7 Q. But what does this "SCA" mean?

8 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the counsel, please.

9 A. It says 305 SCA army -- soldiers.

10 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. Which means that the BH army had killed 305 soldiers.

12 A. I don't know if I'm allowed to read this. I see this document for

13 the first time. It doesn't say anything to me.

14 Q. Now, the reason why I'm asking you this is as follows: A large

15 quantity of ammunition was seized and it was being forwarded to the 1st

16 Corps; is that true? It says it was forwarded to the 1st Corps. Can you

17 see it?

18 A. It says: "The 1st Corps, we are forwarding to you the summary."

19 Q. That's right. Now, we come to a whole list of document -- of

20 weapons being forwarded, but I'm asking you about the first item, tank

21 T34, but it says then "Maljutka rocket" and then a launcher for a Maljutka

22 rocket. Do you see that?

23 A. Yes, I can.

24 Q. Does that mean that the BH army also had weapons. You said that

25 they didn't have aerial bombs, but it seems that they did have Maljutka

1 rockets and launchers for these rockets. Can you see that?

2 A. I just read what I see in front of me.

3 Q. Look what they forwarded to the 1st Corps. It says a Maljutka

4 rocket and a launcher for this rocket.

5 A. Yes, that's what it says here.

6 Q. You can find it elsewhere, but can you tell me, based on this, is

7 it fair to say that the BH army had certain rockets, although these were

8 wire-guided rockets. But does it mean that at that point in time, on the

9 12th of August, the BH army had rockets and launchers at their disposal?

10 I'm asking you this because the indictment says that it was only the army

11 of Republika Srpska who had these rockets and these launchers for specific

12 weapons.

13 A. I know nothing about that.

14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] DD00-0403, may the document

15 please be marked for identification. Thank you. It still needs to be

16 translated.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's not translated.

18 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] No. It does not seem as if we'll

19 be getting more than 100 pages of translations per month.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: It is relatively short.

21 [Trial Chamber confers]

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll mark it for identification.

23 THE REGISTRAR: With the reference number D34, Your Honours.

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, now I have this

25 difficult moment approaching where I have to give references for the B/C/S

1 and for the English at the same time. I have prepared well. I will try

2 to be as effective as possible.

3 I have the statement of this witness here. The 15th of November,

4 1995, that's the date. DD00-0440. This is a document that was produced

5 before the war was even over, or maybe it was. No, it wasn't. No,

6 because Dragomir Milosevic is indicted -- stands indicted of crimes

7 committed up to the 21st of November.

8 I just want the witness to confirm for us if he provided this

9 statement, DD00-0440, and then I can start examining him in closed

10 session.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Sachdeva.

12 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I just want to ensure that the

13 monitor is not being broadcast.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm assured by the court deputy that it is not.

15 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President.

16 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. If the witness can please just confirm whether this is a document

18 that he signed, whether he provided this statement on the 15th of

19 November, 1995.

20 A. Yes, I signed it, and I provided the statement.

21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] If page 1 is not being displayed

22 outside the courtroom, I would like to move to page 2 of this document.

23 And if we can then go back into open session.

24 Q. You see your statement, don't you?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. So there, if you look at page 1, the very first sentence, you say:

2 "Before that I finished a special course for forensic technology.

3 My original profession was a mechanical technician."

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. "After a period of practice with more experienced colleagues, I

6 began to work independently in November 1993." Is that right?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. "I dealt with all kinds of crimes, including crimes against

9 property, murders, and other kinds of serious crimes, such as those

10 related to genocide." Right?

11 A. Yes. Crime investigations. I think it's a poor translation.

12 Q. It says: "Investigations related to genocide." We can look at

13 the English, but that's what the Serbian version says, what you signed.

14 But even as early as 1993, you were dealing with investigations related to

15 genocide.

16 A. Back in the security services centre, a special department was set

17 up that we called the genocide department. As for the shellings and

18 everything else that I investigated, we just subsumed the whole thing

19 under genocide.

20 Q. If you look at the very next sentence. "I only worked in the

21 Sarajevo area." Is that right?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And then: "I worked on 350 different cases, 52 of them related

24 to genocide."

25 What sort of a genocide was perpetrated back in 1993? What was

1 the genocide, and what were the cases that you described as genocide? And

2 based on just what? And do you know what the word means at all?

3 A. I worked 350 different cases, including the incidents of burglary

4 and that sort of thing. Fifty-two cases were cases where I went to the

5 scene and had to do with sniping and shelling and everything that began in

6 early 1992.

7 Q. Was this done pursuant to orders by your superiors, again?

8 Because as soon as 1993 the BH government was already filing its criminal

9 report for genocide. Did this have to do with that?

10 A. No, it had nothing to do with that. This was from 1995, and by

11 this time a lot was known already. Many people had been killed; many

12 people had been wounded; many people had been displaced. So this was a

13 statement that I provided back in 1995. Nobody foisted it on me and

14 nobody forced my hand to say anything at all, so to speak.

15 Q. But you did spend a lot of time on investigations which involved

16 casualties, quite regardless of the war, if my understanding is accurate.

17 It wasn't just bomb victims. It wasn't just victims of the war. You were

18 also involved very often in dealing with manslaughter, murder, that sort

19 of thing, homicide. Isn't that the case, in fact?

20 A. Yes. In fact, over 350 such cases.

21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please have the title page

22 of a newspaper displayed on our screens. This is not a Belgrade-based

23 newspaper. It is not an American newspaper. It is a Sarajevo newspaper;

24 it's a Bosniak newspaper, dated last summer. This is something that this

25 newspaper published. This is DD00-0438. It's the front page of the

1 newspaper.

2 Q. There you go. That's the photograph. This is a newspaper called

3 "Free Bosnia," a Bosniak paper, if you like, a Muslim paper, whatever you

4 wish to call it. I don't really distinguish along those lines myself.

5 You see what it says, don't you?

6 "SB Discovers the Horrific Fate of Serbs in Sarajevo - 850 Serbs

7 Killed."

8 There are documents about that in the possession of the OTP; I

9 know that for a fact. Did you conduct -- [French on English channel] --

10 and throw into caldrons or into the river? Did you have any investigation

11 like that?

12 A. I conducted on-site investigations. I did not conduct the

13 investigation at Kazina. I don't remember a single body being thrown into

14 the river. All of my on-site investigations throughout that period were

15 recorded, and you can find them in the files of the Sarajevo canton. It's

16 no secret. You can go there and you can find them. Everything that I did

17 is well documented. I don't remember any specific cases. There were

18 crimes committed by criminals. I did investigate cases of murder. There

19 were all sorts of names cropping up, Bosnian names, Serb names, Croat

20 names. Sarajevo is a multi-ethnic city. And this is not a Bosniak paper,

21 it's a Bosnian paper, if you see the difference.

22 Q. This is a Sarajevo-based paper; right? It's not a Belgrade-based

23 paper. It's a Bosnian paper; right? That's what it says. "Shocking

24 Photographs of Atrocities and Murder," that's what it says. That's what

25 it says. There's a lot more than just that going on, but at least 850 is

1 something that nobody ever challenged, is it?

