1 Monday, 1 September 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
9 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T,
10 The Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
12 Mr. Russo, I see that you are apparently ready to call your next
13 witness, Mr. Berikoff.
14 Good morning, sir.
15 Before you give evidence in this court, the Rules of Procedure
16 and Evidence require you to make a solemn declaration that you will speak
17 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing about the truth.
18 The text it now handed out to you by Madam Usher. May invite you
19 to make that solemn declaration, but could I ask you to stand first.
20 THE WITNESS: Yes, certainly. I solemnly declare that I will
21 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Berikoff.
23 Mr. Russo, please proceed.
24 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President. Good morning, Your
1 WITNESS: PHILIP ROY BERIKOFF
2 Examination by Mr. Russo:
3 Q. Good morning, Mr. Berikoff.
4 A. Good morning, sir.
5 Q. If you would, please, state your full name for the record?
6 A. Philip Roy Berikoff.
7 Q. Mr. Berikoff, do you recall giving four statements to the ICTY,
8 the first dated 24 August 1996
9 between 26 and 27 May 1997
10 11 December 2007
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 MR. RUSSO: And, Your Honour, if I could have the assistance of
13 the court usher, I would like to hand hard copies to the witness.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
15 MR. RUSSO:
16 Q. And, Mr. Berikoff, did you have a chance to review all four of
17 those statements prior to coming to court today?
18 A. Yes, I have. We did proofing sessions with you the majority of
19 last week.
20 Q. And in reviewing those statements, can you tell the Court whether
21 they accurately reflect what you told investigators at the time those
22 statements were taken?
23 A. All four statements reflect accurately what I had to say in the
24 statements, with the exception of the corrections that we made during the
25 proofing sessions.
1 Q. Thank you. I'd like to take you through those corrections.
2 MR. RUSSO: And we can just do this briefly with the indulgence
3 of the court and counsel. Your Honour, I will simply lead Mr. Berikoff
4 through those.
5 Q. First, as a general matter, Mr. Berikoff, in your statements, you
6 sometimes use the terms "special police HV," "special police," and
7 "Croatian special police." Can you clarify for the Court whether these
8 terms are intended to refer to the same group of individuals.
9 A. Yes, they are. It was my assumption when I was there that all
10 three worked together because I had seen the various types of military
11 police or special police working together. Sometimes, they would be
12 wearing grey coveralls and sometimes camouflage uniforms.
13 Q. Okay. And how did you distinguish special police from regular HV
15 A. The special police, when they were conducting special police
16 operations, in my opinion were those wearing grey coveralls. The ones
17 doing normal military police duties were wearing camouflage uniforms.
18 Q. Okay. And can I take it, then, that then when you refer in your
19 statements and attachments to special police, you are referring to
20 individuals wearing grey coveralls?
21 A. Yes, I am, sir.
22 Q. And also, in particular, in your statements and in the
23 attachments to them, you attributed the burning and looting that you
24 witnessed in Kistanje on 9 August 1995
25 police. I believe, however, that you clarified that did you not actually
1 witness any special police members; that is, those wearing grey coveralls
2 in the town of Kistanje
3 A. That is correct.
4 Q. And I just ask you to please briefly pause after my question, and
5 I will pause after your answers.
6 And I would like to take you through some specific references
7 that you made to the special police for corrections.
8 MR. RUSSO: If we could have Exhibit D284 [Realtime transcript
9 read in error "D248"], which is marked for identification.
10 Q. And, Mr. Berikoff, this is your third statement which in your
11 witness binder appears at tab 3. And if we could go to page 19, lines 36
12 through 38; in the B/C/S version, there appears at page 14, lines 26
13 through 29.
14 And there, Mr. Berikoff, I believe you make a reference to the
15 special police, when, in fact, I believe you indicated that that
16 particular incident was the civilian police. Is that correct?
17 A. That's correct, sir.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 If we could then move you to the following page, page 20, and
20 that would be line 6 to 8; and in the B/C/S, that is at page 14. That
21 would be lines 34 through 47.
22 MR. RUSSO: Your Honours, my understanding from the registrar is
23 that apparently the B/C/S translation has not been uploaded into e-court.
24 JUDGE ORIE: On your own list, I see that it says, "B/C/S
25 translation on progress." That's the list you filed with the -- I don't
1 know whether it's ready. I don't know whether it is uploaded.
2 MR. RUSSO: Apparently, it has not been uploaded yet at this
3 point, Your Honour; however, we will ensure that that happens as soon as
4 possible. I do have the B/C/S page numbers for the court registrar that
5 can I provide so that we can correct the record.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I take it, then, that the translation is
8 MR. RUSSO: It is ready, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: It is ready, so if you would please take care that
10 it is uploaded.
11 Mr. Kay.
12 MR. KEHOE: Pardon me, counsel. Just by way of correction, on
13 line 5, I think, we were talking about this document as 248. If you look
14 at the transcript, Judge, I think it is 284.
15 MR. RUSSO: I think that's correct.
16 JUDGE ORIE: On your list, it appears as 284.
17 MR. RUSSO: It is it 284, Your Honour.
18 MR. KEHOE: Just didn't know if it was. Okay.
19 MR. RUSSO:
20 Q. I'm sorry, Mr. Berikoff. I believe we were at pages 20, lines 6
21 through 8. And, again, you make a reference to the special police; and,
22 again, I believe that you had indicated that that was actually the
23 civilian police on that occasion as well. Is that correct?
24 A. What occasion are we looking at now? Is this still the Kistanje
25 area, Mr. Russo?
1 Q. It is, on page 20.
2 A. Yes, it is. That is correct, Mr. Russo.
3 Q. Actually, I apologise. But the page 20 line 6 to 8 is a
4 reference to in the immediate days after Operation Storm, where you
5 indicate that special police were directing traffic while soldiers loaded
6 vehicles. I believe you indicated during the proofing session, that it
7 was civilian police directing traffic. Is that correct?
8 A. As I explained to you last week and to the Defence yesterday that
9 spoke to me, it was a combination of both. There was looting going on
10 throughout the sector. However, in particular, between the road of Knin
11 to Drnis, it was very systematic where there were a number of trucks that
12 were lined up. There was a police -- civilian-type police standing
13 outside on the road with a checklist, marking off that residence that the
14 looting had taken place and that the material was put on the truck.
15 There would also be houses that were marked with Croatian markings so as
16 not to touch that house, and then they would go on to the next one.
17 So it was a combination of both systematic and not systematic,
19 Q. Well, thank you for that answer. However, I wanted to simply
20 clear up which police you were referring to directing traffic on that
21 road. Your statement at page 20 indicates that it's special police;
22 however, I believe you indicated --
23 A. I indicated that it was civilian police, sir.
24 Q. Thank you. And if we could move to page 24, lines 4 through 7.
25 And here, again, are references to the incident in Kistanje on
1 9 August 1995
2 soldiers and special police in coveralls were in the town.
3 However, I believe, as you already indicated, you did not
4 actually see special police in Kistanje on 9 August 1995. Is that
6 A. No, I did not.
7 Q. Okay. And also appearing further down that page, at lines 14
8 through 17, it makes a similar reference to special police in Kistanje;
9 as well as at line 32, it makes a reference to special police in
10 Kistanje. And can you simply confirm that all of those entries are
11 incorrect in so far as they identify special police actually being in
13 A. That is correct.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. RUSSO: If we could have --
16 Q. You move to your second statement, and that is, I believe, tab 2
17 in your witness binder. Your second statement, for the registrar, 65 ter
19 MR. RUSSO: And if we can move to page 3, paragraph 2,
20 subparagraph O; and in the B/C/S, this appears at page 4.
21 Q. And in there, Mr. Berikoff, in paragraph 2-O, you indicate that
22 on 8 August, Croatian soldiers and special police were looting along the
23 road between Knin and Drnis. And, again, I'd like you to correct whether
24 it was actually civilian police rather than special police?
25 A. That's correct. It was civilian police that were checking off
1 the houses.
2 Q. Okay. And if we go to page 4 in that statement --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, have I well understood that here "special
4 police" is replaced by "civilian police," where at the earlier instances
5 it was just striking "special police."
6 MR. RUSSO: That's correct, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please proceed.
8 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me. Are we talking when -- pardon me, Judge.
9 By clarification, are we talk back in 284 when counsel was
10 striking the "special police"? I think that he was including and saying
11 it was civilian police, when we were back on 284.
12 MR. RUSSO: There were two references in 284 replacing "special
13 police" with "civilian police," and then the references to Kistanje in
14 particular were striking "special police."
15 MR. KEHOE: Okay. That's fine.
16 MR. RUSSO:
17 Q. In your second statement, Mr. Berikoff, at page 4, paragraph 2-Q,
18 and the reference is the same in the B/C/S, you indicate that on
19 10 August 1995
20 soldiers continued unabated, while special police looked on or directed
22 I believe you had also corrected that in that instance again, it
23 was actually civilian police and not special police directing the
24 traffic. Is that correct?
25 A. That's correct.
1 Q. Thank you. If we could move back to your third statement.
2 MR. RUSSO: That is, again, D284.
3 Q. And if we could go to --
4 A. What tab is that, Mr. Russo?
5 Q. That's tab 3 in your binder.
6 A. Thank you.
7 Q. So D284, page 14, lines 27 through 28; and the B/C/S, this
8 appears, for the record, at page 10, lines 46 through 48.
