1 Monday, 9th November, 1998
2 (Open session)
3 (The accused entered court)
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.32 a.m.
5 JUDGE MUMBA: Good morning. Mr. Registrar,
6 can you please call the case?
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours.
8 Case number IT-95-17/1-T, the Prosecutor versus Anto
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you very much. The
11 accused, can you hear me in a language you understand?
12 THE ACCUSED: Yes, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. May I have
14 appearances? The Prosecution?
15 MS. HOLLIS: Good morning, Your Honours.
16 Brenda Hollis with my colleagues Patricia Sellers and
17 Michael Blaxill appear on behalf of the Prosecutor.
18 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. The Defence?
19 MR. MISETIC: Good morning, Your Honours.
20 Luka Misetic and Sheldon Davidson on behalf of the
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. This morning the
23 Court has just received filings from the Defence on
24 notice pursuant to 94 bis (c) saying that they would
25 like the expert witnesses in rebuttal to come and be
1 cross-examined by the Prosecution. I don't know
2 whether the Prosecution has received this.
3 MS. HOLLIS: We just received it, Your
4 Honour. However, we had anticipated doing direct exam
5 of our experts, and they are available.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: And also the second document is
7 dealing with statements in rejoinder; is that so?
8 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I believe it's not
9 their witness in direct, it's their witness in rebuttal
10 to our witness in direct, and ours is --
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
12 MR. MISETIC: -- rejoinder. So we asked that
13 we want to cross-examine their witnesses in rebuttal.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: In rebuttal, yes.
15 MR. MISETIC: I have forgotten what the
16 pending question was, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: I just wanted to clear that
18 because you have your responses to statements of
19 Dr. Brown which are the rebuttal witnesses.
20 MR. MISETIC: We wish to cross-examine both
21 Dr. Brown and Dr. Rath, and then I believe the Court
22 should have a notice that we wish to recall Dr. Morgan
23 and Dr. Younggren in rejoinder following Dr. Rath.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We have that. That's
25 what we've just received as well.
1 MR. MISETIC: Thank you.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Have the Prosecution received
3 that, the rejoinder witnesses?
4 MS. HOLLIS: We just received that, yes, Your
6 JUDGE MUMBA: The proceedings this morning
7 are for the reopening of the case pursuant to our
8 decision of the 16th July, 1998. That is following
9 disclosure of documents by the Prosecution after the
10 proceedings were closed the last time in June.
11 The order of proceedings the Trial Chamber
12 feels will be as follows: There will be further
13 cross-examination of those witnesses, Prosecution
14 witnesses, recalled by the Defence, that is the first
15 witness, Dr. Mujezinovic, and Witness A, and then they
16 will be re-examined by the Prosecution; thereafter, the
17 Defence will call their experts for
18 examination-in-chief, then cross-examination by the
19 Prosecution, re-examination; and thereafter the
20 Prosecution will call their witnesses in rebuttal, the
21 two experts, and re-examination in chief, then
22 cross-examination and re-examination, if any, and
23 rejoinder witnesses, if any, pursuant to the notice of
24 the Defence.
25 That is going to be the order of the
2 When it comes to times, we will adjust the
3 afternoon sitting hours as we have started at 9.30 up
4 to 12.30, and the afternoon we shall start at 14.30 to
5 17.30. There has been a change. We shall be sitting a
6 half-hour later.
7 And then we will have one break during the
8 morning and one break during the afternoon. In the
9 morning, it will be one break of 30 minutes at 11.00
10 hours and start at 11.30 up to 12.30. In the
11 afternoon, I will be able to announce when we start at
12 14.30 to see how much time we need. We shall proceed
14 So I would ask the Defence which witness of
15 the two they want to call first, to recall first.
16 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, we intend to call
17 Dr. Mujezinovic first, but we have some housekeeping
18 matters to address before we get to the witness --
19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
20 MR. MISETIC: -- some of which I believe will
21 be uncontested, others which will likely be contested
22 but we offer them right now.
23 The first matter is that we wish to offer
24 some of the statements that were produced to us into
25 evidence; that is by consent of the Prosecution as
1 well. I believe they are the statements of two
2 doctors, who are unidentified in public so I won't use
3 their names. These statements that were produced to us
4 by Medica, the documents that were produced to us by
5 Medica, we wish to offer those into evidence as well.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Those are the ones we dealt
7 with in our decision, isn't it, where you asked for
8 identities, the one the Prosecution said they didn't --
9 MR. MISETIC: Quite frankly, Your Honour,
10 yes, we are going to offer those into evidence; I just
11 haven't had the opportunity to make any copies, so I
12 was going to offer them on a little later, but since
13 the Prosecution and the Court already have copies, if
14 you want to do that now, that's fine with me too, but
15 it's the July -- the June disclosed documents, the two
16 witness statements from the two doctors in Bosnia
17 briefly examined Witness A, the medical records that
18 were produced to us pursuant to subpoena from Medica --
19 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we do that after the break
20 when you're able to identify them clearly?
21 MR. MISETIC: Absolutely.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Then we can have the record
23 clearly identifying the documents you wish submitted
24 into evidence and then the Prosecution will also have
25 time to --
1 MR. MISETIC: Absolutely, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: -- make sure that they are the
3 ones they consented to.
4 MR. MISETIC: Absolutely. The other issue is
5 that since we read the response or the statements of
6 the Prosecution's expert witnesses, we realise that
7 they are going to contend that we have no knowledge
8 about treatment used at Medica with respect to how they
9 proceed or anything about them.
10 We searched our files, and we have two
11 documents regarding Medica, the types of treatment it
12 uses, its history, the amount of experience that the
13 people at Medica had in treating patients generally of
14 trauma and specifically with PTSD. That was a document
15 that I downloaded off the internet and, as we sit here
16 this morning, is no longer on the internet.
17 The other document that we believe has
18 evidentiary value and that our experts will comment on
19 is the e-mail that was produced to the Court Thursday
20 purported to be from Dr. Monika Hauser.
21 JUDGE MUMBA: Discussing what?
22 MR. MISETIC: It is discussing the -- I don't
23 know whether the Court has had an opportunity to see
24 that or not, the e-mail that we faxed to the Court from
25 Dr. Monika Hauser. It purports to be an e-mail from
1 Dr. Monika Hauser. Our experts are going to comment
2 specifically about the attitudes expressed in that
3 e-mail and how those attitudes can affect a patient who
4 is recovering from trauma. We wish to offer those into
6 We rely on two grounds: First, the e-mail
7 itself evidences the amount of cooperation that we
8 could expect from Medica itself; second, the e-mail was
9 only, according to its face, sent out on November 2nd,
10 and therefore, it would be impossible to get someone to
11 authenticate it; and third, there is precedent for this
12 in the case of Prosecutor versus Blaskic, I believe the
13 Prosecutor offered into evidence in July, it is my
14 recollection, over 200 documents directly into evidence
15 which Trial Chamber I admitted and notified the Defence
16 in that case that they could review the documents if
17 they wished to contest the authenticity of any of those
18 documents, they could call witnesses to question the
19 authenticity. Based on that precedent that is
20 established in this Tribunal, we ask for the same -- it
21 wouldn't be reciprocal, but the same consideration in
22 this case. We believe it's directly relevant and, at
23 the moment, is the only evidence of Medica, its
24 history, et cetera, that is coming directly from Medica
25 itself, in addition to the documents that were produced
1 pursuant to subpoena.
2 I have the documents here, Your Honours, if
3 you wish to see them.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, I think we would like to
5 see them so that we know exactly that we are dealing
6 with the same documents.
7 Have the Prosecution been given copies?
8 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, the first document
9 is entitled "BosNews Report - Medica Zenica - Women
10 Therapy Centre"; the second document is entitled
11 "Medica's Psycho Team - Finding Our Own Way"; and the
12 third document is the e-mail purported to be from
13 Dr. Monika Hauser who is the founder of Medica
14 generally and specifically in Zenica.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: I wanted to ask the
16 Prosecutor -- they are just receiving the copies right
18 MS. HOLLIS: Yes, Your Honour, we are just
19 receiving them. We haven't seen these before.
20 JUDGE MUMBA: So you need time to look at
22 MS. HOLLIS: Yes, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: Is there any one of them that
24 had been produced, Mr. Misetic?
25 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, to give the Court
1 its fullest information, we discovered these documents,
2 one of which was stored away and we had no -- I had no
3 knowledge of, or I had knowledge of but I had forgotten
4 about. The other two -- and we discovered them
5 Saturday night in preparing for the case, and so over
6 the weekend, it would have been difficult to get the
7 documents to the Prosecution.
8 The other documents were put on the internet
9 last week and were produced to the Court and I believe
10 to counsel because they were filed by us.
11 MS. HOLLIS: Your Honour, if I might
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
14 MS. HOLLIS: We were in contact with the
15 Defence over the weekend, we gave them the phone number
16 of Mr. Blaxill. We were here both Saturday and
17 Sunday. To my knowledge, we didn't receive a phone
18 call as to whether we were available to receive these.
19 So our position is that we would have been available.
20 JUDGE MUMBA: So it is clear then that the
21 Prosecution would like some time to look at these
22 before they can comment on whether or not they can be
23 admitted into evidence.
24 MS. HOLLIS: We would appreciate that, Your
1 JUDGE MUMBA: We will deal with the matter
3 MR. MISETIC: We have no objection to that.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: In that case then, we will look
5 at all the documents at a later stage. We can go ahead
6 with the witnesses.
7 MR. MISETIC: Yes, but I wish to alert the
8 Court that to the extent that we complete the
9 examination of the witnesses before our morning break,
10 those documents would be documents that I would want to
11 use in the examination of our first expert, and
12 therefore, I don't know how the Court would want to
13 proceed with it, make a ruling while I'm proceeding
14 or --
15 JUDGE MUMBA: Let me get you clear. You are
16 saying some of the documents, you would like to refer
17 them to your expert witnesses.
18 MR. MISETIC: Yes. Our experts have reviewed
19 the documents and have comments about the documents,
20 and the positions -- the techniques described in the
21 documents as to the treatment of patients, there are
22 certain admissions in the documents regarding
23 experience or lack thereof in treating patients, so
24 they would like to comment upon that.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: So all I want to know is: Are
1 there any of these documents that you wish to refer to
2 "A" or Dr. Mujezinovic?
3 MR. MISETIC: No.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: So we can proceed with those
5 two at least.
6 MR. MISETIC: Yes, we can, Your Honour. Yes,
7 we can.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Which one would you like to
9 have recalled first?
10 MR. MISETIC: The Defence recalls Dr. Muhamed
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Shall we go into closed
13 session, depending on what examination you are going to
14 proceed on?
15 MR. MISETIC: I leave that to the Court. It
16 is the Defence's position that the testimony at least
17 should be public, the issues are public. I think it
18 would be to the benefit of not only my client
19 specifically with respect to, quite frankly, the
20 perception in the public about this case to date but,
21 in addition, it would be beneficial to the public to
22 hear what the testimony in the case is.
23 That said, I leave it to you because I will
24 announce to the Court today that almost all of the
25 testimony with respect to Dr. Mujezinovic is going to
1 be about Witness A. You know, we --
2 JUDGE MUMBA: As long as no other names which
3 were heard in closed session are going to be mentioned,
4 then that's okay.
5 MR. MISETIC: I'm completely aware of the
6 requirements not to disclose names that are
7 confidential, and I don't believe that Dr. Mujezinovic
8 would have any reason to mention a name that is
9 protected so ...
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Ms. Hollis?
11 MS. HOLLIS: Thank you, Your Honour. Your
12 Honour, the Prosecution requests that we do have this
13 in closed session. When Dr. Mujezinovic testified as
14 to issues that are relevant to why this case was
15 re-opened during the initial phase of the proceedings,
16 he testified in closed session. We believe that closed
17 session is the only way to appropriately ensure that
18 there are no statements that can be linked to Witness A
19 if she is later identified, which we think is very
21 We are not aware of any perception of the
22 fairness of this trial that would require otherwise
23 appropriately closed session testimony to be given in
24 open session. It would be our request that we go into
25 closed session.
1 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, may I respond?
2 First, I don't see how the Prosecution can
3 say they don't see what the effect has been when
4 Dr. Hauser posts on the internet that a war criminal is
5 going on trial on Monday, so Mr. Furundzija has been
6 convicted in the court of at least Medica's opinion.
7 Second, the Prosecution had no objection to
8 us talking about all of this in open session in final
9 argument. These are all matters that are now in the
10 public domain, and the only person it hurts, in terms
11 of keeping these matters confidential, is my client.
