Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 3766

1 Thursday, 15 March 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.43 p.m.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Today in the absence of Judge Mindua, we sit

7 pursuant to the provision of Rule 15 bis.

8 Ms. Isailovic.

9 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

10 WITNESS: WITNESS W-91 [Resumed]

11 Cross-examination by Ms. Isailovic [Continued]:

12 Q. We're going to begin with the document that we saw when we

13 finished the session yesterday. Just before we ended the session, we were

14 looking at a document.

15 Good afternoon, Witness. Would you kindly answer to the following

16 question: What happened exactly with the soldier, the UNPROFOR soldier?

17 A. I do know which UNPROFOR soldier you mean.

18 Q. You have on your screen a report. It's the statement following a

19 meeting that took place with you and Mr. Barry Hogan on the 28th of

20 February, 2007; and in this report or statement, there's mention of a

21 misunderstanding that took place with a French -- between a French officer

22 and a soldier from the UNPROFOR.

23 It starts with your name - we're not going to mention it here -

24 and it says here in B/C/S "physically stopped."

25 A. As yesterday, at the very end of the trial, I saw this document

Page 3767

1 for the first time. So I would ask you for two minutes only to read it,

2 and I will gladly answer a question.

3 Yes, I have read it. I can now answer your question. I

4 absolutely confirm that on the day stated I met that gentleman in my

5 office, and on that occasion I gave him all these items that were

6 stated -- that are stated here. Our conversation that followed, and that

7 lasted for about 15 minutes, I understood to be an informal conversation

8 between two fellow police officers.

9 I mentioned then, among others, that the occasion mentioned here

10 was not the first occasion when I, as -- in my official capacity as an

11 investigator, had to protect physical evidence at a -- at a crime scene.

12 When UNPROFOR representatives came to such a crime scene, these

13 citizens present would often have a negative attitude toward UNPROFOR

14 members, because many people had come to harm and many among them

15 children. Sometimes UNPROFOR personnel acted in less than a professional

16 manner at the crime scene, and that such behaviour would additionally

17 increase the tensions.

18 In that informal conversation that I mentioned, that in the given

19 situation, I mean this concrete event now, there was an attempt to remove

20 physical evidence from the scene; and in that situation, I said I had

21 prevented it, and that I was willing to prevent it because that mustn't

22 happen for two reasons: One reason being my professional duty, and the

23 other, as I said, if the UNPROFOR person, staff member had not obeyed, I'm

24 sure that guns would say have been drawn, or weapons would have been

25 drawn.

Page 3768

1 I -- my reaction was directed toward the French soldier, not

2 toward the Nigerian major. If that is a what I said, then it was a slip

3 of the tongue.

4 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the witness confirmed

5 to us that he effectively said what this statement reflects. I would like

6 to ask the document be put in evidence, tendered into evidence, and for

7 the transcript we're talking about the document DD00-1416.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D126, Your Honours.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: I should have mentioned at the beginning that we

11 started late because of technical problems.

12 Mr. Waespi.

13 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Good afternoon, Mr. President. If the exhibit

14 could be under seal, please, because it carries the name of the witness.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, under seal.

16 THE REGISTRAR: That will be under seal, Your Honours.

17 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. Witness, I will ask my assistant to call up the statement of the

19 witness of the 24th of September. It's the following number 65 ter 3042.

20 In your statement of the 14th of November - correction - you were

21 talking about meetings that took place, meetings that you yourself

22 organised or your sector, the police, the Sarajevo police organised with

23 the local police. You will see the document on the screen.

24 I'm interested in page 2 of the document that you will see on the

25 screen, and the last paragraph, second sentence in both versions. So the

Page 3769

1 paragraph that I would like to you read would be the last paragraph,

2 second sentence. Please read it for yourself.

3 Now, I would like to ask you the following: The meeting took

4 place with police officers at a municipal level; is that right?