9 And there, Mr. Berikoff, you give your opinion that the hospital
10 was directly targeted during the artillery attack. However, I believe,
11 during the proofing session, you indicated that you had changed your
12 opinion regarding that; and, in fact, you do not believe that the
13 hospital was actually a target of the artillery attack. Is that correct?
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. Staying with that statement, if we could move to page 21 -- 21,
16 at lines 32 to 33; in the B/C/S, this would appear at page 15, line 45.
17 And there, Mr. Berikoff, you indicate that you met with
18 Major Juric on 8 August in the headquarters. However, I believe that you
19 indicated that that date itself is not correct, and that the date that
20 you actually met with Major Juric was the morning of 7 August?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. Thank you. Now with the corrections we have just made,
23 Mr. Berikoff, can you tell court whether all four of your statements
24 taken together are true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
25 A. To the best of my knowledge, yes, they are.
1 Q. Thank you. And if you were questioned here today regarding the
2 matters contained in those statements, would your answers be the same
3 given the corrections that we've just recorded?
4 A. Yes, they would.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MR. RUSSO: At this time, Mr. President, Your Honours, I would
7 move for the admission of the 24 August 1996 statement, which is 65
8 ter 5389.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, that would be number?
10 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit P739, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
12 MR. RUSSO: Thank you. I would also move admission of statement
13 dated 21 May 1997
14 JUDGE ORIE: And that would be, Madam Registrar?
15 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit P740, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
17 MR. RUSSO: Thank you. The exhibit, MFI'd as D84 [sic], is the
18 statement 26 to 27 May 1997
19 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, counsel, it is 284.
20 MR. RUSSO: My apologies. I thought I said 284, but apparently I
21 can't seem to get that number correct. It's 284. I believe that
22 would --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Now, it slips out of my mind why it was MFI'd at
24 that time. Was there any intention to tender it, and were we just to
25 wait until the witness would have appeared and would have given his
2 MR. KEHOE: I think the latter explanation was a reservation by the
3 parties until Mr. Berikoff came.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And, then, since you brought up the document
5 first, would you like to tender it?
6 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour, we tender it.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Then we don't have to assign another number.
8 MR. KEHOE: Actually, if I may Judge, I want to be tad gracious
9 about this. It was actually my colleague, Mr. Mikulicic, that tendered
10 it, so I guess I should offer the floor to him.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic.
12 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, Your Honour, we would like to have that
13 particular number that was MFI'D.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we move to the next one, Mr. Russo.
15 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President. Finally, the statement
16 dated 11 December 2007
17 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, that would be number?
18 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit P741, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
20 Now, as far as the P numbers are concerned, from the written
21 submissions I take it that there are no objections.
22 MR. KEHOE: No objection, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: P739, P740, and P741 are admitted into evidence.
24 Now, Mr. Mikulicic, Mr. Russo did part of the job seeking the
25 attestations, you tender the documents.
1 I take it no objections, Mr. Russo.
2 MR. RUSSO: That's correct, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Then D284 [Realtime transcript read in error "D248"]
4 is admitted into evidence.
5 Please proceed.
6 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 With your permission, I would now like to read a brief summary of
8 the 92 ter statement.
9 JUDGE ORIE: The witness knows the purpose of that?
10 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
12 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, I am sorry to interrupt. For the
13 purposes of correction, it is, again, "D248" in the transcript, instead
14 of "D284."
15 JUDGE ORIE: Until it is Tuesday, we'll be able to do it
16 correctly, Mr. Mikulicic.
17 Thank you.
18 Mr. Russo, let's try to avoid to refer to that number.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Philip Berikoff was the Military Information Officer in
22 Sector South from 17 July until 5 September 1995. Prior to Operation
23 Storm, he travelled extensively throughout Sector South collecting
24 information on the military situation. He was present in Knin during the
25 artillery attacks on 4 and 5 August 1995, made several missions into Knin
1 during the shelling to rescue civilian employees and to offer assistance
2 to the hospital, and also observed the shelling of Knin from the UN HQ
4 After Operation Storm, he managed to leave the UN HQ compound
5 during the HV blockade and gain access to many areas in Sector South
6 where he observed many villages on fire and also witnessed HV soldiers,
7 special police, and civilian police engaged in looting or acts of
8 destruction. In particular, he particularly witnessed the destruction of
9 towns of Kistanje, Cetina, and Donji Lapac by Croatian forces. He
10 authored several reports describing the level of destruction he witnessed
11 in the towns and villages all over Sector South.
12 That concludes my summary, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Russo. You may proceed.
14 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
15 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I would like to deal first with the attachments to
16 your statements as well as your other exhibits, and then I will move on
17 to ask you a few specific questions.
18 So if you could please refer to your first statement, and that is
19 P739. And if we could go to page 4 --
20 A. What tab is that, please, Mr. Russo?
21 Q. It's the first tab in your binder.
22 A. Thank you.
23 Q. Again, page 4; and in the B/C/S, this appears at page 3.
24 And there you reference a document which is attached to that
25 statement and marked "A."
1 MR. RUSSO: And if we could have now 65 ter 1829, please.
2 Q. Mr. Berikoff, is the document on the screen the document which is
3 referred to as "A" in your first statement?
4 A. Yes, it is.
5 Q. And did you personally prepare this document?
6 A. Yes, I did.
7 Q. And can you tell the Court what the circumstances were which
8 prompted you to do this?
9 A. On the 22nd of November, while I was in -- after I left Knin in
10 early September, I went on to Sarajevo
11 as the G2 operations officer. While I was there, I got a request from
12 UNCRO to prepare a report with regard to all of the damage that I had
13 witnessed during my time in Sector South. I did this based on my various
14 trips that I took while I was in Sector South. The information was based
15 from previous reports that I had done as well as a daily journal that I
16 kept during my whole time in the former Yugoslavia.
17 Q. Thank you. And there's a few entries that I would like to
19 Paragraph 2-A, states: "At least 100 houses were probably
20 destroyed during the actual offensive, 4 to 5 August 1995."
21 Mr. Berikoff, does this number reflect the number of houses that
22 you personally observed?
23 A. Yes, it does. I had the opportunity shortly after the offensive
24 to go into the town of Knin
25 extensively. Some were damaged beyond repair. Therefore, that's why I
1 say they were destroyed and that was immediately after. There was
2 further destruction later.
3 Q. Thank you. And when you use the term "at least 100 houses," can
4 you give the Court some idea of approximately how many more houses you
5 believe were damaged during the actually offensive?
6 A. There was substantial damage to a number of other houses that I
7 did not include in my report because I didn't -- they were still
8 inhabitable, so I didn't include it in the report.
9 Q. Thank you. Moving to paragraph 2-E. This paragraph discusses
10 damage between Knin and Kistanje as well as the damage to Kistanje
12 You stated in that paragraph : "Croatian (HV special police)
13 were likely responsible for the majority of the destruction."
14 Can you clarify whether the destruction which you attribute in
15 this sentence to the special police is the destruction between Knin and
16 Kistanje or the destruction of Kistanje itself?
17 A. I would say the -- from my recollection, I would say it is the
18 destruction in Kistanje itself and the immediate vicinity of Kistanje.
19 Q. And we had discussed earlier that you didn't actually see special
20 police in Kistanje. Nevertheless, can you explain to the Court why you
21 believe the special police had some involvement with the activity in
23 A. It was my opinion and still is today that the special police were
24 involved in some of the operations around the area of Kistanje, because
25 on numerous occasions, I had met personally with Major Ivan Juric who was
1 a military police. However, on numerous occasions when I did run into
2 him, he was also wearing the grey coveralls of the special police. It
3 was, therefore, my assumption that Major Juric controlled a number of the
4 various military police and special police forces; and, in fact, by him
5 wearing grey coveralls in that area, I assumed that there must have been
6 special police in the area as well, sir.
7 Q. Thank you. And to clarify, did you run into Major Juric on the
8 day that you had also been in Kistanje on the 9th of August?
9 A. Yes, I did, sir. I ran into Major Juric in the area of Macure,
10 which is just north of Kistanje.
11 Q. And can you tell the Court what he was wearing on that day?
12 A. Major Juric was driving in a black SUV vehicle, and he was
13 wearing grey coveralls, sir.
14 Q. Thank you. If we could now move to paragraph 2-F -- I'm sorry, I
15 apologise. Let's move to 2-H.
16 And in paragraph 2-H, you discuss the damage to Oklaj, and you
17 state: "An ARSK unit was garrisoned in the village."
18 I'd like you to please clarify, if you can, when the ARSK unit
19 was garrisoned in that village?
20 A. Prior -- prior to the offensive, I had --or I was tasked to a
21 helicopter recce, along the Zone of Separation that ran between the Croat
22 side and the Serb side. When the helicopter picked us up -- myself up at
23 Knin, we were en route to pick up two Canadian officers in Rastovic. On
24 the way to pick up the officers, approximately eight minutes into the
25 flight, we were fired upon by the ARSK from the vicinity of Oklaj. They
1 had fired one missile at us, the helicopter pilot was able to go down to
2 ground level, and an another missile was fired at us. We returned back
3 to the compound. I put in a protest to General Forand. General Forand
4 further put in a protest to the ARSK. About an hour later, a colonel
5 from the ARSK came and apologised for the incident.