12 I would note the distinct disadvantage we're
13 at because, much to my chagrin, someone from the Office
14 of the Prosecutor made comments to the New York Times
15 that the victim is being retraumatised by this Trial
16 Chamber and by the Defence. We know for a fact that
17 that is a request made by the Office of the Prosecutor
18 in July to reopen the case and have Witness A come
20 That is why our specific request is to at
21 least have the testimony out in public so everyone can
22 fairly comment upon this.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: But you do appreciate,
24 Mr. Misetic, that part of the testimony of
25 Dr. Mujezinovic during the trial proceedings was in
1 closed session?
2 MR. MISETIC: At our request.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
4 MR. MISETIC: Right. It was at our request
5 for a specific purpose, and that was so that
6 Dr. Mujezinovic -- if I may backtrack? It wasn't
7 because we were afraid that Dr. Mujezinovic would
8 reveal something in terms of her psychiatric or
9 psychological condition but that I was cross-examining
10 him with respect to his knowledge about Witness A's
11 spouse, and I didn't want her spouse's identity to
12 become public. That was the motivation behind keeping
13 it in closed session.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. Ms. Hollis?
15 MS. HOLLIS: Yes, Your Honour. We feel
16 compelled to request that, in closed session, the
17 Defence tell us who it is he is asserting in the Office
18 of the Prosecutor gave any information to any media.
19 It is not the policy of the Office of the Prosecutor to
20 provide any information to the media about ongoing
21 cases, so we would request the specific name to whom
22 the Defence is referring. We would ask for that in
23 closed session, please.
24 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, there is no need
25 to go into closed session because there is no name. I
1 suggest that the Office of the Prosecutor conduct an
2 internal investigation because the person was
3 specifically identified as an attorney who deals with
4 sexual assault crimes at the Tribunal, and I assume
5 that is not a Defence counsel.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Misetic, you know very well
7 that a media report without a name cannot be relied
8 upon for your submission in court --
9 MR. MISETIC: I understand that, Your
10 Honour. But I also understand the other side, which is
11 it's very easy to keep yourself an unidentified source,
12 make comments to the press, and then come into court
13 and say you can't rely that the press actually used the
14 correct statement. I have no problem with that, but
15 this will then prevent the press from making false
16 statements if the evidence is out in public, and that's
17 the point of having a public trial --
18 JUDGE MUMBA: The point, Mr. Misetic, here is
19 that the Defence counsel cannot prove that it was
20 somebody from the Prosecution's Office, (1), and you
21 are relying on that to ask for open session. That is
22 where the problem is, because you can't prove it. So
23 the best thing for you is to withdraw that because you
24 have agreed that there was no name so you don't
25 actually know.
1 MR. MISETIC: I didn't give a name in the
2 first place, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: So what if it was just a
5 MR. MISETIC: Then we should call the New
6 York Times reporter in and question her as to what her
7 source is.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: That is too far-fetched --
9 MR. MISETIC: It is not an important point,
10 but it is -- it is what it is. I identified what her
11 claim as to the source is.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: That is not accepted by the
13 Trial Chamber.
14 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: After considering the issue
16 whether or not Dr. Mujezinovic should be
17 re-cross-examined in open or closed session, the Trial
18 Chamber is of the view that the proceedings will go on
19 in open session. So you may proceed, Mr. Misetic.
20 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour? I apologise for
21 the interruption.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
23 MR. MISETIC: I forgot to raise an issue
24 which may be of some importance and may be also
25 something that the Prosecution wishes to consider.
1 We would like to have our expert sit in to
2 listen to the testimony of Dr. Mujezinovic and
3 Witness A so that they can comment upon whatever
4 evidence they hear directly in the courtroom. In
5 addition, since neither Mr. Davidson nor I have any
6 real expertise in the area of clinical and forensic
7 psychology, to the extent that anything comes up for
8 which we have not been prepared, they may be able to
9 advise us as to a specific course of questioning which
10 would be appropriate.
11 We would have no objection if the Prosecution
12 wish to have their experts also sit in so that they
13 could comment upon the same testimony and rebut any
14 testimony provided by our experts. Thank you.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: Ms. Hollis?
16 MS. HOLLIS: Thank you, Your Honour. We
17 believe that it's not a matter of objection or no
18 objection, it is a matter that is allowed by the Rules,
19 and we would ask the same thing of our experts. We
20 believe it can be of assistance to the counsel in the
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Misetic, your experts
23 can sit in. The same will be for the Prosecution
24 witnesses in rebuttal; they can sit in from whatever
25 stage so they can assist with the evidence.
1 MR. MISETIC: Our experts are in the Defence
2 witness room. If the Court wishes to call them in,
3 that would be fine.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we be assisted with that,
6 (The witness entered court)
7 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe while we're waiting, the
8 witness can make the solemn declaration due to the
9 passage of time. So can the witness make a solemn
11 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will
12 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. You may be seated.
15 WITNESS: MUHAMED MUJEZINOVIC (resumed)
16 Re-cross-examined by Mr. Misetic:
17 JUDGE MUMBA: The Court doesn't mind the
18 experts being closer to the Defence counsel, right
19 behind them. So that if there is need for
20 consultation, it will be much easier.
21 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, for the record, I
22 believe it would be appropriate to indicate that on
23 behalf of the defence are witnesses Dr. Jeffery
24 Younggren and Dr. Charles A. Morgan.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
1 MR. MISETIC: The Prosecution can make its
3 MR. BLAXILL: Good morning, Your Honours.
4 The Prosecution expert witness present in court is
5 Dr. Craig C. Rath, R-A-T-H.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. If they both use
7 English it's on channel 4. Yes, ready, you may
9 Dr. Mujezinovic, you've been recalled for
10 these proceedings, which are a reopening of these
11 proceedings which were otherwise closed in June, for
12 further cross-examination by the Defence regarding
13 whichever subject matter they will put to you. So
14 you're here to answer the questions, and then after
15 that the Prosecution will re-examine you.
16 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Q. Good morning, Doctor.
18 A. Good morning.
19 Q. Have you communicated with anyone about your
20 testimony in this case since you've last testified in
21 June of this year?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Have you communicated with Witness A since
24 you last testified in this case in June of this year?
25 A. No. I haven't even seen Witness A.
1 Q. Have you spoken with Dr. Kadrija Sabic about
2 Witness A or this case since your previous testimony?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Do you know Mirha Pojskic?
5 A. I know some Pojskics, but Mirhet or Mirheta I
6 don't know.
7 Q. I don't believe I said Mirheta, Doctor. I
8 talking about the Mirha Pojskic, and perhaps this will
9 refresh your recollection; Mirha Pojskic from Medica in
11 A. I do not know her.
12 Q. Doctor, wasn't it your testimony, in June,
13 that you referred Witness A to Dr. Kadrija Racic-Sabic,
14 and I'm citing page 208 of the transcript
15 here: "Because she is specialised in these things, and
16 I asked her to treat his wife. My lady colleague did
17 this for a humanitarian organisation called Medica with
18 a seat in Zenica. They had a team, and I cooperated
19 with the team who helped those individuals who went
20 through the post-war distress syndrome."
21 Do you recall that testimony, Doctor?
22 A. Yes, I do. I said last time that a person
23 that the -- Person A came to my office. She spoke to
24 me. I was unable to assist her, and I called up my
25 colleague, whom I knew well, a neuropsychiatrist, Madam
1 Kadrija Sabic-Haracic, who was at the same time an
2 associate of Medica and who worked in the
3 neuropsychiatric department in Zenica. I did cooperate
4 with people from Medica, because after the end of
5 hostilities with the Croats they would come to Stari
6 Vitez. As Kadrija Sabic came with them I was
7 introduced to her, but I didn't try to memorise her
8 because there were several of them, you see. Kadrija
9 Haracic was not the only one. It is possible that
10 Mirha Pojskic was among them.
11 I'm just saying there was a group of them, a
12 team consisting of a sociologist, a gynaecologist, a
13 psychiatrist, and I made it possible for them to have
14 normal working conditions in Stari Vitez, and I did not
15 interfere in their work. They had their own methods
16 and programmes of work. I did not directly participate
17 in their work with them.
18 They would come in a van, and most of the
19 examination were is done in the van itself or in my
20 office -- or, rather, my surgery, because I would stop
21 working when they came and pass over the office to
23 Q. Doctor, you were the President of the War
24 Presidency during 1993 and 1994; is that correct?
25 A. Yes, that is correct.
1 Q. And you were in Zenica after you were forced
2 to leave the Vitez municipality in May of 1993; isn't
3 that correct?
4 A. I was President of the War Presidency from
5 the 2nd of February, 1993 until about November or
6 December 1994. I was exchanged from Vitez on the 19th
7 of May, 1993, and my family stayed behind in Vitez.
8 They were exchanged on the 31st of May, and we lived
9 with my sister in Zenica from the 31st of May for about
10 six months, until I was given a house to live in by a
11 friend of mine.
12 Q. Is the answer to the question "Yes", Doctor?
13 A. Yes. I was President of the War Presidency
14 of Vitez municipality, of the Bosniak, or as they say,
15 the Muslim part of the Vitez municipality.
16 Q. But from June 1, 1993
17 1994 you were in Zenica; correct?
18 A. My family lived in Zenica. I spent a part of
19 my time in Zenica, but most of my time in the villages
20 of Poculica, Preocica, Vrhovine as a physician. I
21 worked as a physician as well throughout the war.
22 Q. As President of the War Presidency, did you
23 become -- strike that.
24 As President of the War Presidency did you
25 ever meet Dr. Monika Hauser?
1 A. No.
2 Q. You never met Dr. Monika Hauser?
3 A. I don't remember. I have heard of her. I
4 know that she was in charge of Medica. And as far as I
5 know, Medica, as an organisation, did a great deal in
6 those parts helping the seriously traumatised people.
7 I promised to the personnel that I would go
8 and visit them, but I never did visit their premises.
9 They told me where they were headquartered in Zenica,
10 but I never went to those offices. But I do know that
11 they did a great deal to help people, and that our
12 official reports were highly laudatory of Medica. And
13 privately, too, people had expressed their appreciation
14 for what had been done by Medica in Zenica.
15 Q. Other than Witness A, did you ever refer a
16 person or one of your patients to Medica?
17 A. I advised -- I did advise other patients too,
18 but Person A, in my view, was the most typical or,
19 rather, a drastic case. I gave similar advice to
20 others when they came to see me, that is, that they can
21 seek assistance from them, because Dr. Kadrija Haracic
22 was from Vitez, she was born in Vitez, and before the
23 war and after the war we had collaborated when dealing
24 with such and similar cases. Even today, as a
25 physician, I often advise patients with this kind of
1 disorder to address to Dr. Racic Sabic and her
2 colleague, who is specialising on such problems,
4 Q. You said you've worked with Dr. Racic Sabic
5 prior to the war and after the war?
6 A. I said that we cooperated professionally,
7 because the system of organisation of health care is
8 such that I give specialist notice for a patient to go
9 and see such and such a doctor, a specialist, "She will
10 help you most."
11 Q. Doctor, but I'm asking you -- so then let's
12 use your terminology. You cooperated with her during
13 the war and after the war; is that correct?
14 A. Before the war as well.
15 Q. So as the referring physician for Witness A,
16 in these opportunities that you had to cooperate with
17 Dr. Racic Sabic, did you ask -- let me finish the
18 question. Did you ask for an update as to the
19 condition of Witness A?
20 A. No. I had a lot of work to do. I didn't
21 give such a note to Witness A. I said that she came to
22 visit me in my office and not in my surgery, so I
23 believed that the doctor would do everything she could
24 to assist this person. And whoever I had sent there
25 before the war, during the war and after the war never
1 came back to me with any kind of complaint, or nobody
2 ever told me that they were dissatisfied with the
3 treatment they were given by this doctor. And since
4 she took care of these people and monitored them for a
5 longer period of time, mostly she would schedule
6 check-ups on a regular basis, and she would follow their
7 improvement. And as head of the Bosniak part of the
8 municipality, Dr. Racic did once ask me to help with
9 the transport of her patients to Zenica when she was
10 unable to come to Vitez for these check-ups, and I did
11 so whenever I could. I gave her -- would give her an
12 ambulance or some other means of transport to Zenica
13 where she worked.