2 Were you in charge of any of these investigations? Did you

3 investigate a single murder like that, a single killing like that? And

4 what do you really know about it, since you were a homicide investigator?

5 A. I was a forensic technician. I worked over 350 cases, on-site

6 investigations, at the time. There are records; you can check that. All

7 the dates are there. So I don't know. I had nothing to do with the

8 horrific fate of Serbs in Sarajevo, as the front page says.

9 I did do on-site investigations. You asked me about Kazina. I

10 don't know. I can't remember all the names. You said this was a Bosniak

11 paper, not that it was a Bosnian paper, and that's what my objection was

12 about.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: There are three notations on the record where the

14 interpreters have asked that you both slow down in the interests of the

15 interpretation. You're speaking too fast, overlapping. Please observe a

16 pause between question and answer.

17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. Witness, it says here "Free Bosnia," so this is a Bosniak paper, a

19 Muslim paper, or isn't it?

20 A. This is a newspaper produced in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It's not a

21 Bosniak paper; it's not a Muslim-only paper.

22 Q. As far as I know, Serbs always speak of Republika Srpska. They

23 never said that. But, okay, have you seen this or not?

24 A. No. First time I have set eyes on it. Normally I don't read this

25 particular newspaper, if that's what you're asking.

1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I will be skipping a lot of

2 questions again. I'll be moving to the snipers now. I will try not to

3 dwell on anything that is insubstantial.

4 Q. You talked about snipers; it's page 4 of the English, paragraph 1,

5 the document in front of you.

6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Oh, no, we have a new one. I'll

7 be re-tendering it probably. DD00-0440. This document is no longer ...

8 It's page 4 of the English, paragraph 1. B/C/S, the reference is

9 page 6, paragraph 2. There it is.

10 Q. You can see paragraph 2 of that statement, sir, can't you? You

11 dealt with snipers, and yesterday you explained about particular sniping

12 incidents. I'll just refer to some of the questions already asked by the

13 Judges. In your capacity as an expert, you say this:

14 "A sniping investigation resembles a classical murder

15 investigation. By sniping, I mean a fire-arm with an optical device. Of

16 course I investigated cases without knowing if the perpetrator had used an

17 optical device or not."

18 What about the majority of cases that were involved in in your

19 capacity as investigator? Did you not believe in most cases that a

20 telescope or this optical device had been used? First of all, what you

21 say here, is that correct, sir?

22 A. This is my statement. I never knew nor was I able to see whether

23 an optical device had been used or not. What I would normally see was

24 bodies or bullet marks, but I would never see the weapon itself.

25 As for the snipers themselves, all of the places in the city were

1 well known that were covered by snipers. The phrase used was "Sniper

2 fire: Watch out, don't go there." Of course we couldn't see if it was

3 actually a sniping rifle. And the kind of rifle used for sniping normally

4 has an optical device.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, you must ask your questions

6 directly and without the long introductory remarks. Just get to the

7 question.

8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] First of all, I wanted to hear

9 whether the witness could confirm his statement. That was my first

10 question.

11 Q. Is that true, what you said in your statement in relation to this

12 weapon with an optical device?

13 A. That's what a sniping rifle is. It's a rifle with an optical

14 device.

15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would now like to

16 show the witness 65 ter document number 738, page 3. 65 ter number 738,

17 page 3. You can see the witness's name, but --

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Show it to him.

19 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Sorry?

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Show him what it is that you wish him to see.

21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. There is a report that you worked on. You were shown it

23 yesterday, about the snipers, by the OTP, and the Chamber was much

24 interested in these documents and the sniping incidents. There was talk

25 of the plastic sheeting that was used to cover the windows.

1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I will tell you what the document

2 says and then we can go back into closed session later on, perhaps. You

3 can later have a look in closed session what I'm showing him. That course

4 of action is for the Chamber, of course.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is it on the screen?

6 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's not to be broadcast.

8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] This is -- and I think she was

9 killed. Semka Kozadra, we talked about her a lot yesterday, didn't we? I

10 can read that for him and then he can have a look.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is it that you wish to put to the witness?

12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I want to show him the sheets

13 that he talked about on house windows, where some women were wounded and

14 one was even killed. It's the sheeting that --

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please --

16 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] There, when Kozadra Semka was

17 killed on the 3rd of March, 1995. So down the middle of that paragraph,

18 it says:

19 "When an on-site investigation was carried out" - and it was

20 carried out by the witness - "it was established that the bullet had torn

21 through the blanket that was on the balcony and then the sheet. So first

22 it tore through the blanket. "Blanket" in our language means just what it

23 means, blanket. So this is no sheeting, no plastic sheet. It was a

24 blanket hung across the window.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Put your question to the witness.

1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Precisely.

2 Q. My question is, was there a blanket on that window or not?

3 A. So the blanket was in the window and there was a plastic sheet, as

4 I explained yesterday. I explained everything yesterday.

5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] May I continue, Your Honours.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. And now there's another document presented to you yesterday, 65

9 ter 738, pages 5 and 6.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: What use have you made of this document? It's

11 not clear to me what question you have put to the witness on the basis of

12 this document.

13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Based on this document, if he

14 said that there was first a blanket, then it means that no one can see

15 into the flat through a thick blanket. Nothing can be seen going on

16 through the blanket. There was a plastic sheet before it, but before that

17 was a blanket that could not be seen through.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: You haven't put any question to him yet. I mean,

19 you're making submissions on the basis of the document, but it is not

20 clear to me what question you're putting to the witness. This is not the

21 time to make submissions.

22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, then I'm not very

23 good at putting questions. This is what he established in his report.

24 There was a blanket covering the window and the bullet passed through the

25 blanket. That's what he says. Is it true that the window was covered

1 with a blanket? Is it correct, what he established here? I don't know

2 what it says in the English version. If the translation is bad, then it's

3 something that must not have happened, because in this original report

4 compiled in the Serbian language, it says that there was a plastic sheet

5 but that the window was covered with a blanket.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Witness.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It says in the report that it wasn't

8 on the window, it was at the balcony, on the terrace. That's where the

9 blanket was. And the living-room window had a plastic sheet. This

10 blanket served as visual protection, not the protection from light, as a

11 kind of curtain to prevent people seeing what is going on in the flat.

12 The bullet went through the blanket, through the window, through the

13 plastic sheet on the door and then hit the woman in the hip. She was just

14 going out of the bathroom. She wasn't killed; she was just wounded. It

15 says very clear that it first went through the blanket on the balcony, et

16 cetera.

17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. Oh, yes, the whole balcony was covered with a blanket. But the

19 whole balcony was covered with a blanket, enclosed with the blanket,

20 precisely in order to prevent anyone seeing what is happening there.

21 A. I didn't say that. I don't know how you arrived at this

22 assumption.

23 Q. You say here the whole balcony was covered with a blanket and no

24 one can see anything from outside.

25 A. No, it's not correct.

1 Q. What is correct, then?

2 A. The only purpose was to prevent anyone seeing into it, but it

3 allowed light to come on top and on the sides. It only covered the view

4 towards Dobrinja 4 from where the bullet had come.