6 While we were flying over Oklaj, there were a number of ARSK
7 vehicles, and, therefore, I assumed it was a stronghold or a garrison of
8 ARSK soldiers.
9 Q. Thank you. And you just mentioned that you believed it was a
10 stronghold. Is that why, in paragraph 2-H, you also indicate that you
11 believe the whole village of Oklaj
13 A. Yes, I do. There were also occasions when I drove through the
14 town of Oklaj and observed numerous ARSK soldiers prior to the conflict.
15 Q. Thank you. Moving to the following paragraph, 2-I, where you
16 discuss damage in the village of Razvode
17 were left untouched, suggesting that they were Croatian dwellings."
18 Can you please explain to the Court why you say that the fact
19 that they were not touched suggests that they were Croatian dwellings?
20 A. Throughout the sector and in particular in the village of
21 Razvode, there were markings on the house, denoting the fact that, in
22 fact, it was a Croatian residence. Therefore, that residence was left
23 alone. The Serb residences were destroyed or damaged to an extent that
24 made them uninhabitable.
25 Q. Thank you. Let's move now, please, to paragraph 2-L, in which
1 you discuss damage to the town of Donji Lapac, and there you state:
2 "Much of the destruction was caused by HV special police troops."
3 Can you tell the Court whether in Donji Lapac, you actually saw
4 special police troops?
5 A. I went up to Donji Lapac a number of times, in particular,
6 immediately after the offensive on Knin. There were still ongoing
7 fighting throughout the rest of the sector because no offensive stops
8 immediately on -- on whatever, at 1210 on the 5th of August. So there
9 was fighting throughout the rest of the sector. When I got up to
10 Donji Lapac, we ran into a number of HV soldier plus a number of soldiers
11 that were dressed in grey coveralls.
12 Q. And can you tell the Court what, if anything, the HV soldiers and
13 the individuals in grey coveralls were doing in the town of Donji Lapac
14 A. As I indicated just a couple of seconds ago, there was still
15 ongoing fights so there was a lot of small-arm fire going on. However,
16 they were also going into the houses doing whatever activity they were
17 doing in the house. However, upon exit of the house and before the went
18 into the next one, the house would -- would be ablaze, and it became
19 obvious that there was destruction going on.
20 Q. When you say that there was fighting going on, did you see actual
21 combat between ARSK soldiers and Croatian forces within the town of
22 Donji Lapac?
23 A. Not -- not right within the town itself. However, there were
24 sounds throughout the town of small-arms fire; and, as I indicated
25 earlier, the offensive had not stopped. It had stopped in Knin but not
1 in areas -- other areas of the sector. So, in fact, there was still
2 combat operations going on throughout the sector.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 If we could move to paragraph 2-N, where you discuss damage to
5 the village of Cetina
6 after the offensive by both the occupying HV soldiers and the Croatian
7 special police."
8 And can you tell the Court whether you actually sow the special
9 police troops causing destruction in Cetina.
10 A. Yes, I did. In addition to the HV and the special police, there
11 was also a group of, I guess, rag-tag soldiers or possibly those that are
12 belong to a war lord. They were also conducting looting operations or
13 clean-up operations in the town of Cetina
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. RUSSO: At this time, Mr. President, I would move for the
16 admission of 65 ter 1829.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P742, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections against P742?
20 MR. KEHOE: No.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Then P742 is admitted into evidence.
22 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
23 Q. And moving back to your first statement, Mr. Berikoff.
24 MR. RUSSO: And I don't believe we need to pull this up.
25 Q. The first statement at pages -- between pages 4 and 5, you
1 reference a document attached to that statement marked "B."
2 MR. RUSSO: And if we could have 65 ter 450.
3 Q. Mr. Berikoff, is the document on the screen the document which
4 you identify as document "B" in your first statement?
5 A. Yes, it is.
6 Q. Thank you. And did you prepare this document?
7 A. Yes, I did.
8 Q. And can you please tell the Court what the circumstances were
9 while you prepared it?
10 A. I was tasked by Major Dussault to prepare a report based on my
11 activities during the time of the immediate aftermath of the offensive.
12 The purpose of the document was that I was being nominated for an award,
13 and I had to annotate those activities that I had done.
14 Q. Thank you. I just have one clarification for this document.
15 At paragraph 2-B, you discussed the removal of bodies of several
16 ARSK soldiers and civilians who were killed in a mortar blast at the
17 intersection outside of the UN HQ compound on the morning of 5 August.
18 And in paragraph 2-B, you indicate that the first time you went out to
19 check these bodies you came under mortar fire and were forced to take
20 cover in a drainage ditch.
21 I would like to you clarify whether or not it's correct that you
22 came under mortar fire the first time you went out there?
23 A. I do not believe we came under mortar fire the first time. The
24 reason we went out to the intersection was because the intersection had
25 come under mortar fire, and that is how the six people at the
1 intersection were killed.
2 Q. And did you go out to that intersection for a second time?
3 A. I was tasked to go out the second time in order to bag -- put the
4 bodies in body-bags and move them off the road. There was fear of
5 decomposition of the bodies and causing disease in the area.
6 Q. And when you went to bag these bodies the second time you went
7 out, did you come under mortar fire at that time?
8 A. Yes, we did. A mortar round went off and came within about 25
9 metres of our area as we were bagging the bodies. We were forced to go
10 into a ditch alongside the road. That was the only round that hit. Once
11 we decided that there was no more activity, we continued on with our
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would move to admit 65 ter 450.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
16 Madam Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P743, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ORIE: P743 is admitted into evidence.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Q. Referring back to your first statement, Mr. Berikoff, at page 5.
22 MR. RUSSO: And, again, I don't believe there is any reason to
23 pull this up.
24 Q. You reference a document attached to first statement marked "D".
25 MR. RUSSO: And if we could 65 ter 1702.
1 And, Your Honour, I will -- I can explain to the Court why I'm
2 not pulling up the document referenced "C" in that statement, which is a
3 journal. There is a second journal which was submitted with the
4 following statement which encompasses that earlier journal, and I will
5 address that at the time.
6 Q. So, document 65 ter 1072, Mr. Berikoff, can you take a look at
7 that and tell us whether the document on the screen is the document you
8 referred to as document "D" in your first statement?
9 A. Yes, it is.
10 Q. And did you prepare this particular document?
11 A. No, I did not. I gave bits and pieces of information. Captain
12 Rob Williams is the gentleman that prepared the document itself, sir.
13 Q. And have had you a chance to look through the document for
14 information that you actually provided?
15 A. Yes, I did.
16 Q. And is the information which you provided actually reflected in
17 this document?
18 A. To the best of my recollection, yes, it is.
19 Q. Thank you. And there are a few entries which I would like to
21 MR. RUSSO: If we go it page 2 of the document, this is it the
22 entry for 4 August, 1010
23 Q. And there you indicate that you were travelling to the hospital
24 with the SMEDLO. First, can you tell the Court what SMEDLO stands for?
25 A. SMEDLO was the Senior Medical Officer in the compound.
1 Q. Thank you. Other references to this particular trip in your
2 statements indicate that that trip actually occurred at 1300 hours;
3 however, this document indicates that it occurred at about 10.00 in the
5 Can you clarify for the Court whether this trip took place at
6 10.00 in the morning or at about 1.00 in the afternoon?
7 A. To the best of my recollection, I'm uncertain of the exact
8 timings, but I am certain of the sequence of events that took place
9 during that day, sir.
10 I believe it was either late, late morning or early afternoon
11 when, in fact, we went to the hospital the first time.
12 MR. RUSSO: Okay. And, again, if we can move to page 3 of this
13 document, and look at the entry for 4 August at 1300 Bravo.
14 Q. And there it indicates that you travelled into Knin for General
15 Forand's press conference. And, again, other references for this
16 particular trip in your statements indicate that it occurred at 1500
18 And can you clarify, if you're able to, whether the trip with
19 General Forand took place at 1.00 p.m. or at 3.00 p.m. on the 4th?
20 A. It's the same -- same answer as I previously gave. I'm certain
21 of the sequence of events; the timings, I'm unconcern. However, I do
22 know that we did go to the meeting in the afternoon. Another meeting was
23 scheduled for later on that evening at 1800 hours; however, the ARSK
24 people did not show up for the meeting, sir.
25 Q. Thank you. And when you indicated that you're uncertain of the
1 times, but you are certain of the sequence, can I take that to mean that
2 you recall the trip with the SMEDLO occurring previous to the trip with
3 General Forand?
4 A. Yes, it was.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MR. RUSSO: If we can move to page 4 of the document, at the
7 entry for 5 August, 05, 0930 Bravo. There are actually two entries for
8 that time; however, I would like to focus on the first one.
9 Q. And there it indicates that a scared ARSK soldier came to the
10 gate of the UNHCR compound and that he was turned away?
11 First of all, can you tell the Court whether you were the one who
12 turned him away.
13 A. Yes. I was the one who turned him away. He came to the gate
14 along with a number of other refugees; but because he was in uniform, he
15 was carrying a weapon, we were ordered by our senior management that we
16 were not allowed to let combatants into the compound, so I turned him
17 away at that time, sir.
18 Q. Thank you. And was this soldier that you turned away one of the
19 soldiers killed in the mortar blast at the intersection?