14 Q. Doctor, I think we may be having a
15 translation problem. I'm not asking you formally,
16 under your medical guidelines, whether you wrote a note
17 to -- for Witness A to go visit Dr. Sabic, I'm asking
18 you -- because you told Witness A to go see Dr. Sabic
19 and you saw Dr. Sabic at various periods during the war
20 and after the war, did you ever ask Dr. Sabic for an
21 update of your relative, Witness A?
22 A. As I said last time, Witness A, this woman,
23 is a relative of mine. I asked about her when
24 Dr. Sabic would come to Stari Vitez, because her
25 parents lived there. And on one occasion she told me
1 that it was a very serious case and that it would take
2 a long period of psychiatric treatment.
3 Q. Did she tell you why she would need a long
4 period of psychiatric treatment?
5 A. She told me that she was seriously
6 psycho-traumatised person. We didn't go into the
7 details because, as a doctor, as I'm a doctor of
8 internal medicine, and Dr. Sabic's mother and father
9 were my patients, and I had a lot of work, and people
10 would come for examinations to see me very often. For
11 a time I was alone in Vitez. The only doctor in the
12 Bosniak part of Vitez for a time.
13 Q. Doctor, did Dr. Sabic indicate to you that
14 Witness A was suffering from depression?
15 A. We didn't discuss that. She told me that she
16 was a serious case of psychic trauma. No, we didn't go
17 into any further details.
18 Q. Did Dr. Sabic give you a prognosis for
19 Witness A?
20 A. That it would take long and that it would be
21 very hard, the treatment.
22 Q. Did you ever see Witness A, personally, since
23 May of 1993?
24 JUDGE MUMBA: That question has been put and
1 MR. MISETIC: Witness A?
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You asked the doctor
3 whether he saw Witness A and he said no.
4 MR. MISETIC: Could the Court refresh my
5 recollection as to what the answer was?
6 JUDGE MUMBA: It was, "No." You asked him,
7 after he had testified here, after the testimony of
8 this witness.
9 MR. MISETIC: Yes. I mean to ask from May
10 1993 until the present, not from June 1998 till the
12 Q. Doctor, let me repeat the question for you:
13 Have you seen Witness A since -- strike that.
14 You've already testified that you saw her in
15 the fall of 1993 sometime when you referred her to
16 Dr. Sabic.
17 After the day that you referred her to
18 Dr. Sabic. Did you ever have an opportunity to see her
20 A. I saw her sons and husband, but I don't
21 recall having seen Person A after that.
22 Q. How frequently would you see her sons and
24 A. I said, the last time I testified,
11 Page 774 redacted
3 MR. BLAXILL: I'm sorry to interrupt, Your
4 Honours, but one of our concerns that is arising is a
5 variety of details appear to be coming out. Now,
6 obviously we're in open session, and a number of family
7 details relating to A Person are being related, and
8 they might cause a problem in respect of the protective
10 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I don't have any
11 objection with respect to this limited portion of the
12 testimony with respect to her husband and sons. If we
13 go into closed session that's fine, all as long as we
14 can go back into open session when I finish the
15 questioning in this area.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We can go into closed
17 session since you're continuing with the family
19 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE MUMBA: We can go into closed session.
21 I understand the Registry says we can go into private
22 session. So they shut off the sound without pulling
23 down the blinds.
24 (Private session)
11 Page 776-779 redacted. Private session.
13 (Open session)
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Misetic, we are in open
15 session, so you can proceed.
16 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Q. Doctor, in this mass of people, were a large
18 portion of these people refugees from the Vitez
20 A. I didn't understand the question.
21 Q. You answered one of my previous questions by
22 saying that you were introduced to the staff of Medica
23 and there was a mass of people, and I'm asking you, of
24 that mass of people, was a large portion of those
25 people refugees from the Vitez municipality?
1 A. You mean I met the many people that worked at
3 Q. That worked at Medica or that were patients
4 at Medica.
5 A. I don't know how many patients there were in
6 Medica from Vitez. I don't know that. I know that
7 there were a number of patients, but I don't know their
8 exact number.
9 In Medica, as far as I know, they offered
10 medical aid and assistance to all those asking for it,
11 and as far as I know, they would go around the area;
12 for example, they had a programme of work by which they
13 would move from one locality to the next, they had a
14 special vehicle, and they said beforehand they would
15 give notice of when they would be arriving, and they
16 would call their patients and then they would take in
17 all the people who turned up in addition to the main
18 office that was in Zenica; and how many patients they
19 had from Vitez and how many refugees they had, I really
20 cannot say.
21 Q. Are you familiar with a person named Marijana
23 A. Marijana Senjak. I know Krizan Senjak but
24 not Marijana Senjak.
25 Q. Do you know Nurka Babovic?
1 A. I don't know which individual you mean.
2 Perhaps I do know the person, but I can't say. I can't
4 Q. Do you know who the Mujo Lama at Medica was?
5 A. No, I don't.
6 Q. Do you know Sabiha Haskic?
7 A. I know a lot of Haskics, but I don't know
8 which Haskic you have in mind.
9 Q. Do you know a Haskic that worked at Medica?
10 A. I don't know which individual with the
11 surname Haskic works at Medica.
12 Q. How about an individual with the first name
13 Sabiha at Medica?
14 A. The surname?
15 Q. Haskic.
16 A. I said that I know a lot of Haskics, but I
17 don't know who Sabiha Haskic is. I never contacted
18 Sabiha Haskic, had any contacts with a Sabiha Haskic
19 when talking about Medica.
20 Q. Doctor, are you familiar with the term "Post
21 Traumatic Stress Disorder"?
22 A. Post Traumatic Distress Syndrome, yes.
23 Q. Where did you learn about Post Traumatic
24 Stress Disorder?
25 A. While I studied medicine. I have read
1 professional literature on the subject and that tests
2 were made on the American soldiers in Vietnam
3 Traumatic Distress Syndrome and some other studies and
4 reports which I received as professional literature.
5 Q. You stated earlier that you were a specialist
6 in industrial medicine when you testified in June. As
7 part of that speciality, did you treat people with Post
8 Traumatic Stress Disorder?
9 A. I said that I graduated in 1984, internal
10 medicine, and later on, I went on to specialise in
11 industrial medicine and I worked with workers who were
12 employed at special work posts and had jobs and
13 specific conditions, workers working in the explosives
14 factory or fuel departments for the production of
15 various fuels.
16 Q. Fine, Doctor. As I said, you indicated you
17 worked in the field of industrial medicine, and I'm
18 asking you, in that field, did you treat people with
19 Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or symptoms of Post
20 Traumatic Stress Disorder?
21 A. You asked me that last time as well. We did
22 not have, in our factory, people of that kind suffering
23 from Post Traumatic Distress Syndrome. There was an
24 explosion in 1985, but we did not have any cases of
25 PTSD. Because there were systematic regular check-ups
1 for all the employees, this was compulsory by law, and
2 for each individual worker, in addition to the
3 examination I would conduct for these particular jobs,
4 they would undergo an examination by a
5 neuropsychiatrist and an eye doctor and, if necessary,
6 other specialists as well, and we would draw up reports
7 every year on the results of these periodical regular
8 check-ups for all the employees working in the Vitez
9 factories, and you can receive copies of these reports,
10 if you wish, with my signature on them.
11 Q. Doctor, I'm interested in how you determined
12 that you didn't have any of these cases. What
13 methodology did you use to evaluate a person to
14 determine whether or not they had Post Traumatic Stress
16 A. Well, all these doubtful cases were examined
17 by a neuropsychiatrist and his opinion was final. All
18 the cases where there was any doubt, all the cases that
19 we thought might be suffering from psychiatric
20 disorders, we would send these individuals to
21 consultations with psychiatrists and psychologists; and
22 if we receive a positive answer when they did the
23 psycho tests and if the psychiatrist ascertained that
24 these individuals suffered from psychological disorders
25 or were traumatised psychologically in any way, then
1 all these workers would be sent to have their labour
2 capabilities assessed. They wouldn't carry on with
3 their jobs until they had undergone these examinations
4 to see whether they were capable or not, and this was
5 normal standard procedure according to the rules and
6 the law.
7 Q. Okay. But, Doctor, you did the initial
8 intake to determine whether or not these were doubtful
9 cases for you to refer on to the neuropsychiatrist, and
10 what I'm asking you is: In that initial intake
11 procedure, what factors did you look at -- what was
12 your methodology in determining whether or not this
13 person had the symptoms of PTSD which would necessitate
14 a referral to a neuropsychiatrist?
15 A. I said that we did not have in our reports
16 cases of this kind, but wherever there was any doubt
17 that -- because at these jobs, you had to have
18 completely healthy individuals working there, and we
19 would hold consultations and this was normal, standard
20 medical procedure, that a psychological test must be
21 carried out, we consulted psychologists to see what
22 type of disorder we were dealing with and whether that
23 particular individual could carry on with his
24 particular job.
25 Q. I understand that, Doctor, and that's my
1 point. Are you saying that you would only look at the
2 person and, based on your intuition or gut feeling, you
3 would refer them or not refer them, or are you saying
4 there were specific criteria that you were given to
5 make an evaluation and then make a referral?
6 A. Sir, let me explain one thing to you. I
7 examined each individual from head to toe. That is a
8 basic examination. And it is basics in medicine that
9 you take the general clinical picture of each
10 individual to see whether he suffers from insomnia,
11 whether he has nightmares, whether he has bouts of
12 perspiration. So all these are standard symptoms that
13 we look at. And if any of these symptoms deviated from
14 the norm, then we would, by law, consult a
16 Q. That's what I'm trying to get at, Doctor. So
17 could you tell us what specifically were the
18 symptoms -- what were the symptoms themselves? I
19 understand you did your job and you did it the best you
20 could, but I'm asking you to list what the symptoms
21 were that you would evaluate, and based on your
22 evaluation of those symptoms, you would make a referral
23 on to the neuropsychiatrist?
24 A. We would send them to specialists -- for
25 example, if we thought somebody had become a chronic
1 alcoholic, if he failed to turn up regularly at work,
2 we would look into these reasons to see what was amiss;
3 and on the basis of their case histories, if they had
4 any fears, anxieties, difficulty in sleeping, if the
5 individual heard noises, if they suffered from
6 hallucinations of any kind, and if they did, we would
7 send these individuals for a psycho test and for
8 psychiatric treatment.
9 Q. Thank you, Doctor. With respect to those
10 symptoms, were those symptoms official symptoms that
11 were published in Yugoslavia or some place else by a
12 medical association in terms of that this was the
13 clinical evaluation or these were the symptoms of PTSD,
14 or were you just generally looking at people's
15 psychological and psychiatric health and then making
17 A. I examined the individuals. I would take the
18 particulars and their case history. We had a team of
19 people in the factory that dealt with preventive
20 medicine. I was the president of the team. There was
21 the social worker, there was a sociologist, and there
22 was a psychologist on the team. For each individual
23 person, for each individual case, my colleague and
24 myself, and she was a specialist in industrial
25 medicine, I was president of the group, and we would
1 see what should be done, what preventive measures
2 should be taken to stop any further deterioration in
3 the health of the employees.
4 Q. Doctor, in Yugoslavia, were there
5 professional associations or state institutions that
6 established standards of care for physicians?
7 A. Please, sir. We would get certificates
8 guaranteeing that we could perform our work. If I
9 graduated from the school of medicine, I would get a
10 diploma. If I graduated from the specialist training
11 course, I would again receive a diploma allowing me to
12 perform my work.
13 Q. I think we're having a problem understanding
14 each other. I'm not referring to your qualifications,
15 I'm saying, in the field of medicine, with respect to
16 illnesses, diseases, any other problems that a person
17 would have, were there professional associations or
18 state institutions that would evaluate illnesses,
19 diseases, et cetera, and establish criteria for
20 physicians to look at and to be able to make an
21 official diagnosis that was approved by the physicians
22 or the professional association or the state
24 A. (No interpretation)
25 Q. I don't know whether you're familiar with
1 organisations like the American Medical Association or
2 British Society of Psychologists, I believe it's
3 called, these medical associations that meet to
4 establish guidelines for particular --
5 MR. BLAXILL: Pardon my interruption, Your
6 Honours, but there appears to be no interpretation to
7 the previous answer, according to my machine.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The transcript does show
9 "No interpretation." I wonder why. Maybe Mr. Misetic
10 can repeat the question because you seem to have a
11 problem with the witness identifying what it is that
12 you're trying to ask him about, so if you can just
13 repeat the question?
14 MR. MISETIC: The problem is going to be,
15 Your Honour, that his answer didn't match my question
16 to begin with, so I don't know whether it's going to
17 help. I'm doing a follow-up question anyway, if
18 counsel doesn't mind, I'm still on the same topic,
19 trying to explain it to him.