5 A. I can give you a precise explanation if you allow. The department

6 to which I belonged at the time was at the level of CSB Sarajevo; and for

7 the purpose of easier understanding, you can understand that to be the

8 umbrella of all Sarajevo police. So all Sarajevo police was distributed

9 into police stations and the hierarchy was top down, and this meeting was

10 proposed by the members of the department to which I belonged.

11 The reason for calling this -- this meeting was -- was mentioned

12 to the police executives, and they had mentioned that to the chiefs of

13 police stations.

14 Q. Those people in police stations, the people who worked for the

15 police stations at the lowest level, had to take the elements, had to --

16 had to monitor the scene of the crime, and were in charge of the scene of

17 the crime after a crime took place. Is that right?

18 A. We say they secure the scene until the arrival of the

19 investigative team, yes.

20 Q. Right. That is the French word that I used because the police

21 officer have to secure the area, that's the technical word. I imagine

22 that in English the word would be "secure."

23 I also imagine that during this meeting your superiors gave them

24 instructions regarding the victims that would be found on site, where a

25 crime had been committed.

Page 3770

1 A. As far as I remember, and it's some time -- it was some time ago,

2 what you say was not the most important point mentioned at the meeting.

3 If you want me to say what was, I'll do that gladly.

4 Q. Witness, no, it's not necessary. I will ask you questions or will

5 put questions to you, and you will tell me if it's right or not.

6 So you did not discuss securing traces of victims on the scene of

7 the crime?

8 A. As, especially when there was shelling, many victims suffered very

9 severe injuries, sometimes we would find body parts also, so that

10 forensically speaking, these body parts to a criminal investigator

11 certainly are evidence. And one of our tasks was to collect such evidence

12 and secure them -- secure it.

13 Q. Witness, would you be able to confirm to me the following: The

14 officers at the lowest level, those were the first ones to go out on the

15 crime scene; is that right?

16 A. Yes. In principle, they are the first to arrive because the

17 colleagues from the local police stations who were physically closest to

18 the scene arrived there before the others.

19 Q. Do you remember if investigations took place in which you were

20 participating, do you remember if those local police officers, at the

21 lowest level once again, if they were able to indicate where people died,

22 where people were injured? Do you remember that, if they physically

23 marked the area where people were injured and where people died?

24 A. If you mean the forensic marking of the crime scene, my answer is

25 no. But if you mean the possible securing of evidence until the arrival

Page 3771

1 of the investigative team, my answer is yes.

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic, where is this line of question

3 leading? You're questioning in relation to the propriety or impropriety

4 of procedures. What is the point you are trying to make?

5 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, today we have in our

6 presence a person who is able to shed some light on the way the

7 investigation took place -- or those investigations took place. I believe

8 that it is very important to ask this line of questioning because we can

9 obtain a great number of details.

10 And I will only have a few questions of this type to put to the

11 witness, and then I will talk about two incidents which we could see on

12 the indictment list, on the schedule, and this witness was a member of a

13 team.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let's examine what have you said. You said we

15 have a person here who could shed light on the way the investigation took

16 place, and you think it is very important to follow this line of question

17 because we can obtain a great number of details. Why do you want these

18 details? I mean, how is it important to your case to have these details?

19 That is my question.

20 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in order to ensure a

21 proper defence, all the facts are important, especially all the facts that

22 are qualified as offences which you can find in the indictment, which we

23 can all see in the indictment, especially all the elements that were part

24 of these investigations, because the Defence and I believe the Trial

25 Chamber cannot take this investigations and cannot read these reports

Page 3772

1 without analysing them minutiously in order to establish the fact that are

2 qualified later as being serious offences, and these offences are, of

3 course, in the indictment.

4 Up until today we have received many reports, and I found

5 instructions in a statement of this witness, instructions that he gave to

6 the police officers, the first one who would go to the crime scene,

7 because, in fact, the Prosecution is not going to call those witnesses to

8 the bar, those police officers who were the first ones to see the victims,

9 the injured, the dead bodies, to talk to us about the position of the dead

10 bodies.