20 A. Yes, he was.
21 Q. Thank you. The document that we looked at earlier, document 743,
22 indicated that the mortar blast occurred at that intersection at
23 approximately 8.30; however the second entry in this particular document
24 indicates that that blast occurred at 9.30 where you were going out to
25 bag the bodies.
1 Can you clarify for the Court whether the time in this document,
2 the second entry for 05, 9.30, is incorrect or what you recall about the
3 timing of those incidents?
4 A. The mortar round -- the impact of the round was approximately
5 between 8.30 and 9.00. We were tasked to go out, and it was
6 approximately 9.30 when I went to the intersection to bag the bodies.
7 The bodies had laid there for a period of time following the immediate
8 mortar shell.
9 Q. Thank you. And looking at the second entry for 9.30 Bravo, it
10 indicates that of the six dead bodies at the intersection, where the
11 mortar blast occurred, four were civilians and two were ARSK soldiers.
12 However, I believe your other references indicate that it was the other
13 way around; four soldiers and two civilians. Is that right?
14 A. That's correct. It was, in fact, four soldiers and two
16 Q. Thank you. And that same entry also indicates that only five of
17 the six died from the mortar blast and one had died from a previous
18 gunshot wound. Can you shed any light on that?
19 A. There was an elderly gentleman with a woman on a wagon. He was
20 already dead; whether he was dead from approximate bullet shot or not,
21 I'm not sure. One of the other soldiers I know was shot previously from
22 a bullet shot. So, yes, that is correct.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MR. RUSSO: And with those corrections, Mr. President, I believe
25 I would like to admit this exhibit, which is 65 ter 1702.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
2 Madam Registrar.
3 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit P744, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: P744 is admitted into evidence.
5 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Q. Again, your first statement at page 5, Mr. Berikoff, references a
7 document marked "E."
8 MR. RUSSO: And if we could have 65 ter 1832.
9 Q. Mr. Berikoff, do you recognise the document on your screen as the
10 document referred to as document "E" in your first statement?
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 Q. Did you prepare this document?
13 A. Yes, I did.
14 Q. And can you please explain to the Court the basis for the
15 hierarchy that you have laid out in this chart.
16 A. The basis for the chart or the hierarchy is on information that I
17 had gathered either through my own investigations right within the sector
18 or from information I had received from UNCRO. Immediately after the
19 offensive, the first group that came in was the 7th Guards Brigade. They
20 were relieved by the Tigers. But running into Major Juric on numerous
21 occasions, I put him as the head of the military/special police. In this
22 one, I have him as special police. However, on the ones that I have, all
23 of the local police are under his jurisdiction and then the mop-up police
24 or the special police as well.
25 So it was based through -- the information was based on multiple
1 sources as well as my overall assessment at the time following the
2 offensive, sir.
3 Q. Thank you. Can you clarify for the Court whether the line you
4 have drawn directly above Major Juric's name, and it appears below the
5 military structure which is underneath General Cermak, can you clarify
6 whether that is intended to indicate your belief that Major Juric was
7 subordinate to General Cermak?
8 A. The military police in virtually every military organisation -
9 and I'm sure the Croatians is the same - runs a parallel chain of
10 command. One, they answer to higher, and, secondly they answer to their
11 immediate chain of command or their immediate operational commander. In
12 this case, I had them answering to General Cermak following his, I guess,
13 appointment as the head of the sector or the garrison.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I would move to admit 65 ter 1832.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
17 MS. HIGGINS: No objections, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Madam Registrar?
19 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit P745, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: P745 is admitted into evidence.
21 Mr. Russo, I'm afraid that I did not fully understand the last
22 answer. Could you try to elicit some more details from the witness.
23 MR. RUSSO: I will, Your Honour.
24 Q. Mr. Berikoff, you've indicated your belief in this parallel chain
25 of command between military police and regular forces. Do I understand
1 that chart to mean that you placed Major Juric as -- within and beneath
2 General Cermak in a reporting chain of command?
3 A. Yes, I did, in the sense of General Cermak being the operational
4 commander in -- in that immediate area. I am aware, as I said, that
5 military police or special police also have a parallel chain of command
6 which goes up to their own organisation, be it in Zagreb or Split
7 whether they are other organisation was. So at the same time that
8 they're reporting to their immediate operational commander, they're also
9 reporting the information to a higher authority, sir.
10 JUDGE ORIE: And could you add names to that --
11 THE WITNESS: I'm not --
12 JUDGE ORIE: -- parallel structure.
13 THE WITNESS: No, I'm not, Your Honour. I am not able to, as I
14 just arrived in country a few weeks prior to. So, no, I am not, Your
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
17 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
18 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
19 Q. Now, Mr. Berikoff, if could you also tell the Court whether you
20 have any specific information or specific facts to indicate whether
21 Major Juric was, in fact, reporting to General Cermak.
22 A. I don't have any immediate information on that, sir.
23 Q. Thank you. And can I take it, then, that the understanding which
24 you have reflected in this chart is based upon your experience with other
25 military organisations and that you assumed that this is the way it
1 worked. Is that fair to say?
2 A. Yes, it is. In addition, prior to me coming to the former
4 as a senior intelligence officer on the Yugoslav crisis cell at
5 nationality defence headquarters, sir.
6 Q. Thank you. I'd like to move now back to your first statement,
7 and at page 3 you --
8 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry, Your Honour. Is the Court satisfied with
9 the additional information provided?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
11 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
12 Q. Back at your first statement, Mr. Berikoff, at page 3, which is
13 the same reference in B/C/S, you reference several locations in Knin
14 which are military targets in your indication. And you assign letters to
15 each of these on an aerial photograph which I believe you submitted along
16 with the first statement; however, it is it not appended as a specific
17 number itself.
18 MR. RUSSO: I would like to bring that up, please, Madam
19 Registrar. It's 65 ter 1830.
20 My apologies to the Court for the light contrast between the
21 background colours and the markings; however, I thought it was important
22 to maintain the original.
23 Q. Nevertheless, Mr. Berikoff, is this the photograph to which you
24 are referring in your first statement when you indicate place names with
25 letters besides them?
1 A. Yes, it is.
2 Q. Thank you. And can you explain to the Court what the distinction
3 is between the locations which are circled in pink and those in blue?
4 A. Those areas that are in blue indicate where either residential
5 areas or where rounds had impacted. Those that are in pink are those
6 areas that I considered likely military targets.
7 Q. Thank you. I noticed in your third statement - and we don't need
8 to pull this up - but the reference is at page 8, line 27 to 36, where
9 you reference the Knin general supply as a military target.
10 So I would like - if I could have the assistance, please, of the
11 usher - to have you mark in red the location of the Knin general supply,
12 with the understanding that you've identified this as a military target.
13 A. To the best of my recollection.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. RUSSO: With that addition, Your Honour, I would move to
16 admit the aerial photograph of Knin, 65 ter 1830.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
18 Madam Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P746, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: P746, that is therefore 65 ter 1830, but
21 additionally marked today by the witness.
22 So, in addition to the markings already made, P746 is admitted
23 into evidence.
24 I'm just looking at this map, Mr. Russo. You apologised for not
25 being there a lot of contrast. Is there any copy which would ensure that
1 I'm not missing one of the earlier markings. I mean, the last one done
2 in court is clear, but the other ones I'm a bit afraid that I might miss
3 some of them.
4 MR. RUSSO: If it would please the Court, Your Honour, I would
5 ask the witness to simply remark all of the ones here today.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Sometimes the work is done by the Defence. I don't
7 know whether we could expect a similar thing.
8 Mr. Kehoe, Mr. Misetic?
9 MR. KEHOE: I don't have that directly, Your Honour, on this one.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I see. On this one.
11 MR. KEHOE: It's in the spirit of not overloading Your Honour
12 with military targets and stuff.
13 JUDGE ORIE: No, I fully understand. I'm not blaming for you not
14 having done the job which should have been done by the Prosecution.
15 I don't think it is useful to ask the witness to do the job
16 again. Perhaps there is a way of producing a copy which leaves me not in
17 doubt whether I would miss any one; and then if you agree with the
18 Prosecution that you didn't change anything, then I think it would assist
20 MR. RUSSO: That will be fine, Your Honour. I will have a
21 computer-enhanced image uploaded for the Court.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. RUSSO:
25 Q. And now if we could please move, Mr. Berikoff, to your third
1 statement, which is D284. And at page 2, line 9, which, in the B/C/S
2 translation, appears at page 2, lines 8 to 9, there you reference a
3 document attached as "A".
4 MR. RUSSO: And if we could now refer to 65 ter 2105.
5 Q. Mr. Berikoff, is the document now on the screen the document
6 which is referred to as document "A" attached to your third statement?
7 A. Yes, it is.
8 Q. Did you prepare this particular document?
9 A. Yes, I did.
10 Q. Again, can you tell the Court what the circumstances were of its
12 A. Once again, it was in conjunction with the award I was nominated
13 for. As well, I was tasked to do an overall assessment of the activity
14 in the area.
15 Q. Thank you. There are a few clarifications to this document that
16 I'd like to take you through.
17 Focussing on paragraph 1-B which discusses the mortar incident at
18 the intersection, There you state: "When the HV troops entered Knin,
19 there was strict restriction of movement (ROM); however, I was able to
20 travel into Knin on a trip to the hospital. As we passed the previously
21 bagged bodies, I noticed that the dead soldiers were removed from their
22 bagged and that their bodies had been mutilated."