20 Q. You are familiar with organisations like the
21 American Medical Association and the British Society of
22 Psychologists? Were there similar organisations or
23 state institutions in Yugoslavia
24 criteria for physicians to use in treating patients; in
25 other words, for example, Post Traumatic Stress
1 Disorder, the Yugoslavia Society of Physicians has
2 established that these are the six or seven or eight or
3 ten criteria that a physician should evaluate, and if
4 ten are present, the person has Post Traumatic Stress
6 A. In the former Yugoslavia
7 level, an association of physicians, and then we had an
8 Association of Physicians of Bosnia-Herzegovina, but
9 they did not have the function of the type of
10 association in America and Switzerland. We had special
11 teams, and when we would examine individuals, as -- my
12 particular speciality was prevention. If I doubted, if
13 I had any doubts, then this would be verified by a
14 psychiatrist or psychiatric hospital. After that, they
15 would -- the team to assess the working capability of
16 these individuals would come to a conclusion; and our
17 criteria, for the most part, we used Western
18 literature. We based our criteria on the criteria
19 found in Western literature.
20 Now, you asked me about the criteria. Well,
21 we, of course, read various medical journals and
22 received information, but it was my job to have
23 doubts. It was never official that that was so. This
24 had to be ascertained either by sending the individual
25 to hospital, usually the patient was hospitalised, and
1 that is what we do today as well. So these people are
2 sent to a psychiatric hospital and their state is
3 followed up for a certain period of time, at least 15
4 days. And so a team of physicians working in the
5 hospital, officially they would examine the individual,
6 come to a -- arrive at a diagnosis, and this is the
7 diagnosis that a patient would receive when being
8 discharged from the hospital. That's the system.
9 Q. I think we're getting a little off track.
10 With respect to the local unions of physicians and the
11 union of physicians at the level of the Republic of
12 Bosnia and Herzegovina, did either of those
13 institutions actually establish guidelines for you and
14 other physicians in the practice of medicine?
15 A. The Association of Physicians of
16 Bosnia-Herzegovina, or our municipality of Travnik,
17 this is what we did -- an individual physician, for
18 example, I listened to a lecture by Mrs. Racic Sabic
19 about Post Traumatic Distress Syndrome, she held a
20 lecture for the physicians of Travnik municipality, and
21 I attended that lecture which was held at the Kruscica
22 Motel. So she would hold a set of lectures for the
23 physicians of the Travnik region and she would discuss
24 the criteria and the treatment for the disease. She
25 was invited. She was a physician working in Zenica.
1 She is a member of the Association of the Physicians of
2 Zenica, and she was invited by our region to hold a
3 lecture of this kind because that is her speciality.
4 You can ask her for a copy of her lecture. I attended
5 the lecture, and she presented this specialist lecture
6 for physicians.
7 She told us her visions of Post Traumatic
8 Stress Syndromes, how to look at the disease, how to
9 treat it, and that is how the Association of Physicians
10 still function in Bosnia-Herzegovina today.
11 Q. Let's talk about this lecture on Post
12 Traumatic Stress Disorder.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Misetic, we've reached the
14 time when we should have our break this morning.
15 MR. MISETIC: That's fine, Your Honour. It's
16 an appropriate time to break.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: Do you still need more time?
18 MR. MISETIC: Pardon me?
19 JUDGE MUMBA: You still have more questions
20 for the witness?
21 MR. MISETIC: Yes. We're going into a new
22 field, and this is an appropriate time to break, Your
24 JUDGE MUMBA: The Trial Chamber shall break
25 for 30 minutes. We shall resume at 11.30.
1 --- Recess taken at 10.56 a.m.
2 --- On resuming at 11.30 a.m.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Misetic. You
4 indicated that you still have a lot of questions for
5 this witness.
6 MR. MISETIC: That's correct, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE MUMBA: But I'm afraid that we're going
8 into general issues instead of evidence regarding the
9 treatment received by Witness A, because this doctor
10 didn't deal with Witness A. So what other areas are
11 you intending to cover?
12 MR. MISETIC: These are foundational areas
13 for both Witness A and for the other experts in the
14 case. Otherwise --
15 JUDGE MUMBA: Please keep to the limits.
16 MR. MISETIC: I intend to keep to it.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
18 MR. MISETIC: Actually, Your Honour, also for
19 the record, this is dealing specifically with lectures
20 of what appears to be the treating physician on the
21 topic in issue, and since we don't have the treating
22 physician here this is the next best thing.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you may proceed.
24 MR. MISETIC:
25 Q. Dr. Mujenznovic, you indicated that you
1 attended lectures given by Dr. Kadrija Sabic about Post
2 Traumatic Stress Disorder in the city of Travnik
3 that correct?
4 A. No, it is not. I said that Dr. Kadrija
5 Sabic-Haracic, at the invitation of the doctors'
6 section of Travnik, did deliver a lecture, in the
7 Kruscica Motel in Vitez, for all physicians. The topic
8 of the lecture being Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome.
9 Q. And you said you attended that lecture?
10 A. Yes, I attended, and I was one of the
11 organisers -- or, rather, sponsors of that gathering
12 among the lecturers, because Dr. Haracic-Sabic was not
13 the only lecturer. There were others on other topical
14 issues in medicine.
15 Q. Doctor, I want to clarify the record here.
16 A. I beg your pardon. With respect to this
17 topic --
18 Q. Doctor, I need to clarify something.
19 A. -- experience were is also presented --
20 Q. You were referring to the doctor as
21 Dr. Kadrija Sabic-Haracic, do you mean Dr. Kadrija
22 Racic Sabic? Thank you.
23 A. Yes. On the same topic, a lecture was
24 delivered in Kruscica, in this motel in Vitez by
25 Dr. Dzenana Cvjetic, a neuropsychiatrist from Travnik.
1 Her lecture was devoted to the same topic, and on the
2 same day, for all physicians, be they general
3 practitioners or specialists in various fields.
4 Q. And when was this lecture given?
5 A. I'm afraid I can't tell you the exact date,
6 but it was in 1995. But it was held and this can be
7 easily verified.
8 Q. You say 1995. First, did Dr. Sabic indicate
9 why this was an important topic and when, if you can,
10 so I don't have to ask you too many questions, when she
11 started doing work in this area?
12 A. I really don't know that.
13 Q. That's fine.
14 A. I don't know.
15 Q. You're familiar with what the contents of her
16 lecture are; are you not? What the contents were, I
17 should say.
18 A. No. I listened, as did the other doctors
19 present, to the lectures of these two doctors on this
21 Q. You listened because you wanted to increase
22 your own knowledge in the profession; correct?
23 A. It is customary for the physicians'
24 association to invite certain doctors, certain
25 specialists to discuss the most topical issues in
1 medicine, so that experiences, observations, personal
2 experiences, the experiences in which that particular
3 doctor is employed may be presented.
4 These meetings were customary among doctors
5 of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Then they would go from one
6 town to another. Every month such lectures would be
7 organised in another town to discuss the latest issues
8 in various areas of medicine.
9 Q. And Post Traumatic Stress Disorder was
10 topical, I presume, because of the war and the effects
11 it was having on the citizens and residents of
13 A. At the time it was a topical issue, because
14 the doctors came across difficulties of this kind among
15 their patients, and they wanted to hear from somebody
16 who was most competent in that field and who could
17 present views as to the way in which those patients
18 should be treated, tell us how they treated them and
19 what the results were, how successful that treatment
21 The substance of the lecture was that; that
22 is, to familiarise all the doctors present with these
23 things and to advise doctors, who were not so familiar
24 with these matters, to refer to these two doctors. One
25 was in Travnik and the other in Zenica.
1 Q. You said that they were talking about how
2 these people should be treated. What did they say
3 about how these people should be treated?
4 Specifically, what did Dr. Sabic say about how these
5 people should be treated?
6 A. You see, I can tell you in broad lines that
7 the treatment is protracted and difficult, that
8 psychotherapy is required, together with medication.
9 That would be a global answer. As for the details, I
10 wouldn't go into them, because I don't think I'm
11 competent enough to talk about these things.
12 The main aim was to draw our attention that
13 there was, in Travnik, Dr. Dzenana Cvjetic; and in
14 Zenica, Dr. Sabic-Haracic, who said that she has been
15 working on these problems for some time now in the
16 Medica humanitarian organisation.
17 Q. Just so we're clear, doctor, I'm asking you
18 to be an expert in the area, I'm asking you to recall
19 the contents of that lecture, on that particular date
20 when you attended, with respect to what Dr. Sabic had
21 to say.
22 A. I think I told you the substance of it.
23 Q. That's correct. With respect to that
24 lecture, did Dr. Sabic indicate what proportion of the
25 population suffers or was suffering from PTSD, from
1 Post Traumatic Stress Disorder?
2 A. I'm afraid I can't tell you exactly, but they
3 did say that she was very busy, that she had a lot of
4 work, that the treatment, in some cases, was more
5 difficult than in others, that there were differences
6 regarding the consequences. I don't remember the
7 percentage that she cited. I don't think she did
8 mention any names. She didn't mention any specific
9 name in her lecture.
10 Q. What did Dr. Sabic tell you to look for?
11 What symptoms in a patient that could indicate Post
12 Traumatic Stress Disorder?
13 A. Do I have to answer that question? Because
14 it's as if I was asking -- answering questions in
16 Q. I'll ask the questions, you answer the
17 questions, and if there's an objection --
18 A. It's as if you were testing me in my
19 knowledge of medicine.
20 Q. Let's be perfectly clear. I don't want to
21 offend you. I'm not asking you about your knowledge of
22 an area, I understand you're not a specialist in the
23 area. I'm asking you because you're a witness, not in
24 your capacity as a doctor, what you recall about
25 Dr. Sabic's words. There's a difference in what I'm
1 asking you, and I'm asking you these questions not to
2 ask about your knowledge, but to ask about Dr. Sabic's
4 So could you please tell us what Dr. Sabic
5 told you what to look for in trying to evaluate whether
6 a person has Post Traumatic Stress Disorder?
7 A. Dr. Sabic delivered an extensive lecture
8 about her experiences, and she said that individuals
9 had come to see her, as well as -- see her personally,
10 as well as through the Medica humanitarian
11 organisation. Among the symptoms she mentioned were
12 fear, nightmares, insecurity, feelings of there being
13 no aim in life, that people had disturbed
14 personalities, that they find it very difficult to
15 adjust to normal life, that they felt a certain shame,
16 that they were ashamed of their very selves as we like
17 to say, that they feel when they meet someone, that
18 people were only thing about what they felt rather than
19 any other characteristic that they had as individuals.
20 So those were the symptoms that she mentioned in most
21 part. That people just couldn't fit in. They couldn't
22 resume a normal life, that they felt everything was a
23 heavy burden. And as in Bosnia, most people,
24 regardless of ethnicity, have been brought up in a
25 patriarchal spirit. People are very closely linked to
1 their families.
2 As for soldiers, she would say that some of
3 them would commit suicide, just like that, without any
4 immediate cause. They would simply withdraw, stop
5 communicating with their surroundings and they would
6 suddenly commit suicide. And the environment in which
7 those people lived, knew them as exemplary citizens,
8 and they just couldn't understand what was happening,
9 because such tendencies were not widespread in Bosnia
10 before. A normal person who had a job, his family,
11 that simply everything was breaking up, and this was an
12 added difficulty to the already difficult situation for
13 that particular individual.
14 The doctor said that the treatment was
15 difficult, that rehabilitation needed to be -- needed a
16 great deal of time, that they needed encouragement,
17 that they needed to be told that they were not alone in
18 this situation, that they needed to be told that other
19 people too had gone through similar difficulties, that
20 one had to continue to live to try and restore their
21 stability, their families, the normal course of life
22 for the benefit of themselves and their families. This
23 is a very rough rendering of what she said.
24 I can assure you that the doctor's
25 presentation was far better, more precise, with greater
1 detail, that that is not my particular field of
2 interest. For me, this was sufficient to be able to
3 refer people to the right place as soon as I noticed
4 that they needed treatment of this kind.
5 Q. Doctor, just to know, I appreciate your
6 effort in recalling your memory, and that's all we're
7 trying to establish here.
8 With respect to the treatment that you talked
9 about, what specific types of treatments did she note
10 could be used with patients of Post Traumatic Stress
12 A. I have already said that the most important
13 part of the treatment is psychotherapy, combined with
14 certain medicines, pharmaceuticals, which would repress
15 fear, which would provide relaxation. But the main
16 treatment was psychotherapy.