11 So this is very important to the Defence, to us, because it's part

12 of the investigation. It could indicate the direction of fire. It is

13 very important to us, especially when we talk about sniping incidents, and

14 it is very important for shelling incidents as well, to establish all

15 these facts.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: The direction of fire is, of course, important,

17 but you have not asked anything that is of relevance to that. And

18 generally, I am at a loss to see how general questioning about the local

19 procedures would be helpful to the Chamber in determining whether on the

20 basis of the evidence the crimes charge have been made out.

21 It is one thing if you are saying that the procedures are so

22 untrustworthy that the Chamber cannot place any reliance on them and that

23 the evidence as a whole should be disregarded. That's Rule, I think, 95

24 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, but I don't know understand you to

25 be going as far as that.

Page 3773

1 So that so far in the response to me, the only thing I see helpful

2 would be if you are able to elicit some evidence from this witness about

3 the procedures, to throw some light on the direction of fire, where the

4 shots came from. Otherwise, I don't consider it helpful to delve into

5 these procedures.

6 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if you deem that this

7 is unnecessary, I can go to another topic, but I believe still that it is

8 very important. It is, of course, you will who will have all the elements

9 at the end of the day. But if you wish, I can go to another topic.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let me quite plain. If I'm stopping you, it is

11 because have you not persuaded me that the line of question is relevant to

12 any part of your case, apart from the reference you have made to the

13 direction of fire, the line of fire, and you haven't asked any questions

14 that relate to that.

15 If you're suggesting that the line of questioning is important

16 because part of your case is that the bodies were planted, then that is a

17 different matter. But your colleague had suggested that. You are not

18 suggesting that that is the purpose. If that's what you're suggesting,

19 then certainly I would allow to you continue along a line that is relevant

20 to that kind of defence.

21 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just to summarize, we

22 only have one line of defence. It is not myself or my colleague. We both

23 share the same defence thesis, and you will see it very rapidly at the end

24 of the Prosecution case. We will present to you our arguments, and

25 according to us these are arguments that we are trying to get from the

Page 3774

1 witnesses that are called to the bar by the Prosecution.

2 Those witnesses were chosen by the Prosecution because they are

3 there to support the Prosecution case -- Prosecution's case, but we are

4 going to prove the contrary, of course, or we're going to try to prove the

5 contrary. But if you want me, I can finish with this line of questioning

6 and ask the witness the following.

7 Q. Witness, we talked about a specific incident, and we could maybe

8 move into private session for this question, with your leave,

9 Mr. President, because if we talk about this incident, we can't do it in

10 open court.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Private session.

12 [Private session]

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 3775

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 3775-3786 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Page 3787

1 [Open Session]

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic, I have been informed by the court

3 deputy you have used one hour. The Chamber will give you another half an

4 hour.

5 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

6 Now, could we please -- I'm asking my case manager to please call

7 up 65 ter document number 63.

8 We have a technical problem. Could the court officer please help

9 us. So it's the 65 ter document number 63, page 5, please. In the

10 English version, it's on page 2.

11 Q. Witness, we're still in private session, so you do see your name,

12 right; and in fact --

13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: What session are we in? We're in public session?

15 We're in public session, so do we need to go into private session.

16 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour that. Would be

17 preferable.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, private session.

19 [Private session]

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 3788

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 3788-3802 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Page 3803

1 (redacted)

2 [Open session]

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness make the declaration.

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 WITNESS: WITNESS W-46

7 [Witness answered through interpreter]

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let me just say before you begin, Ms. Edgerton,

9 we'll just divide the time equally between now and 7.00. I think we'll

10 take the break somewhere in the region of 6.00, the first break.

11 Please sit.

12 You may begin, Ms. Edgerton.

13 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Your Honour. Your Honour, pursuant to

14 Your Honour's order of 12 March, 2007, these proceedings will be in closed

15 session, and I would ask that we move into closed session at this point.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON Yes, we will move into closed session.

17 [Closed session]

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 3804

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 3804-3837 redacted. Closed session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Page 3838

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 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.02 p.m.,

Page 3839

1 to be reconvened on Friday, the 16th day of March,

2 2007, at 9.00 a.m.

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25