5 Q. So you maintain that the sniper was precisely targeting the target

6 that was behind this blanket. Is that what you're claiming?

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the answer to that question?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was waiting for the interpretation

9 in order not to overlap.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm sorry.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The bullet flew through the blanket

12 and through the sheet. I cannot say that the lady was targeted

13 intentionally. However, the flat where she was was intentionally targeted

14 and hit. I never said that she was intentionally shot. But this window

15 and the blanket protecting the window was targeted intentionally, and the

16 result was the wounding of this lady.

17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. Thank you very much for this answer, but please look at the

19 document that was read out to you yesterday by the Prosecutor. It's 65

20 ter document 738, pages 5 and 6. It again deals with this unfortunate

21 woman, Semka Kozadra. I'm going to read out to you and ask you to confirm

22 it because you signed this document.

23 Can you see this? Let me read it to you. This is what your

24 report says:

25 "On the 3rd of March, 1995, at around 0745 hours, in a ground

1 floor flat, on number 6 Emila Zole Street, Semka Kozadra was wounded. The

2 wounded was caused by a stray bullet of 7.62-millimetre passing through

3 the blanket that served as a visual protection at the balcony."

4 And then you go on with other details. Please, is this true, what

5 you say, that this stray bullet came from somewhere else? Is this

6 correct, what you say in your report?

7 A. Yes. The bullet arrived, and I recorded its path.

8 Q. So it was a stray bullet. You immediately came to that conclusion

9 because there was this blanket, et cetera, that this was not an intended

10 target?

11 A. It wasn't up to me to determine whether it was done intentionally

12 or not, but I did say that the blanket was hit from that side.

13 Q. And in the last sentence you say: "The bullet came from the

14 direction of Dobrinja 4, which is under the control of the aggressor."

15 Is that correct?

16 A. Yes, it is.

17 Q. You have a stray bullet, and Dobrinja, which is at the heart of

18 Sarajevo, was equally populated by Serbs and Bosniaks. How could you say

19 that it had come from Dobrinja? Dobrinja was Dobrinja. Whether it was

20 Dobrinja 4, 5, or 6 is irrelevant. Why did you say that it came from the

21 aggressor positions? It was a stray bullet. Can you please explain that

22 to me.

23 A. I conducted this investigation, and the only thing you can see

24 through the window of this room was the Dobrinja 4 neighbourhood, which at

25 the time was under the control of the army of Republika Srpska.

1 Q. And the BH army was also there, because they shared the same

2 positions.

3 A. Well, I wouldn't know that. I know that the Republika Srpska army

4 was there. I used to live in Dobrinja 4. I was expelled from my flat,

5 and I know this neighbourhood perfectly.

6 Q. Then you also know very well that the distance between the two

7 positions in places were 10 to 15 metres, sometimes 50 metres. Is that

8 true?

9 A. I told you regarding the positions that there probably was a ring

10 surrounding Sarajevo by both armies. I said that it came from the

11 direction of Dobrinja 4. I didn't specify the position.

12 Q. Well, that could be the position of the army of

13 Bosnia-Herzegovina, but equally it could have been the position of the

14 army of Republika Srpska?

15 A. This building was on the very front line. I don't think there

16 were any trenches there, and that nobody could maintain them, because this

17 building was on the very demarcation line.

18 Q. Is it also true that the front line passed through many buildings;

19 that on the one side you had members of the BH army and on the other side

20 there were member -- or the other part of the building there were members

21 of the army of Republika Srpska. Is that true?

22 A. Yes, that's true. Neighbourhoods were divided. It was like it

23 was, and unfortunately this woman had no option but to live where she

24 lived.

25 Q. In order to finish this topic of sniping, I would like to refer

1 you to another document mentioned yesterday.

2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] This was the killing of Zineta

3 Sinanovic. This woman was definitely killed. It happened on the 3rd of

4 March. It's 65 ter number 738, page 13.

5 Q. Can you see this statement? We discussed it yesterday. I'm going

6 to read to you the penultimate paragraph.

7 "I would like to say that on the same day," which means on the 3rd

8 of March, and the same time, "it was noticed that bullets entered flats on

9 higher floors but there were no casualties."

10 Is this what it says?

11 A. Yes, it is.

12 Q. This is a part of the town which was divided by the front line.

13 A. It doesn't say which building we are talking about.

14 Q. I'm asking you, is that one of the buildings that the front line

15 was passing through?

16 A. Yes, that was the same building.

17 Q. Let's look at what it says further on. "The building where we

18 live partially faces Dobrinja 4 neighbourhood which was under the

19 aggressor's control."

20 And it ends like this: "In the rooms facing this part of the

21 neighbourhood are uninhabited."

22 Is this correct, what it says here in this document?

23 A. I can confirm what is written here, but I cannot say whether

24 anyone lived in them or not.

25 Q. And I am putting to you that that was precisely the reason,

1 because they were facing the front and because there was constant fear

2 that people will be shooting at each other, that bullets could be -- could

3 be stray, and that as a result many people were victims.

4 A. I did this on-site investigation. I noted that this woman was

5 shot in this flat. My duty was to document where the bullet had come

6 from, whether there was any deaths caused, and to prepare a report. Of

7 course there were casualties. People were killed by stray bullets, by

8 intentional targeting. There was shooting everywhere.

9 Q. That was precisely what I wanted to ask you. All these people

10 that were killed on the side which was under the control of the BH army

11 were portrayed as sniper incident victims, which means that they were

12 targets of riflemen who had rifles with devices or with any other weapons,

13 but these were intentional shootings; is that correct?

14 A. No, it's not correct. Some people were killed by stray bullets.

15 People were being killed by snipers while they were running across the

16 streets. I myself had to run away from the snipers when I tried to cross

17 the street because people in civilian clothes crossing the streets were

18 particularly targeted by snipers.

19 Q. According to the documents that I have already, you -- and these

20 are indisputable documents that I'm going to present to this Court, you

21 note that shots had been fired by the Bosnia-Herzegovina army in the range

22 of 10 to 15.000 a day. Of course that applies to the Serbian side as

23 well. Do you know anything about that?

24 A. It was war. There was shooting. I don't know which side fired

25 how many -- the number of bullets that each side had fired.

1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I can possibly

2 complete in about 10 or 15 minutes, if we could have the break now,

3 please.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

5 We'll break now for 20 minutes.

6 --- Recess taken at 5.32 p.m.

7 --- On resuming at 5.50 p.m.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please continue, Mr. Tapuskovic.

9 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours, for

10 allowing me to have a break a while ago, because I intended originally to

11 tender these documents into evidence: First of all, DD00-0440; that's the

12 statement made by this witness on the 15th of November, 1995. And then

13 the front page of "Slobodna Bosna," or "Free Bosnia," number DD00-0438.

14 Then 65 ter 738, pages 3 and 13.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: In future, I'd prefer you to deal with the

16 question of admission right after, when the document is fresh in our

17 minds.

18 [Trial Chamber confers]

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll admit the statement of 15th November;

20 that's the statement of the witness. Yes.