17 Q. Did she talk about what they did in
18 psychotherapy? What types of treatment within
19 psychotherapy did they use?
20 A. I cannot reproduce what she said.
21 Q. To the best of your recollection.
22 A. I would suggest there's no problem in you
23 obtaining a copy of that lecture. The doctor would be
24 glad to give you a copy, I'm sure, if you ask for it.
25 Q. On the odd chance that we don't get a copy of
1 that document, can you just tell us what your
2 recollection is about what types of treatment within
3 psychotherapy she said were employed?
4 A. I don't remember. I have already indicated,
5 in broad lines, to encourage people, to talk to them at
6 length, to approach them very gradually in the
7 psychotherapeutic sense, not to go to the event
8 immediately, but to start in a roundabout way, in very
9 broad lines, and only gradually to focus in on the
10 problem itself.
11 JUDGE MUMBA: We've heard that before. We're
12 going into too many --
13 MR. MISETIC:
14 Q. Sir, you testified earlier that you
15 examined -- I should say you met with Witness A
16 sometime, you believe, in the fall of 1993, perhaps the
17 winter of 1994, at which time you referred her to
18 Dr. Sabic?
19 A. Yes. I said that Person A came, accompanied
20 by someone, I can't remember who it was, to see me.
21 That is what I said. I was not in my surgery in which
22 I used to work, but I was in an office -- in my
23 office. That's what I said.
24 Q. But my point is that you did meet with her
25 and refer her to Dr. Sabic? I'm just trying to --
1 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Misetic, we're wasting a
2 lot of time in repetitions. It was there before, it's
3 been there this morning. Please.
4 MR. MISETIC: Let me just wrap up then.
5 Q. Doctor, you testified that at that referral
6 meeting that she was incoherent, that she cried, that
7 she couldn't put together coherent sentences. Is there
8 anything else you recall about that meeting in terms of
9 the symptoms that she had, especially now looking back,
10 in terms of what you know about the symptoms of Post
11 Traumatic Stress Disorder?
12 A. I can tell you now, and I think that is also
13 what I said in my previous testimony, that I was, after
14 all, surprised by the woman's appearance. She had
15 completely changed. She had become deformed. She was
16 a very good looking woman, a very attractive woman, a
17 beautiful woman, in her middle age, a middle-aged
18 woman, who had worked in Vitez as a salesperson. She
19 dressed very elegantly, and who was always very neat.
20 So it was a shock when I saw her, for me. I asked
21 Person A, "What on earth happened to you?"
22 As I was treating her parents and her family,
23 I told you that we were related, she tried to tell me
24 that some terrible things had happened to her. I went
25 on to say that she started telling me what had happened
1 to her, but after a sentence or two she started
2 weeping, and I may have spent about half an hour with
3 her. I told her that there was a doctor, Kadrija
4 Haracic, and that I would personally call her up by
5 phone and ask her to receive her. I also had the
6 telephone number in the neuropsychiatric department and
7 her home number, and I called the doctor and asked her
8 to see her immediately, because I said that this was an
9 urgent psychiatric case. After that I did not see
10 Person A.
11 Q. You said urgent psychiatric case and I
12 understand the events of what happened, but I'm asking
13 you now to talk specifically about symptoms, especially
14 since you have an understanding of what the symptoms of
15 Post Traumatic Stress Disorder are. Can you recall if
16 any of those symptoms were present at the time you
17 referred her?
18 If you want, I can give you some examples and
19 you can giver me a "yes" or "no" answer, if that will
20 make it easier.
21 A. Mrs. A, as I already said, shocked me by her
22 appearance. She appeared frightened, exhausted.
23 Mrs. A, as I said, when she started telling me what it
24 was, she would say, "Doctor, you don't know what I've
25 been through. You don't know what happened to me. I
1 don't know what to do. I want to kill myself. I'm
2 ashamed. I can't sleep, I have nightmares. I can't
3 calm down. I cannot -- I cannot talk to people.
4 Everything irritates me."
5 I told you that she thought everyone was
6 staring at her, and that everybody was accusing her of
7 something, that her sons are already big, grown up,
10 MR. BLAXILL: Pardon the interruption, but
11 once again we're having concerns here regarding the
12 protective measures situation. We're in open session
13 again. This is delving back into sufficient family
14 relationship that I think could lead to unfortunate, if
15 inadvertent, identification of the person concerned.
16 MR. MISETIC: Then I just ask the witness not
17 to speak --
18 Q. I'm just asking you about symptoms, Doctor,
19 so please don't any comments about the husband or the
21 Do you recall any other symptoms?
22 A. Look, if as a doctor with some 20 years of
23 experience behind me, in any profession, including my
24 own, there are many things that one knows from
25 experience and that I could see. If I called up the
1 doctor to ask her to receive her immediately, that the
2 woman wanted to commit suicide, then I think I've told
3 you enough.
4 MR. MISETIC: May I have just a second, Your
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
7 MR. MISETIC: I'm just going to consult.
8 Your Honour, we've completed our cross-examination of
9 the witness.
10 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Re-examination?
11 MR. BLAXILL: I do have a few the matters,
12 Your Honours. They will be brief.
13 Re-examined by Mr. Blaxill:
14 Q. Firstly, I would just like to confirm the
15 time period when this encounter with the person
16 concerned took place. You stated in your testimony, I
17 believe in June and again this morning, that that was
18 late 1993 or early 1994; is that correct?
19 A. Yes. I think it was the second half of 1993,
20 that period, the latter half of '93. The autumn of
22 Q. In point of fact, the specialist lecture you
23 attended in relation to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
24 itself took place later in 1995; is that correct?
25 A. Yes. In 1995, two physician specialists. I
1 mentioned Dr. Kadrija Sabic Haracic and Dr. Dzenana
3 Q. At the end of 1993, did you, when you
4 referred the person to your psychiatry colleague, did
5 you offer any kind of formal diagnosis or assessment of
6 that person when you referred her?
7 A. I promised Person A that I would personally
8 contact the doctor. I was not in my surgery, I was in
9 an official room, and at the time, I was President of
10 the Wartime Presidency, and I said that I would do
11 everything to try and locate her and to have her
12 receive Person A for treatment, but I did not give any
13 official referral note for a hospital because I did not
14 have the papers for that at that time.
15 Q. Did you offer any diagnosis yourself or a
16 medical opinion on the condition of Person A to the
17 doctor to whom you referred her?
18 A. I think that I have already stated, and I
19 conveyed this to the doctor, that the person in
20 question was in a very difficult psychological state,
21 distressed, and that she had tendencies towards suicide
22 and that she should be treated.
23 Q. Did you, sir, after that date, have any part
24 in her treatment?
25 A. No. No, I did not, and I don't consider
1 myself to be competent for treating individuals of that
3 Q. Doctor, a few moments ago, you made reference
4 to the person to whom you referred and you used the
5 words "Kadrija Haracic." Can you perhaps confirm again
6 the name of the psychiatrist to whom you referred or
7 clarify if there's any confusion over the name?
8 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I believe I've
9 already clarified that.
10 MR. BLAXILL: I'm sorry.
11 MR. MISETIC: I asked: You were using this
12 name. Do you mean Kadrija Racic Sabic? And he
13 answered "Yes."
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Blaxill, please continue.
15 A. The person is a woman, I think she was born
16 in 1952. She is a woman, she's not a man. She is
17 Haracic Sabic. Her maiden name is Haracic and her
18 surname, her husband's surname, is Sabic. I think that
19 that is clear enough.
20 MR. BLAXILL: Thank you very much.
21 A. She has three daughters. What more can I
23 MR. BLAXILL: You have amply answered that
24 question. Thank you, Doctor.
25 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour --
1 MR. BLAXILL: I was going to say -- may I
2 just say that that concludes my re-examination, Your
3 Honours. Thank you.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you.
5 MR. MISETIC: I think we need clarification
6 because he made that mistake before, and I asked him
7 whether that is Kadrija Racic Sabic and he indicated
8 "Yes," and I would just like to know whether that is
9 still the case.
10 JUDGE MUMBA: With regard to which one? The
11 last name?
12 MR. MISETIC: I just want to avoid a
13 situation where the Prosecution comes in at the end and
14 says now we're talking about another person, not
15 Kadrija Racic Sabic but Kadrija Haracic Sabic and that
16 that might be somebody else, and I would just like to
17 make sure that we're clear.
18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Go ahead. Go ahead.
19 MR. MISETIC:
20 Q. Doctor, on two occasions now you've used the
21 name Kadrija Racic Sabic. You used that name when you
22 testified in June of this year --
23 A. I never said Racic, I said Haracic.
24 Q. Would you like to see a copy of your
25 transcript, Doctor?
1 JUDGE MUMBA: There could have been a
2 spelling mistake.
3 A. Please. I have always referred to the person
4 as Haracic, Haracic, and not Racic, but Haracic.
5 MR. MISETIC: Can I pull up the transcript
6 here in this case where I asked him not 45 minutes
7 ago -- okay. Just as long as, for the Court, it
8 doesn't matter. That's fine with me. Thank you, Your
10 A. I really don't know what you have in your
11 transcript, but I kept saying Sabic Haracic and I said
12 that her maiden name was Haracic, and she is married
13 and her married surname is Sabic.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you very much, Doctor.
15 Any reasons why the witness should not be released?
16 Anything from the Prosecution?
17 MR. BLAXILL: Your Honours, I think certainly
18 based on the -- what we are aware of the Defence case
19 at this point in time, our comment would be "No." We
20 would see no objection. Of course, things could
22 MR. MISETIC: We have no objection, Your
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you very much, Witness.
25 You are released. You are free to go.
1 (The witness withdrew)
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Misetic, we can continue
3 before the lunch break. We have some twenty minutes.
4 MR. MISETIC: That would be fine, Your
6 JUDGE MUMBA: We are going into closed
8 Who is your next witness?
9 MR. MISETIC: I'm sorry, Your Honour,
10 Witness A.
11 JUDGE MUMBA: So we are going into closed
12 session with all the blinds down.
13 (Closed session)
11 Pages 812-862 redacted. Closed session.
11 Pages 863-868 redacted. Private session.
11 (Open session)
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Doctor, will you please make
13 the solemn declaration?
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. I solemnly
15 declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth,
16 and nothing but the truth.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. Please proceed,
18 Mr. Misetic.
19 WITNESS: JEFFREY NELS YOUNGGREN
20 Examined by Mr. Misetic:
21 Q. Witness, would you please state your name for
22 the record?
23 A. Jeffrey Nels Younggren, Y-O-U-N-G-G-R-E-N.
24 Q. What is your residence?
25 A. I live in Rancho Palos Verdes, California, in
1 the United States.
2 Q. What is your occupation?
3 A. I am a clinical and forensic psychologist.
4 Q. Where did you receive your education?
5 A. I received my education at the University of
6 Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, in the United States, my
7 master's degree in psychology there and my Ph.D. in
8 clinical psychology there.
9 Q. Have you ever served in any military?
10 A. Yes, I have.
11 Q. Which military did you serve in?
12 A. I served 29 years as a commissioned officer
13 in the United States Army.
14 Q. Have you ever received a medal while you
15 served in the United States Army?
16 A. I most recently received my second
17 Meritorious Service Medal for contributions to the
19 Q. What is your current role with the United
20 States military?
21 A. I serve as United States Army Reserve
22 clinical psychology consultant to the Surgeon General
23 of the army.
24 Q. Have you also received any medals in that
1 A. My most recent decoration was for some
2 contributions that I made in terms of credentials and
3 qualifications for psychologists in the army.
4 Q. To be kind to the interpreters, Doctor, you
5 can take the earphones off, and if you want to move it
6 to Channel 6 just so that you realise that there is a
7 translation delay between my question and your answer.
8 A. Thank you.
9 Q. How long have you been licensed to practice
11 A. Since 1976.
12 Q. In what state are you licensed?
13 A. In the State of California
14 Q. Are you board certified?
15 A. Yes. I hold my boards from the American
16 Board of Professional Psychology in clinical
18 Q. Can you explain what board certification
19 means and why it's important?
20 A. Board certification is an examination-based
21 process where you submit yourself to peer review,
22 demonstrating a higher level of expertise to your peers
23 that qualifies you for recognition of advanced status,
24 if you will.