23 Can you please clarify whether when you saw these soldiers out of
24 the body-bags you were actually en route to a trip to the hospital?
25 A. That was in the late afternoon of the 5th of August. A Croat
1 officer had come to the gate and indicated to us that there were a number
2 of Serbs that wanted to come into the compound to be placed under UN
3 protection. The Croat officer said that if we were to provide the
4 drivers and the vehicle, they would provide the escort to ensure that we
5 were able to get to the location where the Serbs were and bring them back
6 to the compound.
7 On our way out of the compound, and down the main road going into
8 Knin before we got to the bridge, we were fired upon or over our heads by
9 Croat soldiers an ordered to turn around.
10 On the way back to the compound, myself and Captain Rob Williams
11 saw, in fact, it wasn't two bodies, it was just the one soldier where
12 his -- the body-bag was open. The soldier was out. The bag and
13 everything was run over by a tank, and the bag and the body was riddled
14 with bullet-holes.
15 Q. And had that Croat officer who came to the gate told you that
16 these Serbs who wanted refuge were at the hospital?
17 A. I don't recall the -- the location of where they were. They were
18 either at the hospital or they were at the middle school or school
20 Q. Thank you. Let's move to paragraph 1-E which discusses your trip
21 into Knin on 8 August and the looting and destruction that you witnessed
22 on that date, including specifically damage done to General Forand's
24 And in that paragraph, you state: "Either HV troops or Croatian
25 special police were likely responsible as they were all in the area."
1 I'd like to you clarify, first, whether the damage you're
2 attributing in Knin to HV or special police is the damage to Knin
3 generally or just the damage to General Forand's residence?
4 A. I would say it is the damage done to Knin in general, not just to
5 General Forand's place.
6 Q. Thank you. And can you also clarify whether you witnessed
7 special police - that is, the troops in grey uniforms - looting or
8 committing acts of destruction in Knin itself.
9 A. It was a combination of both.
10 Q. Thank you. Finally, moving to paragraph 1-H where you discuss
11 your trip into Civljane on 11 August, and you state you "witnessed HV
12 troops, including the special police, going into numerous residences."
13 Again, I'd like you to clarify for the court whether you actually
14 saw special police - that is, the individuals in grey uniforms - going
15 into the residences in Civljane?
16 A. In Civljane -- it was actually en route to Civljane. In Civljane
17 itself, it was military and -- HV military personnel. They had also
18 taken over the UN compound.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MR. RUSS: With those clarifications, Your Honour, I would move
21 to admit 65 ter 2105.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
23 Madam Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P747, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE ORIE: P747 is admitted into evidence.
1 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
2 Q. Moving back to your third statement --
3 MR. RUSSO: And, again, we don't need to pull this up, Madam
5 Q. But at page 3, you reference a document attached as document "D"?
6 MR. RUSSO: So, Madam Registrar, if we could have 65 ter 1177.
7 And for the court's clarification, I'm not calling up B or C, because B
8 was also attached to the previous statement and is already in evidence; C
9 are a collection of the letters from Cermak regarding freedom of movement
10 which are also in evidence; and the document which is being pulled up now
11 is the journal.
12 And I had indicated earlier that I didn't call up the previous
13 journal which was attached to the first statement, and I will have the
14 witness explain the distinction between the two journals for the Court.
15 Q. Mr. Berikoff, can you tell the Court whether the document on the
16 screen is the document referred to as "D" in your third statement.
17 A. Yes, it is.
18 Q. And did you prepare this particular document?
19 A. Yes, I did.
20 Q. And if you could, please, explain to the Court the circumstances
21 under which you created this particular journal.
22 A. The journal was prepared -- a handwritten journal was prepared.
23 When I first found out that I was being deployed to the former
25 are basically notes throughout the day. I had made my entries daily
1 based on the events of the day and when I had a bit of spare time to
3 When I got to Sarajevo
4 started to transpose it into an electronic form. In doing so, I expanded
5 on some of the areas based on my own recollection of the events that took
6 place, and it was an ongoing project. It was notes for myself to be kept
7 to myself. It was for no other reason, sir.
8 Q. Thank you. And the journal that you handed to the ICTY
9 investigator along with your first statement, can you tell Court how that
10 relates to this particular journal?
11 A. Can you explain in what context, please, Mr. Russo?
12 Q. Sure. Attached to your first statement is a journal which
13 date-wise goes from the 30th of July until approximately the 15th of
14 August. The journal which you've identified as document "D" attached to
15 your third statement goes from 17 July to 6 September.
16 If you can, please, tell the Court what is the difference is
17 between the earlier shorter version and this version?
18 A. As I indicate a few minutes ago, it was an ongoing project of
19 mine, and I was expanding it as I was remembering things to put into my
20 journal, sir.
21 Q. Thank you. And comparing between the journal on the screen which
22 is marked "D" to the earlier electronic version and to your handwritten
23 statement, can you tell Court which of those three you consider to be the
24 most complete and the most accurate version of events?
25 A. I would consider the latest one, the 17 July to 6 September, to
1 be the more accurate of all of my journals, sir.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I would move now for the admission of 65
4 ter 1177.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
6 Madam Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit P748, Your Honours.
8 JUDGE ORIE: P748 is admitted into evidence.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
11 Q. Now, moving back to your third statement, Mr. Berikoff, beginning
12 at page 61, line 5; and in the B/C/S translation, this appears at page
13 43, beginning at line 43.
14 And in that portion of your third statement, Mr. Berikoff, you
15 reference a number of photographs that you supplied to the ICTY
16 investigator; I believe it is 154 photographs. And in the pages which
17 follow, you identify 41 specific photographs by number and describe each
19 MR. RUSSO: If I could, Madam Registrar, please have 65 ter 5404?
20 Q. While that is it being pulled up, Mr. Berikoff, let me ask you:
21 Did you have a chance to review an Index of photographs plus the
22 photographs themselves to determine whether or not that Index plus the
23 photographs accurately reflect the specific photographs that you identify
24 and discuss in your third statement?
25 A. Yes, I did. However, the photo -- the indexing was done to the
1 best of my recollection. It's been 13 years.
2 Q. Thank you. And the document on the screen, is that the
3 document --
4 MR. RUSSO: If we could scroll in a few pages, or perhaps just
5 one more page.
6 Q. Looking at that document, Mr. Berikoff, is this the document that
7 you reviewed and compared to your second statement --
8 A. Yes, it is --
9 Q. -- I'm sorry, your third statement?
10 A. My third statement, yes, it is, sir.
11 Q. And does this document accurately reflect the photographs which
12 you reference in your third statement?
13 A. Yes, it does.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I would move for the admission of 65
16 ter 5404.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
18 Madam Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P749, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: P749 is admitted into evidence.
21 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
22 Your Honour, I would just like to move through this very quickly.
23 Of the 154 photographs provided by Mr. Berikoff along with his
24 third statement, I've taken the liberty of categorising only a selection
25 of those photographs into four separate categories. I have sent some
1 notification of this to the Defence, and I would like to submit each
2 category of photographs as a separate exhibit. I thought that might
3 assist the Court.
4 And if we could have, then, 65 ter 5399.
5 And for the Court's information, this is a collection of
6 photographs which indicate that they are photographs of shelling damage
7 in residential areas of Knin, and I would move for the admission of 65
8 ter 5399.
9 And I would also advise the Court that between the categories,
10 there is some overlap between the previous collection of photographs, but
11 I thought it would be easier reference for the Court to decide by
12 category what it chose to review.
13 JUDGE ORIE: I hear no objections.
14 Madam Registrar, 65 ter 5399 would be?
15 THE REGISTRAR: It would be Exhibit P750, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: P750 is admitted into evidence.
17 MR. RUSSO: Thank you. And just to save a bit of time, rather
18 than calling up all of the collections, 65 ter 5400 is a collection of
19 photographs representing and identified by the witness as photographs of
20 acts of burning or destruction within Knin itself; 65 ter 5401 is a
21 collection of photographs depicting burning and acts of destruction
22 outside of Knin; and 65 ter 5402 are a few photographs of Cetina valley
23 which I thought the Court might appreciate getting at look at.
24 So, if there is no quarrel, I would move for the admission of
25 5400, 5401, and 5402.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Kuzmanovic.
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Just a question: Are these all of these
3 included in 5404?
4 MR. RUSSO: They are not all included in 5404, but they are
5 included in the 154, which Mr. Berikoff gave to the investigator, along
6 with his third statement.
7 MR. KUZMANOVIC. Okay. Thank you.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Which means that the total, then, will be more
9 than 41?
10 MR. RUSSO: That's correct, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. No objections, no quarrels.
12 Madam Registrar, 65 ter 5400 would be?
13 THE REGISTRAR: It would be Exhibit P751, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ORIE: P751 is admitted into evidence.
16 THE REGISTRAR: It would be Exhibit P752.
17 JUDGE ORIE: That is admitted into evidence.
19 THE REGISTRAR: It would be Exhibit P753, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: That is admitted into evidence.
21 Thank you, Madam Registrar.
22 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
23 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 Q. And, Mr. Berikoff, if we could now move to your fourth and final
25 statement, which is P741, and moving to page 3 of that exhibit. And by
1 the way, that is tab 4 in your binder.