21 Now, the other two, just describe them. What do they deal with,

22 those two documents?

23 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I can show you the other

24 documents. One is DD00-0438; that's the front the page of "Slobodna

25 Bosna" magazine. It speaks about -- I wouldn't like to repeat that

1 again. I'm going to hand over the entire magazine in translation when it

2 becomes required. I think that it's not necessary at the moment.

3 [Trial Chamber confers]

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: This magazine has no connection with the

5 witness. There's no relationship established and we see no basis for

6 admitting it. We'll not admit it.

7 What's the third one?

8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] That's, in fact, two documents.

9 They are both contained in 65 ter 738. The first document is page 3, and

10 the second document is page 13. These are the documents that speak about

11 sniping incidents in which the witness was involved in investigations.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the source of the document?

13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] That's the document contained in

14 number 738 under 65 ter.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: May it be shown on the screen.

16 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] That's the two documents that

17 describe this blanket, the stray bullet, et cetera. That's the two

18 documents.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: And where did it emanate from?

20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] From 65 ter document number 738.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: No, no. I meant who made the document? Whose

22 document is it? Is this a Novi Grad public security station, crime police

23 department? You say no.

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] No, I didn't. It says -- there's

25 the witness's name and it says that he was involved there. Yeah, yeah.

1 That's what it says at the top of the document, but from the document we

2 can see that the witness was involved in the investigation. And also the

3 second document was prepared -- or, rather, an investigation was conducted

4 by this witness, and they were all produced as a result of his on-site

5 investigations.

6 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I am of the understanding that the

7 document produced by the witness has already been admitted into evidence

8 during my examination. But in any event, if the first one is going to be

9 admitted, I would ask that it's admitted under seal, if his name is on

10 there.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: This document has already been admitted in your

12 examination-in-chief; is that what you're saying?

13 Can the court deputy confirm that.

14 MR. SACHDEVA: The document that I see on the screen, it is my

15 understanding that it has been admitted. And the document that he himself

16 has signed has been admitted as well.

17 [Trial Chamber confers]

18 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

19 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Prosecutor, can you give us the information of

20 the P number that was given to this second document, the Novi Grad Public

21 Security Station Official Note.

22 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes, I am able to do that.

23 Firstly, the one that he himself completed was Exhibit P150, under

24 seal; and then the next document is Exhibit P151, under seal.

25 [Trial Chamber confers]

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: We're not going to do that now. That's an

2 administrative exercise. The Prosecutor says it was admitted. The court

3 deputy will check on it. In any event, it's a document that would be

4 admitted. So the administrators can determine that and report to us as

5 soon as possible.

6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the witness statement dated 15

7 November 1995 will become Exhibit D35, under seal.

8 [Trial Chamber confers]

9 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: So let us move on. Go ahead, please.

11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, before my last

12 topic, there is just one thing that I would like to show the witness.

13 It's about the bus that he mentioned yesterday.

14 Q. Witness, do you remember mentioning a bus yesterday, and the

15 glass?

16 A. Yes, I remember that.

17 Q. Would I be right if I said that you conducted that on-site

18 investigation without the actual bus? And the wounded had been taken

19 away. The only basis for you to go on was the shattered glass; is that

20 right?

21 A. I conducted an on-site investigation in two different places. The

22 first place was the place where the bus was and the other place was the

23 place where the bus had been hit.

24 Q. So you conducted your investigation without the actual bus, didn't

25 you? You investigated it based on the shards of glass alone that you

1 found at the scene; right?

2 A. I conducted it on the spot after the bus was found in the Dobrinja

3 neighbourhood. We went back to the place where the bus had been hit, and

4 the bus was not returned there, so we did that particular scene without

5 the presence of the bus, if that's what you mean.

6 Q. I'm asking you for the third time: It was only based on the

7 shattered glass that you found on the spot; right?

8 A. We found splinters and shattered glass on that spot, but we came

9 there to begin with because witnesses had told us to go there and told us

10 that that was where the bus had been hit.

11 Q. Based on those bits of shattered glass, you concluded where the

12 bullet had come from; right?

13 A. Yes, among other things.

14 Q. Thank you. Just another thing: Do you know where Mojmilo is?

15 It's the long ridge. It's 3 kilometres long. It overlooks Sarajevo in

16 its entirety, doesn't it?

17 A. I know where that hill is.

18 Q. Is it 3 kilometres long?

19 A. It's quite long. I'm not sure if it's 3 kilometres.

20 Q. May as well be two and a half. Is it not true that throughout the

21 war it was under the control of the BH army?

22 A. The side facing Alipasino Polje, that particular neighbourhood,

23 was the site that was, throughout, controlled by the BH army.

24 Q. But there were parts of Mojmilo that were held by the army of

25 Republika Srpska. Is that what you're claiming, sir?

1 A. The side facing Lukavica and Trebevic was under the control of the

2 army of Republika Srpska.

3 Q. Thank you very much. But what about at the foot of that hill?

4 A. Which side do you mean, the north side or the south side?

5 Q. Both sides. I mean the side facing the Serb positions and the

6 side facing the BH army positions. The army of Republika Srpska was at

7 the foot of Mojmilo, wasn't it?

8 A. They were on the west side.

9 Q. That wasn't my question. They were at the foot of the hill. They

10 weren't close to the peak, were they? They were down on the lower slopes

11 of the hill, if I can put it that way.

12 A. All I know is I wasn't supposed to go there. I wasn't allowed to

13 go there. I'm not sure if they were higher up or lower down at the foot

14 of it. What I do know is that, as far as this side of Mojmilo was

15 concerned, I was free to walk around without the risk of being hit.

16 Q. In a way you are saying that up there in the hill, in some way the

17 army of Republika Srpska held certain positions. Did they hold any

18 positions at all up there?

19 A. I don't know. I didn't venture that far. What I know is that I

20 was free to walk around safely, so there was no firing from the south side

21 of that hill, the side facing Alipasino Polje. It's easier for me if I

22 use the cardinal points, if I talk about the northern side, the southern

23 side. If you say "the foot of a hill," that means nothing at all to me.

24 It could be south, north, east or west.

25 Q. Could we say that it was from near the peak of that hill that the

1 area under the BH army control was surveyed? And that's why you were

2 never hit and that's why you were never fired at. Whereas the other side

3 facing the Serb positions and Lukavica was under the control of those who

4 also occupied the very peak of that hill. And it's a ridge that is 3

5 kilometres long, overlooking Sarajevo, isn't it?

6 A. I said a while ago that the side facing Alipasino Polje, or,

7 rather, the north side, was under the control of the BH army. The other

8 side was under the control of the army of Republika Srpska. I don't know

9 specifically where their respective positions were, because I never went

10 that far myself.

11 Q. Thank you very much. That's a sufficient explanation, indeed, a

12 very good explanation. I'm thankful for your opinion, as a matter of

13 fact.

14 Can you just tell me about the bus that was within the area of

15 responsibility of the BH army. Was it exactly at the foot of that hill,

16 the hill that was under the control and within the area of responsibility

17 of the BH army? Isn't that where it was?