25 Q. What is your area of expertise?
1 A. I currently serve as both a clinical and a
2 forensic psychologist. I specialise in the forensic
3 aspects of psychology, in issues having to do with
4 ethics, standard of care, and trauma and memory work,
5 and in my clinical practice, I have an outpatient
6 clinical practice, where I see individuals in
8 Q. Are you board certified in any particular
10 A. I hold my boards in clinical psychology.
11 Q. What is the American Psychological
13 A. The American Psychological Association is an
14 organisation of psychologists in the United States
15 America, it's a voluntary organisation and it has
16 multiple purposes, but it's designed to integrate the
17 profession of psychology.
18 Q. Have you received any honours from the
19 American Psychological Association?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Which honours have you received?
22 A. Two years ago, I was voted the status of
23 Fellow of the American Psychological Association for my
24 contributions to psychology.
25 Q. How does one become a Fellow in the American
1 Psychological Association?
2 A. Approximately 5 per cent of the membership
3 receives the status of Fellow. It is a peer review
4 process where your credentials and contributions are
5 reviewed at various levels in the organisation and
6 eventually voted on by the Council of Representatives
7 which is the governing body of the American
8 Psychological Association.
9 Q. Do you know how many members the American
10 Psychological Association has?
11 A. Approximately 65.000 members.
12 Q. Do you have any journal affiliations?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Which journal affiliations do you have?
15 A. I am a consulting editor for the Journal of
16 Professional Psychology - Research and Practice
17 published by the American Psychological Association.
18 Q. Do you have any academic experience?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. What academic experience do you have?
21 A. I am currently an assistant clinical
22 professor of medical psychology at the University of
23 California, Los Angeles.
24 Q. Doctor, what is clinical psychology?
25 A. Clinical psychology is that aspect of
1 psychology that is applied and is generally designed to
2 assess and/or treat psychological issues and
3 developmental issues or problems.
4 Q. So that means -- does that mean that you are
5 treating people?
6 A. You treat people with mental illnesses.
7 Q. What clinical experience, if any, do you
9 A. Well, I was trained as a clinical
10 psychologist, did an internship at the VA Palo Alto in
11 clinical psychology, trained also with Stanford
12 University at that time. I left my internship and
13 spent two years as a division psychologist for the 9th
14 Infantry Division of the United States Army, left that
15 capacity, and began employment in an outpatient HMO in
16 Southern California. As I established my private
17 practice in clinical psychology, left the HMO to go
18 into full-time private practice.
19 Q. Have you served on any professional boards or
21 A. Yes. I served as a member of the ethics
22 committee of the California Psychological Association
23 for four years, spent the fifth year as the chair of
24 that committee. Following that, I was elected or
25 appointed, if you will, to be a hearing officer for the
1 American Psychological Association, and in that
2 capacity you hear complaints, or cases if you will, and
3 render decisions about ethical conduct. I then was
4 appointed as a fact-finder, now known as an associate,
5 to the ethics committee of the American Psychological
6 Association, spent two years in that capacity and was
7 elected by the Council of Representatives to the
8 committee, served three years on the committee,
9 finishing my last year as chairperson of the ethics
10 committee of the American Psychological Association.
11 Q. What does the ethics committee of the
12 American Psychological Association do?
13 A. It has two functions: one is to enforce the
14 ethical standards of psychologists in a disciplinary
15 fashion on its members, that is, deal with complaints;
16 and then it serves an educative function. It is
17 involved in educating the membership about ethical
18 issues, to include the review and the development of
19 new ethics codes. Although the codes are developed by
20 sub committees, the committee retains authority over
21 the codes.
22 Q. Do you serve as a consultant for any boards
23 or committees?
24 A. Yes I do.
25 Q. Which do you serve?
1 A. I consult to various licensing boards in the
2 State of California to include the Medical Board, Board
3 of Psychology, Board of Behavioural Sciences, Nursing
4 Board, and other health care boards, and also consult
5 with the Board of Psychology in the State of Nevada
6 standards of care and ethics issues.
7 Q. Have you published or presented any articles
8 on psychology?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. How many articles have you published or
12 A. I have six peer review publications and a
13 number of other publications in widely disseminated
14 journals, if you will, like the Register Report of the
15 National Register of Psychologists. It's a United
16 States organisation that publishes a journal, if you
17 will, or a newsletter about ethical issues, and I write
18 articles for that and then publications in various
19 division newsletters as well and have made
21 Q. Have you ever been qualified as an expert in
22 a Court of law?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. In how many cases have you been qualified as
25 an expert?
1 A. Approximately 35.
2 Q. Did your testimony in any of the cases in
3 which you have been qualified as an expert deal with
4 traumatic memory?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. How many cases?
7 A. At a minimum three cases: one criminal, one
8 civil, and in another, an administrative law matter.
9 Q. In your professional practice as a clinical
10 and forensic psychologist, have you worked with cases
11 that involve memory and trauma?
12 A. Yes. I have treated trauma victims in my
13 practice and, in my forensic practice, have done
14 extensive assessments of trauma victims, both with
15 established trauma as well as debated trauma, if you
16 will, and so both in the capacity as a forensic
17 psychologist as well as a clinical psychologist I've
18 worked with issues of trauma and memory.
19 Q. During your tenure with the ethics committee
20 of the American Psychological Association, did you deal
21 with cases that involved trauma?
22 A. Yes, we did, and, in fact, at that time the
23 debate was raging about memory recovery and false
24 memory syndrome, if you will, and that piqued my
25 interest in the area because there were allegations of
1 professional misconduct wrapped around that, and in
2 addition, the American Psychological Association was
3 involved in the preparation of a report about traumatic
4 memory which was published, and so I carried that
5 interest with me after I left the committee and have
6 pursued that interest.
7 Q. Have you ever treated victims of trauma?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. How many, approximately, patients of victims
10 of trauma have you treated?
11 A. Well, I mean, if you start with the beginning
12 of my clinical training and you -- I was at the VA Palo
13 Alto. The majority of the residents there were World
14 War II and Korean War veterans, most of whom were
15 trauma victims. Then I was responsible for dealing
16 with the emotional problems of an infantry division
17 that had just rotated out of Vietnam
18 individuals who were exposed to combat and trauma. I
19 maintained my contact with the military, seeing
20 patients at Letterman Army Medical Centre and Brook
21 Army Medical Centre as well as seeing non-combat trauma
22 victims in my general clinical practice. Although that
23 is not exclusively what I treated, it was a part of my
25 Q. Have you treated any victims of Post
1 Traumatic Stress Disorder?
2 A. Yes. I obviously treated victims of Post
3 Traumatic Stress Disorder in the VA in the army. In
4 those days, we didn't have the diagnosis, we just had
5 the problems. Subsequent to that, I have seen
6 individuals who have carried the diagnosis and I've
7 treated them, as well as assessed individuals who have
8 carried that diagnosis.
9 Q. Have you ever treated rape victims?
10 A. Yes. Again, as a part of my clinical
11 practice, I would see rape victims -- to be honest, I
12 think that rape victims generally are better treated by
13 women than men because generally the victims are women,
14 but I would triage with hospitals that I have worked
15 with, and so in that capacity have treated rape
16 victims, and then have seen rape victims in therapy in
17 various capacities over the years.
18 Q. Are you familiar with the field of forensic
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. What is forensic consulting, and do you have
22 any experience in that area?
23 A. Well, actually, yes, forensic consulting is
24 that aspect of psychology, if you will, forensic
25 psychology, that deals with the application of
1 psychology to the legal process or to an administrative
2 process, testimony, evaluation, disability evaluation,
3 those kinds of things, and I guess in recognition of
4 whether I have expertise in that or not, the American
5 Psychological Association has contracted with me and
6 two other authors to write a book on forensic
7 psychology to be published by the American
8 Psychological Association to help clinicians understand
9 the differences between forensic and clinical
10 psychology and to avoid the pitfalls that exist in
11 crossing those lines, if you will.
12 MR. MISETIC: Your Honours, the Defence
13 offers Dr. Jeffrey Younggren as an expert in the areas
14 of clinical and forensic psychology.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Any comments?
16 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, the Prosecution
17 has no objection.
18 JUDGE MUMBA: You may proceed.
19 MR. MISETIC: Thank you.
20 Q. Doctor, have you reviewed any documents in
21 preparation for this case?
22 A. Yes, I have. I reviewed the testimony of
23 Witness A, 1993, 1995, 1997, the direct and the
24 cross-examination for this trial; in addition, I
25 reviewed the documents from Medica concerning her
1 treatment; and then I reviewed the documents that the
2 Court has accepted today; and I also reviewed the
3 testimony of Witness D in this matter.
4 Q. Doctor, are you familiar with the different
5 methods of treating victims of trauma and rape?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. What is the primary objective when treating a
8 rape trauma patient?
9 A. Well, the primary objective of treating a
10 rape trauma patient is not a lot different, in a
11 general sense, from treating any kind of patient; that
12 is, you are to try and alleviate the psychological
13 difficulties that they're having. Specifically with
14 trauma, there are certain kinds of techniques that are
15 more effective with that than others and some of which
16 are actually destructive in terms of recovery of
17 patients. But in general, the treatment of trauma
18 victims requires the establishment of a therapeutic
19 relationship and then, in some gradual and supportive
20 way, a working-through or a re-experiencing, if you
21 will, of the traumatic event, to organise it as well as
22 to desensitise to the PTSD symptoms that might be
23 present or to the symptoms of the trauma, that doesn't
24 have to be PTSD, and coupled with that appropriate
25 medication intervention.
1 Q. Are you familiar with the terms "forensic
2 reality" and "emotional reality"?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. What do those terms mean?
5 A. Well, it's a term of much discussion in
6 psychology because emotional reality of a patient has
7 to do with their beliefs and what they respond to in
8 their perception of what happened to them and emotional
9 reality is an important part of therapy; that is, a
10 therapist would not necessarily pursue truth, if you
11 will, in a factual sense in order to obtain treatment
12 or to pursue treatment. In fact, if you question a
13 victim too much, it's destructive to the relationship.
14 I would say that short of extreme kinds of allegations,
15 that is, alien abductions and satanic cults, therapists
16 generally accept what a patient brings to them and they
17 work with that and they work with the inconsistencies
18 in it, and that's the emotional reality, vastly
19 different from the forensic reality which has to do
20 with truth, it has to do with the questions that are
21 going on here and in lots of courtrooms about what
22 happened, what didn't happen and so forth. Forensic
23 reality can often be destructive to the emotional
24 reality, and that's why the profession holds the
25 position that treating therapists should not do
1 forensic assessments in the cases that they're treating
2 because they get into mixed roles that can be
3 destructive to the patient.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Can I just ask one question
5 before you leave that? That is the American view;
6 those are the guidelines to the American profession?
7 A. Yes, Your Honour, and truly I think in a
8 general sense they're adopted -- obviously, many
9 countries don't have highly-trained experts and
10 obviously there are constraints as a function of that,
11 but we take very seriously the difference between a
12 forensic role and a clinical role, and mostly for --
13 you know, frankly for two reasons, one of which is that
14 mixing those roles can be destructive to the patient
15 because if you say what they told you is a lie or you
16 don't believe it, you're not going to be able to be a
17 very good therapist; and the second is that therapists
18 tend to become advocates for patients out of the
19 treatment setting. You're trying to get them better
20 and you bond, we call it transference, that's a generic
21 term, and so a treating therapist is not necessarily
22 objective in a forensic sense so they're not good
23 witnesses in expert testimony. They may be good fact
24 witnesses or treating therapists for fact witnesses but
25 not forensic expert.
1 MR. MISETIC:
2 Q. Doctor, to follow up on Judge Mumba's
3 question: Do you have any knowledge of whether that
4 standard that you described about the separation
5 between forensic treatment and -- forensic analysis and
6 emotional treatment, whether that is something that is
7 generally accepted outside the borders of the United
8 States? Do you have any knowledge about that?
9 A. I don't think that it's a matter of a lot of
10 debate, and I would -- I can't cite you publication
11 citations for it, but the standards I'm sure are
12 accepted in Britain and countries in Europe as well.
13 We just had the International Congress of Psychologists
14 in California and, in fact, I presented to the
15 International Congress on Ethics Issues, so there is an
16 integration of standards going on. I can't say what
17 every country's standard is, but they were all there.
18 Q. Doctor, having served on the ethics committee
19 of the American Psychological Association, are you
20 familiar with the minimum standards necessary for
21 someone to begin practice in the area of psychology?
22 A. I'm familiar with primarily the standards in
23 the United States of America and a number of countries,
24 not the world standard, but, yes, generally the title
25 "psychologist," if you will, is restricted or at least
1 encouraged to be restricted to people who hold a
2 doctoral degree in psychology. Many states have a
3 master's level psychotherapist licence for independent
4 practice, so it's safe to say that the minimum level of
5 education in the United States for an individual to do
6 psychotherapy independently is a master's degree.