2 P741 at page 3, paragraph 7, which is the same citation in the
3 B/C/S translation, you reference a video which was taken by an individual
4 named Garth Pritchard. And I would like you to please to explain to the
5 Court the circumstances of how that video was taken.
6 A. Mr. Garth Pritchard was a journalist for one of the television
7 companies in Canada
8 combination of the Canadian soldiers up in the Benkovac-Rastovic area; as
9 well, he made a trip down to our area in Knin.
10 I was tasked by either General Leslie or General Forand to take
11 him around to the area. Myself and Master Bombardier Parlee were his
12 escorts, and we took him to various locations throughout the sector where
13 he televised various areas of destruction.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. RUSSO: And, Your Honour, we have portions of this video
16 identified by the witness that - I don't want to play them for the
17 Court - I would just like to submit them on the basis of the supplemental
18 statement and the information provided by Mr. Berikoff.
19 So I would move for the admission of - and, again, we don't need
20 to call them up - 65 ter 5405, this is this video at counter references
21 6 minutes 54 to 14 minutes 35; 65 ter 5406, our counter reference is 2425
22 to 3321; and 65 ter 5407, our counter reference is 3405 and 3802
23 [Realtime transcript read in error "3402".
24 I would simply move for the admission of all three of those
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, could you please check whether what we
2 have on the transcript at this moment whether that is it correct, because
3 giving numbers in a quick sequence is at risk of being mis-transcribed,
4 not because of lack of competence of the transcriber but because of speed
5 of speech of the person who presents it.
6 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, there is only one correction to be made,
7 and that is with respect to 65 ter 5407; and in that instance, the
8 counter reference is actually 3405 to 3802.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Do I, then, understand that you only
10 want these portions to be admitted into evidence?
11 MR. RUSSO: That's correct, Your Honour, and we will be
12 submitting those portions and the translations for them.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. No objections, as far as I am aware of at this
15 Madam Registrar.
16 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 05405 will be Exhibit P754, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: P754 is admitted into evidence.
18 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 05406 will be Exhibit P755.
19 JUDGE ORIE: P755 is admitted into evidence.
20 THE REGISTRAR: And 65 ter 05407 will be Exhibit P756, Your
22 JUDGE ORIE: P756 is admitted into evidence.
23 Mr. Russo, if you would allow me just to go back to the selection
24 of photographs theme-oriented, so to say.
25 It is my recollection that the witness statements contain an
1 observation that not for all of the 154 photographs, he has time and
2 place available.
3 Now, we have seen this selection of 41, where there is an
4 indication on this spreadsheet of time and place. Now, you have made
5 another selection, of course, which the Chamber was not able to
6 immediately verify and check.
7 Now, for all those photographs which appear in these series -
8 damage in Knin, damage outside Knin, damage in the Cetina valley - are
9 these photographs of which time and place are always known and
11 MR. RUSSO: To be clear, Your Honour, the photographs which are
12 specifically referenced in the third statement and which are described do
13 not contain information regarding the date and the time that the
14 photograph was taken. That kind of specific information is not available
15 for those photographs. Likewise, with the additional photographs which,
16 as you indicate correctly, are organised by theme. We have only general
17 time-frame for those photographs and I can ask the witness do discuss
18 that, but we could not have specific dates and times for those.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I was just asking because it might -- of course, the
20 probative value of the photographs might be influenced by lack of certain
22 But since there was no objections, the series are admitted into
23 evidence, but just for the Chamber's information.
24 Then please move on.
25 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
1 Q. Back to your fourth statement, Mr. Berikoff, and this time at
2 paragraph 8, you reference another video which was taken by
3 Mr. Pritchard. Are the circumstances of that video similar to the ones
4 to the video we just discussed?
5 A. Yes, it is.
6 MR. RUSSO: Again, Your Honour, I would simply like to admit a
7 portion of this video, not show it to the Court, and that would be 65 ter
8 5408, the counter reference for which is 02422.
9 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
10 Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P757, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: P757 is admitted into evidence.
13 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
14 Q. And we -- if we could move now to also in your fourth statement,
15 this time at paragraph 6, and you reference two maps which you provided
16 to the ICTY.
17 MR. RUSSO: The first map, if I could have 65 ter 5393.
18 Q. Locking at this map, Mr. Berikoff, can you tell the Court whether
19 this is the map which you reference in your fourth statement?
20 A. This is one of the maps, yes.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. RUSSO: And if I could move for the admission of 5393, Your
24 MR. KEHOE: No objections.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Since there are no objections, Madam Registrar.
1 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit P758, Your Honours.
2 JUDGE ORIE: P758 is admitted into evidence.
3 MR. RUSSO: If we could now have 65 ter 5392.
4 Q. And, Mr. Berikoff, is the map on the screen the map you reference
5 in your fourth statement as "PB-2"?
6 A. Yes, it is. It is the northern portion.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. RUSSO: I would move now for the admission of 65 ter 5392.
9 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
10 Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P759, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
13 Mr. Russo, the description on your list is both in both -- no, I
14 see, no. No.
15 Please proceed.
16 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
17 If we could now please have document 65 ter 2995.
18 Q. Mr. Berikoff, are you familiar with this particular document?
19 A. I'm familiar with the document, yes, I am.
20 Q. And can you explain to the Court the -- first of all, did you
21 prepare this document?
22 A. No, I did not.
23 Q. Can you explain to the Court, if you know, how it was prepared or
24 who prepared it?
25 A. A presentation was given to personnel in Knin and Sector South
1 headquarters. I'm not sure who prepared it; but based on the text of
2 the -- of the document itself, it may have been Colonel Tymchuk or
3 General Leslie.
4 Q. And are you familiar enough with the contents of this document to
5 indicate or explain to the Court whether you believe the information
6 contained in it to be accurate?
7 A. I'm familiar with the contents; but to say that it is accurate or
8 not would, you have to ask the originator of the document, sir.
9 Q. And can you explain to the Court what exactly your involvement
10 was with this particular document?
11 A. The only involvement I had with this document was to forward it
12 on to General Leslie, or Colonel Leslie at that time.
13 Q. And why was it that you forwarded it on to General Leslie?
14 A. I was requested by Leslie.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, based on the fact that the witness
17 simply indicates that this document was apparently drafted by someone
18 within the HQ compound, was the subject of a presentation, and was --
19 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me. That is not what he said. That is not
20 what he said. He doesn't know where the origination of the document
22 MR. RUSSO: I think he indicated that he doesn't know who drafted
23 the document, but that it was the subject of a protection, it was
24 requested to be sent -- requested from General Leslie to be sent from
25 UNCRO Sector South --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Let's check. Looking at page 44, line 1, let's
2 first seek clarification from the witness because there are two different
3 interpretations of that line.
4 Mr. Russo, you have heard what Mr. Kehoe says is not in the
5 testimony, and you apparently take a different interpretation.
6 Let's ask the witness what the link was between the presentation
7 and the preparation of this document.
8 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Your Honour.
9 Q. Mr. Berikoff, you've already indicated that you don't know
10 exactly who drafted it. Do you know who gave this presentation?
11 A. No, I do not. I was not in attendance at the presentation.
12 Q. How do you know it was a presentation?
13 A. I had heard, and it is only hearsay, that there was going to be a
14 presentation to various people in the headquarters.
15 Q. Did you attend that presentation?
16 A. No, I did not. I was not present at the presentation.
17 Q. Do you know who was in attendance at the presentation?
18 A. I do recall, sir.
19 Q. And can you tell the Court where you got the document from.
20 A. I would have received the document from OPs centre at
21 Sector South headquarters, either from Major Balfour or Major Dussault,
22 the operation officers?
23 Q. And did you retrieve that document on the 22nd of August?
24 A. I don't recall, sir. That is the date that is on my memo or my
25 short note to Colonel Leslie. With that in mind, that it is probably the
1 same date that I retrieved the document.
2 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, on that basis, I would move for the
3 admission, understanding that the probative value, of course, can be
4 slightly effected since we don't who drafted it. Nevertheless, this was
5 a communication of information relevant to this case, submitted from the
6 HQ Sector South to UNCRO in Zagreb
8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I just find it astonishing that
9 we're asking to move a document that doesn't exist and that nobody has
10 into evidence based on a cover letter. It is mind-boggling to me.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
12 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I am not sure what the meaning is that
13 the document doesn't exist. Clearly, the witness has already testified
14 he got it from at least someone. He believes it is the OPs centre in the
15 HQ Sector South. He transmitted it to a higher authority in Zagreb
16 Clearly, it is a roughly contemporaneous record of what someone in the HQ
17 Sector South had presented to someone else. The Court can take it for
18 what it is worth; nevertheless, I think it is information that would
19 assist the Court in making its own determination.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
21 MR. KEHOE: If I may, Your Honour, and with all due respect to
22 Captain Berikoff, we can't cross-examine the man on a document that he
23 has no knowledge as to who prepared, how it was prepared, and on what
24 basis the document was prepared. Merely going in there and pulling
25 something out and sending to Leslie doesn't qualify or authenticate this
1 document. If, in fact, this was done by Leslie, why did the Prosecution
2 not put it to Colonel Leslie when he was here? Heavens knows he was here
3 for long enough.
4 Now, there are comments in here frankly that are extremely
5 prejudicial. And, again, with all due respect to Captain Berikoff, I am
6 sure when I asked about those, he will simply say, "I don't know. I
7 don't know where this document came from, I don't have a source for it,
8 and I don't know where those comments come from."