18 A. It was heading down the 9th Transversal Road towards Western

19 Dobrinja, and this is the western slope of the hill. The bus was above

20 the Olympic village of Mojmilo and it was hit before it reached the

21 Olympic village, at a junction between Mojmilo B and Mojmilo C, which is

22 the crossing of these two streets, the 9th Transversal and Safeta Hadzica

23 Street. That is the western slope of Mojmilo and it is still very much a

24 slope. You certainly couldn't call it the foot of that particular hill.

25 Q. Thank you very much. I don't have much left to go.

1 Before I launch into my next set of questions, let me ask you

2 this: The Zagreb Hotel, which used to be a hotel before the war, needless

3 to say, during the war, became the headquarters -- or, rather, at least

4 there were lots of police there, weren't there?

5 A. Not that I know of.

6 Q. Fine. What about the Belgrade Hotel, which was also very

7 central? I think the police administration was based there. At least you

8 could know that, couldn't you?

9 A. I don't know that this was a police building. I probably would

10 have known if it had been. In fact, I'm sure I would have known.

11 Q. Very well. I assume that at least you can tell me, if it was

12 neither the Belgrade Hotel nor the Zagreb Hotel, where, then, was the

13 central police administration, the central wartime police administration

14 in Sarajevo?

15 A. The MUP building and the security services centre building, those

16 were the police buildings. As for police stations, they were still in the

17 same place as they always were, even before the war; across the

18 municipalities.

19 Q. There were plenty of those and there were a lot of police there

20 and they were armed at least with pistols, weren't they?

21 A. I know about the security services centres, the BH MUP, and the

22 police stations; the Centar police station, Bijeljina police station, Nova

23 Sarajevo police station, Novi Grad police station, Ilidza police station,

24 which was at Hrastica. I never carried out any on-site investigations

25 there because there was another colleague of mine working there. So the

1 ones that I've just listed for you, those were the police stations that I

2 was familiar with.

3 Q. Witness, could you please tell us, roughly speaking, how many

4 police stations there were? That's my first question.

5 A. I have listed the ones that I was aware of at the time. I don't

6 know if any other police stations that actually existed that were used at

7 the time. I have given you all I know. Centar, Bijeljina, Novo Sarajevo,

8 Novi Grad, those are the police stations where I carried out on-site

9 investigations, as well as Stari Grad. I don't know of any other police

10 stations that may or may not have existed.

11 Q. What about Marin Dvor, which is a name that crops up a lot in this

12 trial and which is a place that happens to be near the tallest

13 sky-scrapers down your side? How far is Marin Dvor from the two tallest

14 sky-scrapers in Sarajevo itself? Marin Dvor. Marin Dvor.

15 A. There's a police station at Marin Dvor; it's still there. And the

16 only thing that separates the police station from the sky-scrapers is the

17 so-called Trscanska Street, which is about 15 metres wide, plus the

18 pavements on either side of the street, which produces a total of 50

19 metres at the very most.

20 Q. I'm not sure if you know about this. I assume that you should.

21 It was from those really tall sky-scrapers, the two tallest sky-scrapers,

22 that sniper fire would be opened at their own citizens; right?

23 A. It's not something that I'm familiar with.

24 Q. I suppose you know that snipers use those locations a lot to

25 target positions held at the time by the army of Republika Srpska. Do you

1 know about that?

2 A. No, I don't know about that either.

3 Q. Those two sky-scrapers were often targeted by the Serbs; right?

4 A. What I know is that both sky-scrapers were smashed up and all the

5 glass panes were gone.

6 Q. Are you familiar with the fact - and I'm talking about the police

7 most of all - that it was from those sniper nests and those buildings that

8 the greatest number of civilians were killed on the other side, the side

9 that was at the time held by the army of Republika Srpska? Are you

10 familiar with that?

11 A. No, I'm not.

12 Q. You don't know about the fact that those two buildings were

13 targeted for that specific reason alone?

14 A. No, I'm not.

15 Q. Do you know that between 15.000 and 20.000 policemen were under

16 arms? They had pistols, rifles, mortars. Are you familiar with that

17 particular bit of information, sir?

18 A. I know that the police had weapons. They had pistols and some had

19 machine-guns, but I don't know about any of them having mortars.

20 Q. Given the fact that there were so many armed policemen, do you

21 perhaps know that the 1st Corps at no point in time numbered less than

22 60.000 soldiers? The 12th Division itself had about 50.000 armed

23 soldiers, especially during the period that the indictment against General

24 Milosevic refers to.

25 A. I'm unfamiliar with those facts and figures.

1 Q. Thank you. Just a couple of things left that I'd like to ask you

2 in relation to the hills surrounding Sarajevo.

3 The indictment claims that Serbs occupied the hills above Sarajevo

4 and they never did anything else from those hills but target civilians for

5 no reason at all. Do you agree with that, the Serbs being on those hills

6 pounding Sarajevo from up there, the sole objective being to kill the odd

7 civilian - a woman, a child, people fetching water, people growing

8 vegetables in their garden to make ends meet? Was that the sole objective

9 of the Serbian army, those people who were holding positions along the

10 ridges around Sarajevo?

11 A. You asked my opinion. I'll give you my opinion. As a matter of

12 fact, I think so, the reason being this: I was stuck in Sarajevo that

13 whole time. I couldn't get on with my life as a normal citizen. Once my

14 duty, term, was over I couldn't leave Sarajevo. I was under constant

15 threat, just as everyone else in Sarajevo was. I could have been killed;

16 fortunately, I wasn't. I could have been wounded. I certainly was

17 besieged in Sarajevo. The city was under siege.

18 Q. You were a police officer and you worked on the vital cases, the

19 most vital of all cases, in fact; that is my understanding. A doctor was

20 free to leave Sarajevo, for example, whenever he or she liked. They could

21 have used the tunnel. How many times had you -- how many times did you

22 use the tunnel beneath the Butmir airport, or did you never use the

23 tunnel, in fact?

24 A. I used the tunnel once to leave to go and fetch food so that we

25 could survive. I asked for leave; I got ten days. I used the tunnel

1 because that was the only way out. It was the only way to get through to

2 the other side. I'm not sure what the distance was. We would come back

3 with supplies that sometimes lasted us no more than days. And that was

4 the only time I used the tunnel, and this proves that was the only way

5 out. And not everybody enjoyed the privilege of being able to use the

6 tunnel. There were lots of us and there was only that one tunnel. You

7 had to -- you had to squat. You had to bend your back to be able to walk

8 through the tunnel; you couldn't just walk upright.

9 Q. I know that full well that that is what it was like back in 1993

10 and for a while in 1994. It wasn't that easy to get through. But towards

11 the end of 1994 and for the whole of 1995, there were actually tracks in

12 the tunnel that were laid. And it was possible to use those tracks or

13 rails, vehicles that were mounted on those rails, to bring supplies into

14 the city or whatever the necessities were at the time. However, the

15 tunnel was also continuously being used by the BH army to leave Sarajevo

16 and to go back. Wasn't that a fact?