7 Q. Is there a minimum level of experience that a
8 person must have before they attain a licence to
9 practice in the area of psychology?
10 A. Yes. In most states, there is both
11 pre-degree and post-degree supervision that's required,
12 anywhere from 1.500 to 3.000 hours. I can't speak for
13 every state, but I've testified in a number of states
14 and discussed their licensing laws, and generally there
15 is a supervision component that is embedded in the
16 licence in addition to the education.
17 Q. Doctor, would you recommend that a person
18 with no knowledge about trauma or how to deal with it
19 treat a patient who has Post Traumatic Stress Disorder?
20 A. Absolutely not. Individuals who are absent
21 knowledge of trauma may be useful in an emergency sense
22 to give support and help guide or triage someone to a
23 victim, to someone who has experience, but in the hands
24 of an inexperienced therapist, you can do significant
25 emotional damage to someone if you utilise the wrong
1 kinds of therapeutic interventions. You can actually
2 make the symptoms far worse.
3 Q. What can happen if a person is not properly
4 treated for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder?
5 A. As I said, you can make the symptoms worse.
6 You can -- the term in the literature is "retraumatise"
7 them and it's really regressive. It just creates a
8 whole another set of problems or makes the problems
9 more severe, so the therapy is not helpful. I mean,
10 this is an area of substantial reading, and individuals
11 who work in it and treat victims need to have some
12 knowledge of both the psychological and psychiatric and
13 even some of the new medical literature coming out
14 about neurology of PTSD victims.
15 Q. What effects, if any, could trauma have on
17 A. Well, I am willing to acknowledge that this
18 is a matter of debate in the profession and I'm sure
19 that you will hear individuals take a different
20 position on this, but my reading of the literature
21 indicates that trauma can have effect on memory.
22 Generally memory is good, but that there are studies,
23 Southwicke's research, Koss's research, that indicate
24 that trauma has effects on memory in various ways
25 different from experiencing of unpleasant events by
1 individuals who have not been traumatised, so I'm one
2 of those individuals that believes that the debate goes
3 on but that there is some very good research that shows
4 that the more trauma you have, the worse your memory
5 is, and specifically can cite the research for that.
6 So it's a matter of debate, but there is
7 evidence that trauma affects memory.
8 Q. Doctor, you say that there is a debate. Is
9 there a debate among the various psychological
10 associations on this issue?
11 A. No, I don't think so. I really believe that,
12 for example, in the area of repressed memories, which
13 is not a matter in this case, the American
14 Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric
15 Association, and the British Society have all taken
16 very conservative positions about the validity of those
17 memories and caution clinicians who work with them to
18 be most careful about assuming those memories to be
19 true and assuming positions of advocacy because of
20 those memories. So the associations have taken
21 conservative views. There are divisions among various
22 groups in psychology about the accuracy of memory and
23 the debate goes on, but as I said, my reading of the
24 literature, my belief is that there is data to show
25 that trauma affects memory.
1 Q. Doctor, I'm going to quote you a few lines
2 out of Defence 22 which is the document titled "Medica
3 Psycho Team." It's page 2, under the heading of
5 "At the beginning of our work over two years
6 ago, we often felt helpless. We had no knowledge about
7 trauma and how to deal with it. We ourselves didn't
8 know how we should cope with our own traumatic
9 experiences or how we could protect ourselves
10 internally against the terrible stories we heard each
12 And then that very next paragraph:
13 "At first, we lacked experience and
14 theoretical knowledge, but our daily work and the
15 discussions with women taught us quickly and we became
16 increasingly confident."
17 Doctor, in this particular case, given what
18 you've just testified to, could Medica's lack -- or
19 lack of knowledge about trauma and how to deal with it,
20 its lack of experience or theoretical knowledge have
21 had an effect on Witness A's memory?
22 A. Absolutely. It could have had an effect and
23 it could have led to contamination of memory.
24 Q. What is contamination of memory and how does
25 that apply in this case?
1 A. Well, contamination of memory is where
2 individuals functionally begin to believe things that
3 are not true, can be the result of them filling in
4 blanks from information given to them by other people
5 or piecing memory fragments together in ways that are
6 not necessarily truthful. Again, they may be
7 emotionally meaningful but you may create a belief
8 system that can be dangerous. In addition, if these
9 individuals engage in techniques that retraumatise or
10 encourage things like confrontation, it can be
12 Q. Doctor, if a therapist starts acts as an
13 advocate with a patient and lacks knowledge about
14 trauma and how to deal with it, or experience, what
15 type of consequences could result?
16 A. Well, I think if you limit your advocacy to
17 the treatment setting, and I've said that's important,
18 that's helpful. If you advocate beliefs in things that
19 are wrong, that can be very destructive.
20 I'll give a case in point that I've been
21 involved in, a lady who was -- had a very disturbed
22 psychological history. We would say she had a
23 personality disorder -- went into therapy with an
24 individual who was a believer in cults and satanic
25 cults, if you will.
1 The analysis of the transcriptions of the
2 therapy, as well as the therapist's consultation with
3 other people indicate that belief was reinforced. The
4 patient developed a belief that she was a birthing
5 mother for a satanic cult, if you will, and
6 deteriorated emotionally, was hospitalised and actually
7 involved in some very serious criminal allegations.
8 But the point is that when they did a gynaecological
9 examination on her, her hymen was still intact.
10 Now, somehow what she believed, and I believe
11 came from the process of her therapy with someone who
12 was inexperienced, didn't help her at all, and
13 substantially complicated her life.
14 Q. Could you please explain to the Trial Chamber
15 what the method of group therapy is?
16 A. Group therapy is the treatment modality where
17 you put together individuals, usually who suffer some
18 kind of homogenous problem, in a setting with a
19 therapist to work on those problems in various ways.
20 Usually one or two therapists and a number of group
21 members, and it's a verbal exchange therapy usually. I
22 mean, there are group therapies for relaxation and so
23 forth, but group therapy is group therapy.
24 Q. What effect or effects, if any, might group
25 therapy have on memory?
1 A. Again, as I said earlier, I have concerns
2 that that kind of a therapy fills in the blanks, if you
3 will, and can create false beliefs. It might be useful
4 for those false beliefs or peripheral false beliefs,
5 less so than with the gist memories, but some of the
6 detail memories could be altered. And that, frankly,
7 could be helpful from a treatment perspective but might
8 not be helpful in another setting.
9 Q. What do you mean by that last comment?
10 A. As I said earlier, it may help a patient to
11 put that together and then talk about their problems in
12 an environment where they can relax, and accept them
13 and make therapeutic progress, but then to take those
14 beliefs out and bring them out as fact in terms of
15 confronting people, which is an issue for -- in the
16 profession, and/or coming to a forum like a courtroom
17 and saying they're factual, it's not the same thing.
18 Q. And do you know what guided imagery therapy
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. What is guided imagery therapy?
22 A. Well, first let me say, people do guided
23 imagery therapy differently, but it has to do with a
24 model of therapy where an individual is generally
25 relaxed and then encouraged to fantasise either in a
1 passive way with the therapist, or some therapists
2 actively participate in helping the patient imagine
3 things, usually to piece together improved memory.
4 Q. Doctor, in this case, again I'm using D22,
5 page 3, it describes some of the techniques that were
6 used at Medica to treat patients. Just above the title
7 "Safety in a War," it says: "At the same time we found
8 suitable therapeutic techniques with which we could
9 back up our ideas. These included relaxation methods,
10 dreamed and imagined journeys, breathing techniques and
11 work with the body. Our self-confidence also grew at
12 the same rate as our knowledge and our assessment of
13 our experiences as the results of our work improved."
14 My question to you, Doctor, is if Medica were
15 engaging in the methods of treatment that are described
16 in that citation, and they lacked the experience or
17 knowledge in the treatment of trauma patients, how
18 could this have affected Witness A's memory?
19 A. Well, assuming that Witness A participated in
20 this, this could have contributed to false beliefs in
21 terms of what happened. I think that relaxation
22 therapy is not -- I wouldn't criticise that, that's a
23 helpful therapy. I would worry about what "dreamed and
24 imagined journeys" mean. Dreams are not necessarily
25 truthful mind adventures, journeys, and imagined
1 journeys concerns me. It's awfully close to what I was
2 talking about, although I'm not sure. Breathing
3 techniques may be relaxation, which is fine, and I
4 don't know what work with the body is, but it does
5 worry me.
6 Q. What is -- just so we're clear on this, what
7 is the dream journey technique, or what is dream
9 A. I don't know what exactly they do, but dream
10 journeys and dream interpretation is, frankly, an
11 analysis of people's dreams to determine what they
12 mean. Frequently individuals will encourage that those
13 dreams are representations of what occurred coming from
14 the unconscious mind. I don't think that's supported
15 by the empirical literature at all, but that is a kind
16 of a common lay belief.
17 Q. You talked earlier about the objective of
18 therapy being the recovery of the patient. How does
19 this objective affect reported memory, if at all?
20 A. Well, depends upon how it's used. The -- I
21 mean, if you're talking about someone developing
22 memories that are generally accurate, somewhat
23 inaccurate, and the end result of that would help them
24 recover, to put meaning to what occurred to them and to
25 learn to cope with those experiences and thoughts of
1 what occurred in more adaptive ways, to accept the
2 reality, it can be helpful.
3 Q. Have you seen any evidence of this in this
4 particular case, in terms of the primary objective
5 possibly affecting reported memory?
6 A. Well, I have some concerns about it. One of
7 the concerns I have is the mixed mission of Medica. In
8 their position statement they say that their goal is to
9 deal with war criminals, and I believe that's in one of
10 the documents, and that may be incompatible with the
11 recovery of patients.
12 So if that is a goal that's carried into the
13 treatment setting, and again, I don't know if it was or
14 wasn't, but assuming that's the mission, then it may
15 encourage patients to do things that are not
16 necessarily treatment oriented, if you will, or
17 recovery oriented.
18 Q. Doctor, so we're clear on that cite, that
19 reference that you just made, I'm going to give you the
20 following passage and ask you if that was the cite you
21 were referring to. I believe it's D25. It is the
22 document entitled, "BosNews Report - Medica Zenica
23 Women Therapy Centre," and it is page 5 under the
24 subtitle "Research."
25 It states: "While our mobile teams
1 visit..." that's in the original, "...the refugee
2 camps, they also collect data on refugees in order to
3 understand and analyse the full dimension of war
4 violence against women in ex-Yugoslavia, summon
5 international law courts against war criminals and
6 contribute to the world-wide feminist analysis of
7 patriarchal violence in war." Is that the passage that
8 you were referring to?
9 A. Yes, it concerns me as a clinician. The goal
10 of arriving at a legal conclusion may not be compatible
11 with the recovery of some trauma patients. It might be
12 for some trauma patients too, but that kind of a
13 patient-by-patient -- that would require a
14 patient-by-patient analysis, so I can see where there
15 might be a conflict of interest in Medica's goal here
16 with what their treatment goals are.
17 Q. Doctor, is there any specific research that
18 has been conducted on the memories of rape victims?
19 A. Yes. There's a substantial amount of
20 research on the memory of rape victims.
21 Q. And what do those studies reveal?
22 A. Again, many of those studies get into the
23 remember-don't remember war, but there is one
24 impressive study by Koss in the Journal of Abnormal
25 Psychology that says rape victims suffer memory
1 detriment in terms of clarity and affect effects, as
2 opposed to other individuals who have negative
3 experiences, or to individuals who don't necessarily
4 have negative experiences. It is a very good study to
5 show, I believe, that rape, as an individual type of
6 trauma, has effects on memory. It's from the
7 University of Arizona
8 Q. Does this research indicate -- or what, if
9 anything, does this research indicate about accuracy
10 for visual details, like appearance of others?
11 A. Well, there's an implication in it that
12 individuals who have been victims of rape may, in fact,
13 have less accurate memories and clarity of what
14 occurred, and so I don't think it's a big leap to
15 conclude that that would apply to visual details.
16 Q. Could that inaccuracy in visual details,
17 having read the witness statements in this case, do you
18 see -- what, if any, application do you see for that in
19 this case?
20 A. Well, I think it's striking that Witness A
21 initially had a recollection of the defendant as blonde
22 and short, when, in fact, he clearly isn't blonde and
23 short, and that that shift is, at least in my reading,
24 very evident in the testimony.