9 It is simply not sufficient to say that somebody, at some
10 someplace, at sometime drafted a document. Mr. Berikoff happened to grab
11 it and then sends it up to UNCRO headquarters in Zagreb and that thereby
12 authenticates it. If this is an witness that did it, the OTP should go
13 found out who did it, so he or she can come back in and defend the
14 contents of it.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
16 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I certainly agree with Mr. Kehoe. He is
17 not able to cross-examine this particular witness on the content of the
18 document; nevertheless, that goes to the weight to be accorded to the
19 Court. It is clearly a statement which, as I indicated, is roughly
20 contemporaneous with the events which it purports to relate to. It is
21 something some one in the UN HQ compound said about what happened. On
22 that basis, they could use it to cross-examine other witnesses to see if
23 the agree with it or do not agree with it. We have no information that
24 it was drafted by Colonel Leslie. And if we had, we certainly would have
25 submitted it through him. We simply don't know who drafted, but we do
1 know that it was sent by Mr. Berikoff to Colonel Leslie upon Colonel
2 Leslie' request.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Do you have information that it was not drafted by
4 Colonel Leslie?
5 MR. RUSSO: No, Your Honour. We don't have information one way
6 or the other. However, I can tell the Court that this was -- I believe
7 came to us attached to General Leslie's statements; although, I don't
8 believe he indicated to us that he was able to authenticate the content
9 of it, which is why it was not offered through him.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Well, if he is not able to authenticate, then you
11 have information that he was the author, isn't it?
12 MR. RUSSO: I believe that's a circumstance which I could safely
13 assume, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: So, then, the answer to my last question could have
15 been shorter; it could have been "yes."
16 MR. RUSSO: Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 Mr. Kehoe.
19 MR. KEHOE: Just, frankly, it is a document. Who knows when it
20 was created? I mean, it doesn't have a particular date on it. And with
21 all due respect to my learned friend across the well, I mean, the OTP has
22 at least some preliminary burden to tell not only the Chamber but to the
23 Defence who is responsible for this, so that we can have a meaningful
24 dialogue. Again, with all due respect, Captain, he doesn't know, so it
25 is not going to a meaningful dialogue, and the OTP just throws this
1 document across the transom. Then they say, well, like it or not, here
2 it is. I think that that is not a pursuit of facts that are detailed
3 here, and I will tell you, Your Honour, that there are some very
4 prejudicial comments in this document that need to be addressed. And it
5 is simply not asking the OTP after 13 years of investigation to find out
6 who authored this document. There has to be a limited circle of people.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber -- Mr. Russo, I heard you saying
9 something when I had my earphones off. I don't know what you said.
10 MR. RUSSO: I had just one brief response, but if the Court has
11 already made up its mind, then --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Well, we have not made up our mind as a matter of
13 fact. But if it is a brief comment, then I make take it that the Defence
14 has a brief comment as well?
15 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Your Honour.
16 I agree with Mr. Kehoe that there is limited circle of people who
17 could have authored this document, which is why I believe there is some
18 probative value to be attached to it; however, we simply don't know who
19 among that circle of people it was who drafted it. Nevertheless, the
20 circumstances in which it came to the OTP, which I now can address, for
21 example, to someone showing up at a crime scene, finding a journal on the
22 floor of a crime scene, they can authenticate what is in the journalism.
23 Nevertheless, the fact that it was found at the crime scene nevertheless
24 makes it evidence that the Court should see.
25 This document is no different. We don't know who authored it,
1 how accurate it is; nevertheless, we do know that it came out of the one
2 location from which the UN was reporting the most contemporaneous
3 information regarding events in this case.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I now see all three. I think, I saw Ms. Higgins
6 MR. KEHOE: [Overlapping speakers] ... sorry. I just didn't
7 see --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, there was a whole queue behind you.
9 Ms. Higgins.
10 MS. HIGGINS: Your Honour, very briefly, on behalf of Mr. Cermak,
11 we joint the objection to this document on several bases. Primarily, the
12 first being the rule has been incorrectly stated by Mr. Russo. If this
13 Chamber is to descend to the levels of allowing documentation to come in
14 mainly and purely on the basis that it would assist this Court, then we
15 would start to apply rules which are not within the rule books
17 And it would reduce the levels of admissibility to levels of
18 incomprehensibility. This witness cannot speak on any level or to any
19 degree through no fault of his own to this document. And I fail to see
20 the basis despite the valiant attempts arguably by Mr. Russo upon which
21 this document could come before this Court.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
23 Mr. Kuzmanovic.
24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I have nothing to add to that.
25 Thank you.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Kehoe.
2 MR. KEHOE: One last comment, Judge. I find this most recent
3 analysis by Mr. Russo simply astonishing that --
4 JUDGE ORIE: You mean that he considers UN circles to be the
5 crime scene; is that it?
6 MR. KEHOE: I find it happening upon a report. Let us
7 extrapolate this out and look at it in the general criminal sector with
8 police departments. It happens to be some report that is unsigned,
9 undated, and it happens to have evidence that is involved in a --or could
10 be conceivably involved in some criminal matter. And without any
11 description of the author or naming of the author as to where this
12 information comes from, the Prosecution has submitted that this -- that
13 this document should be admitted into evidence with none of the attendant
14 information to check on authenticity.
15 If that is the standard of documents under which documents should
16 come in, I have to join in the comments made by Ms. Higgins that there is
17 no standard, and that is basically what Mr. Russo has put before this
18 Court. There is it simply no standard. They found it, it's around,
19 somebody wrote it, we don't know who, we don't know when, but it comes
20 in. Oh, by the way, Defence, you can't cross-examine anybody on the
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, Mr. Kuzmanovic, Ms. Higgins, and
23 Mr. Kehoe, the Chamber will consider the admission into evidence of the
25 And, therefore, it will be marked for identification for the time
2 Madam Registrar.
3 THE REGISTRAR: That will be P760, marked for identification,
4 Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
6 Please proceed.
7 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I don't if the Court is of a mind for a
8 recess at that point. I don't know --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. As a matter of fact, the debate was so
10 interesting that I forgot to look at the clock, with my apologies for all
11 those suffering from it.
12 We will have a break, and we will resume at ten minutes past
14 --- Recess taken at 10.43 a.m.
15 --- On resuming at 11.14 a.m.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, please proceed.
17 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
18 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I'd now like to ask you some questions regarding
19 some specific events that you witnessed during and after Operation Storm.
20 Can you tell Court whether you took a trip to Knin hospital on
21 4 August?
22 A. Yes, I did.
23 Q. Can you tell the Court what the circumstances of that trip were.
24 A. The first trip I took to the Knin hospital was with the SMEDLO,
25 the Senior Medical Officer. We went down to see if, in fact, we could
1 offer assistance to any of the wounded people in the hospital or with the
2 medical staff.
3 When we got to the hospital, we were turned around and our help
4 was refused.
5 Q. You indicated that -- well, let me ask first: On that trip to
6 the hospital, did you see any ARSK tanks positioned at or near the
8 A. I am not aware of any military position near the hospital at that
9 time. No, I did not see any.
10 Q. Did you, in fact, see an ARSK tank anywhere inside the town of
11 Knin on any of the trips you made either on 4th or 5th of August?
12 A. In Knin itself, no, I did not.
13 Q. You indicated that on the first trip -- in your last answer, on
14 the first trip that you took to the hospital, can you tell the Court how
15 many times you went to the hospital on the 4th and the 5th?
16 A. I believe, on the 4th, I went to the hospital twice, or may I
17 refer it my notes, please?
18 Q. Sure. And while you're doing that, can you please just let the
19 Court know what exactly it is what you're referring to when you check it.
20 A. Okay. I'm referring to the daily journal marked 17 July until
21 6 September, and I'm looking at the entry for the 4th of August, which is
22 a Friday.
23 MR. RUSSO: And just for the Court's benefit, that's Exhibit
25 A. Okay. That was the one trip when we went to the hospital, like I
1 said, to offer assistance. I believe I made a couple of trips that day.
2 With -- with me on the trip were a number of people, including, as I
3 said, the Senior Medical Officer; as well, I believe the Jordanian Chief
4 of Staff. And I'm not certain if General Leslie was with us at that time
5 or not. He may, in fact, have been, because I know he came with us on
6 one occasion to the hospital where he went inside and I stood in the
7 parking lot.
8 Following departure from the hospital, I was tasked to go to the
9 Jordanian Chief of Staff's residence to pick up his luggage. When -- on
10 our way to the Chief of Staff's residence, we were fired upon by an ARSK
11 soldier who had a hand-held rocket launcher. He fired at the -- at our
12 APC and missed.
13 I know that General Leslie was not with us at that time, but I do
14 know that one occasion -- I believe it was on the 4th. On the 5th, I'm
15 not aware of him going to the hospital to go inside.
16 Q. Thank you. And did you go to the hospital on the 5th of August?
17 A. No. I did not go to the hospital on the 5th of August. In the
18 morning, I was preoccupied with the casualties and -- and the deceased at
19 the intersection. At 12.10 on the 5th, the Croat Puma Brigade, or
20 members of, had come to the gate with their tanks and stopped us from any
21 movement outside the compound. If, in fact, any carriers or any
22 personnel went downtown on the 5th in the morning, it was without my
23 knowledge because I was tasked to do numerous other things. So I was not
24 aware of other vehicles. However, after 12.00 that day, nothing left the
1 Q. Can you please refer to your third statement at page 14?
2 A. What tab is that, please, Mr. Russo?
3 Q. That is tab 3, I believe, in your binder.
4 MR. RUSSO: And this is, again, for reference, Exhibit D284, at
5 page 14.