17 A. Yes, there were some rails that were laid in the tunnel. That's

18 true. I remember passing through the tunnel. It wasn't just me. There

19 were convoys of people inching their way in and out, all of those who had

20 received permission to leave. You weren't just free to use the tunnel as

21 you saw fit. You needed permission for that. I'll not sure who passed

22 through the tunnel and when. I only did that once, when I wasn't on

23 duty. I didn't, myself, keep track of any doctors or engineers or other

24 military staff using the tunnel. Therefore, I can't answer your question.

25 Q. But there was no way for any of the 40.000 Serbs to use the tunnel

1 unless they had paid big money. Some people did, in fact, pay up the

2 money, the big money. They got through the tunnel and they were killed

3 once they reached other side. What can you, an as investigator, tell us

4 about that?

5 A. I'll give you an answer to that. In my whole department

6 throughout that whole period of time, the department was a multi-ethnic

7 one - we had Serbs working for us - they would use the tunnel and they

8 would soon be back alive. No one ever killed any of them just because

9 their name happened to be a Serb one.

10 I am not familiar of any cases where someone used a tunnel and was

11 killed at the other end just because they happened to be Serbs. There

12 were a lot of Serbs in Sarajevo who just continued to -- business as

13 usual. I know plenty of them who never left Sarajevo during the war. And

14 one thing I know for sure is that none of them were subjected to

15 mistreatment. I talked to a lot of them. We went to shelters together.

16 We tried to get on together all the time.

17 Q. Since you say that you have a lot of friends amongst Serbs, tell

18 me at least one name of a Serb who managed to go out of Sarajevo and come

19 back again, to be exposed to the hail of bullets? Just tell me that and

20 I'm not going to tell you anything else.

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. And you don't know that entire battalions used to go out to other

1 fronts, to Mount Igman and other battlefields all across

2 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

3 A. I don't know about that. The tunnel had been excavated, but I

4 don't know about any such events.

5 Q. We mentioned Mojmilo.

6 JUDGE HARHOFF: Can I just ask the witness, or can I ask you to

7 ask the witness, a question of clarification? Because I did not

8 understand fully whether the tunnel was used sometimes also by Serbs who

9 wanted to leave Sarajevo and come back again. Can you ask that question

10 to the witness, please.

11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. Was there a single Serb -- let's say a Serbian policemen, a

13 colleague of yours, fine. But were there any women, children, ordinary

14 citizens, not policemen or soldiers, although there were of course Serbs

15 in Sarajevo who were soldiers and policemen? I'd like to hear from you,

16 was there a child or a woman who managed to get out of Sarajevo and come

17 back again to the place where she or he could have been killed? That's

18 what I'm asking you.

19 A. I gave you an example that I know of. I gave you one name of the

20 man who went out and came back again. He was a Serb. As for women and

21 children, I don't know. I didn't see any because I wasn't there.

22 Q. That is exactly what I'm asking you. Do you know of a single

23 ordinary citizen, most of all of women or children, going out of Sarajevo,

24 being allowed to go out of Sarajevo, and come back, unless they paid a

25 hefty sum of money. If they paid a lot of money, why would they go back

1 to Sarajevo at all? Can you explain that to me?

2 A. I don't know about any money being paid. I said I wasn't there.

3 I don't know who went out. I didn't keep track of that, and I answered

4 your question by saying I don't know.

5 Q. Very well. I need not insist on this any longer. We're going to

6 present additional evidence as well as the Prosecution will do.

7 What do you about Mojmilo hill, which is 745 metres high? Who

8 held positions on that hill? Were those positions of the BH army

9 controlling the entire area of Grbavica, the Jewish cemetery, et cetera?

10 A. That's a hill overlooking Sarajevo, where the line was. I never

11 went up there and I don't know.

12 Q. You're saying that there were also soldiers of the army of

13 Republika Srpska on Mojmilo as well. Is that what you are claiming?

14 A. I'm not claiming anything. That was one of the hills surrounding

15 Sarajevo, and I knew when one -- when I walked around Sarajevo, I had to

16 be wary of those hills. But I don't know where the exact positions were.

17 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Just a question on the

18 translation, on line 10.

19 [In English] You're saying that there were also soldiers of

20 Republika Srpska on Mojmilo as well --

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the point? Because we're hearing from

22 Mr. Tapuskovic.

23 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] It's just a correction for the

24 transcript, because it's not Mojmilo at line 10 -- line 11, but Debelo

25 Brdo.

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: I see. So at line 11, the reference to Mojmilo

2 should be Debelo Brdo; is that correct?

3 Is that correct, Mr. Tapuskovic?

4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Precisely. I am not following

5 the transcript. I can't speak English, so I cannot look at the screen. I

6 have no time for that. I asked the question about Mojmilo and that's

7 where I left it off. Now I'm asking the witness about Debelo Brdo, which

8 is the point that dominates the entire centre of Sarajevo.

9 Q. You are saying that this is where the positions of the army of

10 Republika Srpska were.

11 A. No, I am not saying that. I said that I didn't know. I never

12 went up there, so I don't know who was there.

13 Q. Is it true that Debelo Brdo is a place which dominates Marin Dvor

14 and the Jewish cemetery?

15 A. Yes. You have a domineering -- a commanding view of the town from

16 this position.

17 Q. Are you aware of the allegation in the indictment that most

18 shooting -- sniper shooting came from the Jewish cemetery, while this

19 cemetery is at the foot of the Debelo Brdo? Would you care to comment on

20 that?

21 A. The city of Sarajevo is at the hill of Debelo Brdo. It's in the

22 valley. And the Jewish cemetery is on the slopes of this hill.

23 Q. Thank you. Colina Kapa, 940 metres high. It is somewhat to the

24 west of Debelo Brdo. Trebevic is only 50 or 60 metres higher than Colina

25 Kapa. The positions of BH army were also on Colina Kapa. Is that true or

1 not?

2 A. I don't know.

3 Q. I simply cannot believe that, given the job that you were doing,

4 but I will accept what you've just told me.

5 I have a few more questions and then I'll finish. If we go to the

6 north in the area of responsibility of BH army --

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Are you saying you're not aware of the positions

8 held by the BH army in and around Sarajevo? Is that your evidence?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right. I don't know where

10 these positions exactly were because I never went there.

11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would rephrase the

12 question.

13 Q. Colina Kapa, Debelo Brdo and Mojmilo, were these hills in the area

14 of responsibility of BH army? And these hills dominate Sarajevo and the

15 centre of the town; yes or no?

16 A. I don't know. I didn't go there, and I cannot know where the

17 positions of the BH army were or the positions of the army of Republika

18 Srpska. I know that these hills surround the city of Sarajevo, but where

19 these positions were, I don't know exactly.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: The job that you have, would it be fair to

21 describe it as a job in the security forces?

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I worked for the security services

23 centre, but my job was in town. It didn't involve the front line. I

24 never went there. This name, security services centre, means police,

25 actually, and that is the name taken from the earlier period when the

1 police was part of the security services of the state. But I myself was

2 in town all the time and I didn't go to the positions.