25 Q. Are you able to make an opinion as to the
1 psychological makeup of Witness A?
2 A. No. I couldn't do that without conducting a
3 psychological evaluation of her, and I wouldn't be
4 qualified because I don't speak Croatian. For a
5 variety of reasons, but most importantly is I haven't
6 evaluated her.
7 Q. Is the confidence a patient displays about
8 memories an indicator of reliability?
9 A. No. It's a measure of confidence. People
10 can be very confident about things that occurred that
11 simply hadn't occurred. Again, not necessarily the
12 gist of what occurred, but confident about some details
13 and be very wrong. I think all of us have experienced
14 that at least some way or another in our lives.
15 Q. And what indication, if any, of that have you
16 seen in this case?
17 A. Well, I've read the testimony of Witness A, I
18 have -- I've observed her testimony. There's no
19 question she went through a horrific trauma, and she is
20 impressively confident in her beliefs and purpose, and
21 I hope this process is helpful to her to recover from
22 what occurred, but a confidence doesn't mean that she's
23 right. It doesn't mean she's wrong either.
24 Q. You believe the memories of your own
1 A. Generally, yes, because of what I spoke about
2 earlier. It is an important part of treatment. Unless
3 you get into those extreme areas where I think that
4 it's not helpful for people to carry around bizarre
6 Q. With respect to your own patients, do you
7 believe that the memories of trauma reported to you
8 from your trauma patients are forensically accurate,
9 that is factually accurate?
10 A. I believe their memories are emotionally
11 accurate. I don't even deal with the forensic end of
12 it. I'm working with the patient to help that
13 individual recover from emotional distress. That's my
14 goal, and if I didn't believe it, it would affect my
15 therapeutic alliance in relationships that is so very
16 important to therapy. It would have lots of negative
17 effects. So from the emotional perspective, we're in
18 the belief together.
19 Q. But if you were asked to -- or if you wanted
20 to make a forensic conclusion about one of your
21 patients, that is a factual conclusion, how could you
22 determine the factual accuracy?
23 A. I wouldn't go there. I mean, I really --
24 that's, as far as I'm concerned, a ethics violation,
25 because I've lost my objectivity. I'm an advocate for
1 the patient and I have beliefs consistent with the
2 patient's beliefs, and that is simply not necessarily a
3 forensic reality. I would be willing to share that
4 information with the forensic evaluator who is working
5 for the Court, or for lawyers, to make that
6 determination, but because I'm a treating therapist, it
7 precludes me from testifying as a forensic expert about
8 truth, if you will.
9 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Dr. Younggren. I
10 have nothing further for the witness.
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you, Mr. Misetic. We
12 have a few minutes. Perhaps the Prosecution could
14 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, would you just
15 give me one minute?
16 Cross-examined by Ms. Sellers:
17 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, if we could just
18 do one or two matters this afternoon. I understand our
19 time period is down.
20 The Prosecution would like to offer into
21 evidence the document entitled, "Reply, The Medica
22 Centre for Treatment of Women." The Defence, I
23 believe, has indicated earlier that they would agree to
24 its authentication. We'd like to ask our learned
25 colleagues to allow us to submit this into evidence as
1 we have priorly submitted their other documents into
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Was that document submitted?
5 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Prosecution
6 Exhibit 5, number 5.
7 MS. SELLERS: Thank you. I believe we have
8 copies for the Court also.
9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you may proceed.
10 MS. SELLERS: Am I to understand now that the
11 document will be admitted into evidence, Your Honour?
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Do you have any objection,
13 Mr. Misetic?
14 MR. MISETIC: No objection, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: It's admitted as P5. We're
16 being told that it's the same document as D24.
17 MS. SELLERS: No, Your Honour. I'm talking
18 about the reply from the Medica centre. I believe that
19 the Defence entered into evidence the report of the
20 Medica centre.
21 Your Honour, am I to believe that the reply
22 is part of the document that's been submitted into
24 MR. MISETIC: If it's part of our document,
25 that's fine.
1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The whole document was
2 submitted, yes.
3 MR. MISETIC: We need to need to raise one
4 procedural matter, and I apologise. With respect to
5 the order of sequestration of witnesses, et cetera, I'm
6 not clear as to whether that would apply in the expert
7 context. We have no objection if during the breaks
8 they wish to consult with their experts, and the reason
9 we say that is otherwise, we're have to ostracise
10 Dr. Younggren tonight and leave him alone someplace.
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. With experts it doesn't
12 matter really. If counsel wishes to consult, they can
13 go ahead.
14 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: So we're dealing with this
16 document. You say the whole document, including the
18 MS. SELLERS: Fine, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: So just withdraw P5.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, it's part of D24.
21 JUDGE MUMBA: Leave it as D24.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Yes.
23 MS. SELLERS: May I proceed, Your Honour?
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
25 MS. SELLERS:
1 Q. Good afternoon, Dr. Younggren.
2 A. Good afternoon.
3 Q. End of the afternoon, I imagine.
4 Dr. Younggren, you've testified about your
5 relationships to standard of care and standard of
6 practice; is that correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. As a matter of fact, you have been involved
9 for over 20 years with questions of ethics and the
10 standard of care in California; is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And as an expert, you're involved in handling
13 compliance that could lead to either someone's licence
14 being revoked or turned over to the State Attorney
15 General in California; is that correct?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. Now, I imagine that whenever you evaluate a
18 complaint, there are certain steps that you take before
19 reaching the decision that you'll transmit to the
20 licensing board; is that correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. For example, before you would reach a
23 conclusion, you would probably study the psychologist's
24 file; is that correct?
25 A. If that's in the evidence. Basically if you
1 need information, you can request it, or you need to
2 limit or qualify your statement to the documents that
3 you've reviewed, but you either get more information or
4 you have the information with you.
5 Q. Because the information would be important in
6 terms of trying to reach that decision; is that
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And at times would you request to speak to
10 that psychologist if you needed information?
11 A. Actually, no. The boards generally don't
12 want you to do that. I don't establish the procedures,
13 but if you want information, an investigator will go
14 out and do that. On occasion you will speak to the
15 psychologist, but generally not.
16 Q. So generally you have information from the
17 psychologist through the investigator?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And would there be certain questions that you
20 would ask that investigator to inquire of that
22 A. Could be, yes.
23 Q. Would you ask them what type of therapy was
25 A. Depending upon the case, yes.
1 Q. Would you ask them what types of techniques
2 were used in that particular therapy?
3 A. Once again, depending upon the case, yes.
4 And the reason I qualify is, there are some violations
5 that it doesn't make any difference what kind of
6 therapy you did, but generally when one talks about
7 certain kinds of interventions, what they do is very
9 Q. Right. Particularly when we're talking about
10 the standard of care; correct?
11 A. Yes, yes.
12 Q. Dr. Younggren, I would imagine that you would
13 then evaluate whatever information the investigator
14 brought back; is that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now, what types of techniques would you
17 inquire about before you'd reach a conclusion?
18 A. An evaluation consists of a review of the
19 information, and then a citation of relevant literature
20 having to do with the standard of care, codes, laws,
21 local standards of practice, and an integration of
22 those into a decision. And again, if the decision is
23 qualified, and by that I mean frequently the cases do
24 not include a defence because an attorney has advised
25 the individual not to provide that to the medical board
1 or psychology board, and so you basically say, assuming
2 these materials are true, then this is my conclusion.
3 Obviously, if there is other information, you reserve
4 the right to qualify the opinion.
5 Q. Am I correct in assuming that in the case we
6 have before us today, that you did not talk to the
8 A. Actually, I don't know who the psychologist
10 Q. So you didn't talk to the psychologist; is
11 that correct?
12 A. No. That's correct.
13 Q. Can I also assume that you did not send an
14 investigator to ask about the techniques or the therapy
15 that was used?
16 A. I actually asked if there was more
17 information and was informed that that was not
19 Q. Whom did you ask?
20 A. Mr. Misetic.
21 Q. I understand. Then I imagine you at least
22 got a copy of the local standards of care practised
23 within the former Yugoslavia, the Zenica region?
24 A. No, I didn't.
25 Q. Were you able to inquire whether one was
1 available, sir?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Now, you've testified that you've given
4 forensic testimony concerning a criminal case before,
5 in terms of memory?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. An administrative case?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And a civil case?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. How many other criminal cases, sir, have you
12 given forensic evidence in?
13 A. I believe three.
14 Q. Let's say a total of four criminal cases, and
15 one of those criminal cases, sir, dealt with the
16 question of memory and trauma; is that correct?
17 A. Yes. Actually, memory and trauma -- one,
18 two -- three of them are trauma cases. So three out of
19 five are trauma cases, one memory-trauma case.
20 Q. So you've actually testified in one case
21 concerning memory and trauma to date?
22 A. One criminal case.
23 Q. Prior to today, of course?
24 A. Right.
25 Q. Well, Dr. Younggren, I understand that your
1 focus, from your CV, is on ethics, isn't that correct,
2 not memory and trauma?
3 A. Actually, I spend a great amount of time
4 working with memory and trauma, and I would say the
5 majority of my forensic assessments have been simply on
6 that topic.
7 Q. Not the ones you've testified in court about;
8 is that correct?
9 A. Most of them are civil cases and they've
11 Q. I've enjoyed looking at your CV. You have a
12 long list of publications and most of those are
13 concerning ethics; is that correct?
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. You've mentioned that you will have a book
16 that's coming out, but to date I do not see any
17 publications concerning memory or trauma, or memory or
18 rape; isn't that correct, sir?
19 A. Actually, that is correct. It's not an area
20 that I publish in, except in terms of comments about
21 the risk to professionals who work in this area.
22 Q. Sir, also I noticed on your CV that you have
23 not listed any of the rape crisis centres in which you
24 have worked at. Have you worked at a rape crisis
1 A. No.
2 Q. Have you consulted directly with a rape
3 crisis centre, sir?
4 A. Well, I worked with the Los Angeles Free
5 Clinic that saw rape cases, it was a generic clinic.
6 Then I had rape cases at the HMO that I worked at as
7 well, but I didn't work at a rape crisis centre.
8 Q. Have you supervised therapists who have
9 worked at rape crisis centres?
10 A. I don't recall.
11 Q. Dr. Younggren, I see that you reviewed many
12 of the materials, I imagine, that are relevant to this
13 case. I would like to know, in that review of
14 materials, because you furnished that to the
15 Prosecution, isn't it correct that most of the
16 materials that you informed us that you reviewed dealt
17 with questions of childhood sexual abuse?
18 A. I don't understand the question.
19 MR. MISETIC: I would object. Give the
20 witness a copy of the document. I believe he said
21 there is nothing particular that he reviewed for this
22 case, however, there are books about the area that may
23 be of assistance to you.
24 MS. SELLERS: Excuse me, Your Honour. I'm
25 referring to a document supplied to us by the Defence
1 concerning the materials that Dr. Younggren was going
2 to rely upon, attached to the different studies. Then
3 I assume Dr. Younggren knew of the list of materials
4 that you had forwarded.
5 MR. MISETIC: Again, I would prefer that we
6 have the document we're talking about, because that was
7 my comment before.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Which document in
10 MS. SELLERS: Yes, Your Honour. Excuse me.
11 Q. Dr. Younggren, maybe I can refresh your
12 memory. You cited the book of Dr. Elizabeth Loftus?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now, Dr. Younggren, the book of Dr. Elizabeth
15 Loftus, that book basically deals with recovered
16 memories during childhood abuse; is that correct?
17 A. It's the major theme, but it is a publication
18 about memory trauma and recovery from trauma. I mean,
19 it's a memory book, but the primary topic is child
20 sexual abuse and repressed memories.
21 Q. Right. And Dr. Younggren, you also refer to
22 another work entitled, "Validation of Sexual Abuse in
23 Day Care Settings."
24 A. Right. That's Dr. Fisher's publication, I
1 Q. Right. Now, is that work also about sexual
2 abuse of children?
3 A. It actually has to do with applying the
4 ethics codes to arriving at conclusions about sexual
5 abuse in areas where there's not existing literature,
6 so it's -- but the topic is children, obviously, by the
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Ms. Sellers, I think we've
9 reached our break-off point, 17.30.
10 MS. SELLERS: Yes, Your Honour.
11 Q. We'll be able to continue this discussion
13 A. I will be here, counsellor.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: We'll adjourn until tomorrow
15 morning at 9.30 hours.
16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
17 5.35 p.m., to be reconvened on Tuesday,
18 the 10th day of November, 1998 at
19 9:30 a.m.