3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. I put my question very simply. I'm not asking you whether the BH

5 army positions were there. I'm asking you in terms of geography. In the

6 area of responsibility of the BH army, Mojmilo, Debelo Brdo and Colina

7 Kapa, were they in the area of responsibility of the BH army?

8 A. I truly don't know. I really don't know.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: I think you have exhausted that one now.

10 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I have one more question.

11 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] In your job, did you wear a uniform

12 while you were on the job?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The forensic technician goes to the

14 scene for investigation in civilian clothes. However, in that period, the

15 entire security services centre was issued with uniforms because we didn't

16 have any clothes. Our clothes were worn and torn. We were issued these

17 uniforms but we were not obliged to wear them.

18 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. You were born in Sarajevo.

20 A. Yes, I was born in Sarajevo.

21 Q. Not even as a child, you never went to Colina Kapa, Debelo Brdo

22 and Mojmilo. You never went to those places?

23 A. Of course I did.

24 Q. Do these three hills overlook Sarajevo from that side, if we

25 disregard Trebevic as being slightly taller than -- higher than Colina

1 Kapa?

2 A. As I said, these hills surround Sarajevo, and Sarajevo is in the

3 valley surrounded by these hills.

4 Q. Okay. I have exhausted this topic.

5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have exhausted

6 this topic --

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Witness, I just wanted to find out, you do know

8 where the Serb positions were?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This question relating to the hills

10 I don't know. I know that they were in Nedzarici, but I cannot identify

11 exactly the houses. I know that they set up a ring around Sarajevo, but

12 where it was exactly, whether it was 1, 2, or 3 kilometres, I really don't

13 know. I never went to any positions of either of the sides. I can tell

14 you, though, that Sarajevo was surrounded from all sides.

15 [Trial Chamber confers]

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: But you have given an abundance of evidence of

17 bullets and shots and mortars coming from the Serb position, coming from

18 the direction of the Serb position, haven't you?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, yes, I did. But if you look

20 at Sarajevo being surrounded, all the projectiles that arrived came from

21 that position. I didn't say that they originated there, but they did come

22 from this ring where the Serbian soldiers were. But I never said

23 specifically from which location they had been firing.

24 If you view Sarajevo as something in the centre, and then there

25 were two rings around Sarajevo itself, I did say that they were coming

1 from the direction where the Serbian soldiers were, and they were, in

2 fact, there because Sarajevo was surrounded.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: In any event, your evidence is that you don't

4 know where the BiH positions were in and around Sarajevo, even while you

5 were a member of the security forces or services.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was a member of the criminal

7 investigation department of the criminal investigation police. If there

8 were other departments there, I wasn't part of them. I was part of the

9 criminal investigation department, and I did the job that I did.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: I used the term "security forces" to cover both

11 the army and the police.

12 Mr. Tapuskovic.

13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I have exhausted

14 my questions concerning the southern side, but I still have some questions

15 about the northern side. Therefore, I would like to ask the witness the

16 following:

17 Q. Does he know that Zuc hill is 850 metres high, that it's on the

18 northern side; that Orlic hill is about 876 metres high? And there are

19 some other hills which I'm not going to mention now. They're all on -- to

20 the north. And does he know that the BH army detachment held positions on

21 all these hills?

22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The transcript did not record

23 "Zuc," which is 850 metres high; Orlic, 876 metres. As I said, there are

24 other hills to the north of the approximate same height, at least five of

25 them.

1 Q. Do you know that members of the BH army were on those hills?

2 A. Yes, I do know that.

3 Q. Sokolje; Brijesce Brdo, to the west; Svabino Brdo, that's 700

4 metres, 689 to be precise.

5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The names have not been

6 recorded.

7 Q. Sokolje; Brijesce Brdo; Svabino Brdo, 689 metres high. Again we

8 don't have the names. I have to repeat this. I'll do it slowly. Sokolje

9 neighbourhood, rather Sokolje hill; Brijesce hill; Svabino hill, 689

10 metres. On the one side, these overlook Rajlovac, which is on the Serb

11 side, and on the other side they overlook the entire Sarajevo field, which

12 is the very heart of Sarajevo.

13 Do you know about that, and do you know about the fact that these

14 positions, too, were being held at the time by the BH army?

15 A. I know about Brijesce Brdo. There's a settlement there with

16 private homes. Sokolje is not a hill; it's a neighbourhood at the foot of

17 Brijesce hill, facing Rajlovac. I also know that this is in the Novi Grad

18 area, and that's where I conducted an on-site investigation when the

19 neighbourhood of Brijesce Brdo and Sokolje was shelled.

20 Q. Further down is Igman, isn't it? During Mr. Milosevic's time as

21 commander, that largest hill in the surroundings of Sarajevo was in fact

22 held by the BH army, wasn't it?

23 A. I don't know. Igman is an enormous mountain. I'm not sure if it

24 was under the control of the BH army in its entirety, or, for that matter,

25 which parts the army of Republika Srpska controlled. Igman is to the west

1 of Sarajevo and it overlooks the general area. But I have no idea who was

2 there.

3 Q. Can I conclude by asking this: If Trebevic is near Sarajevo -

4 it's about 1.000 metres high - and Trebevic was under the control of the

5 army of Republika Srpska and Colina Kapa on that same side - just slightly

6 smaller, about 940 metres high - was the only place overlooking Sarajevo

7 that was under the control -- if Trebevic, above Colina Kapa, is the only

8 place under the control of the army of Republika Srpska and all the other

9 hills overlooking Sarajevo are under the control of the BH army, and these

10 run along the confrontation lines, could we put it that way?

11 A. I'm not sure what you can put. I told you, I don't know where the

12 positions were.

13 Q. Thank you very much. That will be established in the course of

14 this trial. But you have already provided sufficient confirmation for

15 us.

16 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I thank you for

17 allowing me the time to complete my cross-examination.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Any re-examination Mr. Sachdeva?

19 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes, Mr. President, just a few things.

20 Re-examination by Mr. Sachdeva:

21 Q. Witness 138, just to be clear, the CSB or the centre for security

22 forces, was that a military or a civilian institution?

23 A. It's the security services centre. I think you used a different

24 phrase. It's security services centre. I was a civilian police officer.

25 I still am. I wear no uniform. My job was the kind of job done in plain

1 clothes. There were some other members who wore uniforms. That was the

2 uniformed police. They were armed with pistols and some had automatic

3 weapons at the time.

4 Q. When you say "the uniformed police," are you referring to military

5 combat uniform or police uniform? And what colour was the uniform they

6 were wearing?

7 A. At the beginning they wore standard issue police uniforms. Later

8 on, as I said in my evidence, we received different uniforms, a new set of

9 uniforms, because we had run out of the old ones. I had this uniform; I

10 wasn't compelled to wear it throughout. I was free to choose whether I

11 would wear my civilian clothes or the uniform that we were provided.

12 Q. Counsel for the Defence, in the beginning of his

13 cross-examination, put to you on page 12, line 5 -- well, he asked you

14 whether you, while you were in the police, conducted combat operations for

15 the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and I want to ask you: From when you

16 joined the police - and that is the 1st of January, 1993 - up until the

17 conclusion of the war, did you conduct combat operations with the ABiH?

18 A. No.

19 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, I'd like to show

20 Witness 138 a document that appears to be from the accused. And I have

21 copies, both B/C/S and English, for Your Honours and counsel.

22 Perhaps it could be put on the ELMO. Actually, for the moment

23 it's okay. It's okay for the moment. I'll just ...

24 Q. Witness, do you have a document there in front of you?

25 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.

2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Is it allowed in re-examination

3 to be showing a document that we have not seen so far? If that is

4 standard procedure, I wish to know, because I might then ask questions

5 about this again. But first I need to study it. How come a document like

6 this is now being used?

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, you should ask -- you should be questioning

8 whether it is a matter arising from cross-examination.

9 Might I ask, Mr. Sachdeva, what does this arise from?

10 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, it arises out of the questions --

11 well, actually, out of the claims by counsel that the television tower

12 was -- the incident at the television tower was caused by the ABiH. And

13 this document is, in fact, on our exhibit list and thus counsel has had

14 notice of this document for some time.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please proceed.

16 MR. SACHDEVA:

17 Q. Now, Witness 138, you have a document there in front of you; is

18 that right?

19 A. [No interpretation].

20 Q. And at the top of the document, can you confirm that it

21 reads: "The SRK/Sarajevo-Romanija Corps IKM/forward command post.

22 Strictly confidential." And it is dated the 30th of June, 1995. Do you

23 see that there?

24 A. Yes, I see it. It says the command of the Sarajevo-Romanija

25 Corps, forward command post, and the number. I have seen all of it.

1 Q. And if you go to the bottom of the document, right at the very

2 end, on the next page, do you see at the end there the name -- well, do

3 you see it written there "Commander, Major General Dragomir Milosevic."

4 Do you see that?

5 A. Yes, I see that.

6 Q. Very well. I want to take you back to the first page, if you move

7 back to the first page. And roughly -- well, it begins halfway down that

8 page, halfway to three-quarters of the way down that page, there is a

9 paragraph that starts: "The Serbian soldiers are displaying unprecedented

10 heroism."

11 Do you see that paragraph there?

12 A. Yes, I see it.

13 Q. Okay. I'm just going to read on:

14 "The Serbian soldiers are displaying unprecedented heroism, not

15 letting the enemy get closer to their homes and families. The Main Staff

16 of the VRS/army Republika Srpska, Main Staff Commander, Commander Colonel

17 General Ratko Mladic commended the heroism of units in the north-western

18 part of the front. Numerous congratulations also arrived from unit

19 commands and civilian government institutions. Our artillery forces are

20 responding with precision to the Muslim artillery attacks. In one such

21 response on the 28th of June, they hit the BH RTC/Radio-Television Centre,

22 the centre of media lies against the just struggle of the Serbian people."

23 Do you see that paragraph there?

24 A. Yes, I have been reading along.

25 Q. What I want to ask you is, the reference there to the TV -- to the

1 radio and television centre, is that the same installation that you went

2 to on the 28th of June, 1995, to investigate a projectile attack on that

3 installation? Is that the same one?

4 A. There was only one in Sarajevo, only one building, the

5 Bosnia-Herzegovina TV building, and this was the one.

6 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, Your Honours, I'd like to offer that

7 into evidence.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

9 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.

11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I have no need to respond to

12 that, but as far as I can see there is no signature to be seen, no

13 signature by Dragomir Milosevic. Just his name. And I think this should

14 be made an exhibit because it does tell us a lot, in fact.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: We won't stand in the way of its admission. It

16 will only go to weight.

17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, this document will be marked as

18 Exhibit P152.

19 MR. SACHDEVA: I have no further questions, Mr. President.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Sachdeva.

21 Witness, that concludes your testimony. Thank you for giving it,

22 and you may now leave.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

24 [The witness withdrew]

25 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.

2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] It is not my intention to tire

3 the Chamber, and I'm not sure that I'm able really to explain it now, but

4 I did ask, once the cross-examination is over, for the Chamber to hear me

5 on an issue that really has nothing to do with the Chamber.

6 If I may, it's about the conditions in which I work. It's about

7 our Defence. It's about the fact that I'm being hamstrung in my attempt

8 to do something that I had been telling you about. Maybe for you to make

9 a ruling to admonish the BH government to do something about what I think

10 is not necessary now.

11 Can I explain that?

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. But if it is a matter on which you should

13 be making a written submission, submitting a motion, then perhaps it would

14 be better if you did that.

15 Well, let me hear you quickly. You have four minutes.

16 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Quickly, Your Honours. It's not

17 for you; it's something that I was supposed to deal with in cooperation

18 with the Registry, but they showed no understanding.

19 This is about documents that I will have to go and get because

20 they're very precious. I asked to leave for Belgrade for two days to get

21 those documents. It's a lot of documents and it's very confidential. I

22 simply wouldn't have the courage to have it transported here in any other

23 way but actually for myself to go and bring it back. I was told that I

24 would not be allowed to do that. I'd be losing three DSAs here, but I

25 don't care about that, and I will not be allowed to travel back to

1 Belgrade and have my flight paid before September.

2 Believe me, I don't care about any sort of monetary compensation.

3 I think the Registry would probably be saving up about 300, 400 euros for

4 my DSA. I'd pay for the flight myself. I just need to go there, get

5 those documents myself. It's something precious to me. I will use it to

6 show something important.

7 My investigators will be taking delivery this coming Friday, yet

8 the Registry is putting obstacles in my way. That, indeed, is the case.

9 I'm offering here to be a mailman. I'm offering to be the mailman

10 myself. And just about a single flight ticket, an obstacle is being laid

11 in my way.

12 I think that is really putting spikes in the wheels of our

13 Defence. It is not a question of me being willing, but at least they

14 should say -- if I go now, and let us avoid any further explanations.

15 This is an unpleasant situation. I had to waste an hour or so of my time

16 this morning explaining this. So that's an issue. And money is being

17 saved, in actual fact. But I really don't know what we're talking about

18 here.

19 In Belgrade the opinion prevails that we lawyers --

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, matters, such as DSA, between

21 yourself and the Registry are not normally matters in which the Trial

22 Chamber will involve itself, unless there is an issue of a fair trial. I

23 think you should seek to have the matter resolved in the first instance by

24 pursuing representations with the Registry. The Trial Chamber would not

25 involve itself in that matter at this stage.

1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] What I have just said is

2 prejudicial to our defence. I have no way of obtaining these documents in

3 a matter of days. It might take between 10 and 15 days and that --

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Why don't you pay the 400 euros yourself and then

5 make a claim on the Registry and see how that works.

6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] That is precisely what I will

7 do. But let me just tell you -- or perhaps I won't tell you what the

8 reply was. I'll do that tomorrow.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: That is not coming from the Chamber, I should

10 say. It's just a strategic approach that you might wish to follow.

11 We're going to break now, Mr. Tapuskovic, because there is nothing

12 more that the Chamber can do at this stage.

13 We will resume tomorrow morning, at 9.00 a.m.

14 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.02 p.m.,

15 to be reconvened on Friday, the 2nd day of

16 February, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25