6 Q. Beginning at about line 7, you're discussing a Serb doctor, and I
7 believe that this, what you're talking about here, occurred on the 5th of
8 August. You indicated that a Serb doctor from the day before approached
9 the gate. He is asking for help at the hospital.
10 And later on, on the following paragraph, beginning at line 18,
11 it says: "En route to the hospital, there was still a number of dead on
12 the street, probably in the vicinity of 20 to 30 people; and once we got
13 back to the hospital, there were still a number of dead and wounded,
14 approximately the same that were seen the day before."
15 Then it says: "Though the bodies had not been removed from the
16 previous day. We noticed at that time that hospital had, indeed, been
17 hit by artillery. A number of the windows in the hospital were, in fact,
18 broken. There were shell marks on the wall; as well, there were craters
19 in the field surrounding the hospital."
20 Looking at that portion of your third statement, which seems to
21 reflect that you were at the hospital on the 5th, can you clarify whether
22 or not having read that you have a memory of going to the hospital on the
24 A. Mr. Russo, I do not recall the 5th -- of going to the hospital on
25 the 5th. My recollection of the 5th is that I was -- I was busy at the
1 intersection with the casualties.
2 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Your Honour. This is not contained in the
3 supplemental information sheet. I would like to know when the
4 Prosecution came into possession of this information.
5 MR. RUSSO: It's in the third statement, which is Exhibit D284,
6 page 14, line 18.
7 MR. KEHOE: No. I'm talking about the information that the
8 witness did not go to the hospital, when that information came to the
9 possession of the Prosecution.
10 MR. RUSSO: I believe I asked just asked him a few questions ago,
11 and he said he didn't have a memory of going to the hospital on the 5th.
12 I can just take a look at that.
13 MR. KEHOE: My answer --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Just a moment. I think, Mr. Russo, what Mr. Kehoe
15 would like it know is whether at any earlier moment you became aware that
16 the testimony of the witness might be that he did not go to the hospital
17 on the 5th of August.
18 Is that, Mr. Kehoe, what you were looking for?
19 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
20 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry. I misunderstood the question. I spoke to
21 the witness yesterday evening after he met with members of the Defence,
22 at which time he indicated to me he was unsure at what time or whether he
23 went to the hospital on the 4th or the 5th, and I believe I thought it
24 was a matter that needed calculation for the Court.
25 I apologise if that was not communicated to the Defence; however,
1 I think it is it pretty clear from what the witness said in court today
2 that he doesn't have a specific recollection of whether he went to the
3 hospital on the 5th. That's why I thought I would take him to this
4 portion of his statement and find out if could address that.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
6 MR. KEHOE: Well, we're certainly entitled to that disclosure
7 about that. We got three single-spaced pages of disclosures, and that
8 very important detail has not been provided by the Office of the
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I don't know what time and what date that was
11 disclosed to you.
12 But, Mr. Russo, if you found this information, even late
13 yesterday evening, I think we're all working day and night, so,
14 therefore, you should have disclosed this to the Defence.
15 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I apologise. It was my understanding
16 from the witness that it was during his conversation with the Defence
17 that he became uncertain, and that this was communicated to him by the
18 Defence that he was uncertain.
19 I apologise. I didn't send it either the Cermak Defence or
20 Markac Defence, but it was my understanding that at least the Gotovina
21 Defence had notice of his confusion regarding that.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But you're awareness and you're being informed
23 about it in a conversation with the witness is something different than
24 the Defence finding out about these matters. It's your witness.
25 MR. RUSSO: I understand, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, please proceed.
2 MR. RUSSO:
3 Q. Mr. Berikoff, can you explain to the Court why in your third
4 statement, on page 14, you discuss a trip to the hospital and
5 observations that were made on a trip to the hospital on the 5th of
7 A. No, I can't explain the 5th of August. I do know that, on one
8 occasion, General Leslie did come with us to the hospital. When we got
9 to the hospital he went inside the hospital; I stayed in the parking lot.
10 I do not recall, and I'm uncertain, if it is the trip with the SMEDLO or
11 another trip. I do know, and I'm certain, that he came with us on one
12 trip where he went into the hospital, and then he came out and he
13 indicated how many wounded and dead he saw inside the hospital. That is
14 why I put the information in my very first handwritten journal that I
15 did. It was information given by General Leslie at the time.
16 I know for a fact that when I left the hospital en route to the
17 Jordanian Chief of Staff's residence to pick up his luggage from his
18 residence, General Leslie was not with us at that time. I don't know if
19 he had gone back to the hospital on his own at that time or if he had
20 stayed on. But I do know that there was one occasion when I was
21 personally there when Leslie went inside the hospital, sir.
22 Q. Thank you. Let's move now to your fourth statement, and that is
23 Exhibit P741.
24 A. I take it that's tab 4, Mr. Russo?
25 Q. That is correct. And turning to page 2, paragraph 2 of that
1 statement, you describe your -- or you discuss your change of opinion
2 regarding the indiscriminate nature of the shelling.
3 And I would like you, please, to explain to the Court why it ask
4 that you changed your opinion.
5 A. Following the offensive, I had a chance to reassess and take a
6 look at the overall picture, because by this time I had numerous
7 opportunities of driving through the town of Knin and in the -- and in
8 the other -- outlying outskirts Knin itself.
9 In my opinion, there were a number of areas that could have been
10 considered military targets, be they strategic infrastructure-type
11 targets or just military installations where there may have been troops.
12 The opinion that I -- or the assessment that I came up upon was
13 done immediately after as I had a chance to re-think things over.
14 During the offensive itself, it seemed that it was indiscriminate
15 because there were a large number of shells, there were a large number of
16 rocket barrages, mortar fire, and everything. So it seemed like
17 everything was coming in on Knin. But having reassessed it after, in
18 fact, it is my opinion that there were, in fact, military targets, and it
19 may not have been as indiscriminate as originally thought.
20 There was a lot of collateral damage, and was the amount of
21 shelling and rocket fire unnecessary? In my opinion, the answer is yes.
22 And the reason I say that is because most of the ARSK had left the town,
23 the civilians had evacuated the town, and those check-points that were
24 located throughout the town were with minimal manning.
25 So, I came of the opinion that, okay, was it indiscriminate? No.
1 Was it unnecessary with the amount of fire that they put into the city of
2 Knin? My opinion was yes.
3 Q. Thank you. And I would like to be clear about when exactly it
4 was that your opinion changed.
5 In your third statement, you indicate that you believed it was
6 indiscriminate; however, there was a gap of almost 11 years between that
7 statement and your following statement, which is your fourth statement,
8 in which you indicate that your opinion has changed.
9 At what time after your third statement did you come to a change
10 of opinion?
11 A. There was a number of times when I revisited in my mind the
12 situation in Sector South and had -- and over -- and looked over my maps
13 or the aerial photo and stuff like that and the photos that I took and
14 looked at the various types of damage that existed, and that is when I
15 formulated my own assessment that it was not indiscriminate, as other
16 people had indicated?
17 Q. And you indicated that you realized that there were military
18 targets in the area. Are there -- did you realize that there were any
19 military targets in addition to those which were identified by you on the
20 map and in your statements?
21 A. Prior to the offensive on -- on Knin, no, I was not aware of
22 other military targets, because I had just arrived in country a few weeks
23 prior to, and I did not have the opportunity to drive up and down the
24 streets of Knin. My task, when I first got there, was to go outside of
25 Knin and see what forces on either -- either side that I would encounter.
1 So it was not my task to go up and down the streets of Knin and see what
2 military installations were there.
3 I knew the main military installations on the main road, the main
4 barracks, et cetera; and from looking at the aerial photo and just what
5 was in the vicinity targets, such as the railhead, the factory,
6 et cetera, those are also military targets, sir.
7 Q. And the two you've just identified, the rail yard and the
8 factory, I believe you have already indicated in your statements and
9 exhibits that those are military targets.
10 What I'm attempting to discover is whether the change of your
11 opinion after your third statement is based on any new information or any
12 information which is different from the information you had in your
13 possession at the time you made your third statement.
14 A. No, it was not. It was still just based on the information that
15 I had from my original -- original statement of what was in the vicinity,
16 such as the Ministry of Defence, the barracks, et cetera; and when you
17 look at those, as well as the POL station and everything, those were
18 strategic targets, and that was what made me think that the overall town
19 of Knin was, in fact -- or, in fact, did have numerous military targets
20 that could have made it a military target.
21 Q. Are any of the facts upon which you base your in opinion --or let
22 me just ask it this way: Are the facts upon which you're basing your new
23 opinion in any way different than the facts upon which you based your
24 original opinion that the shelling was indiscriminate?
25 A. No there they're not, it's just that I changed my opinion from
1 indiscriminate to unnecessary. The shelling still continued, there was
2 collateral damage; however, there were military targets.
3 Q. Thank you. Now if we could please refer to your journal, which
4 is Exhibit P748; and in your tab, this appears at tab 6.
5 MR. RUSSO: And in P748, if we could go to page 15, which is the
6 entry for 31 August 1995
7 Q. And in that entry for 31 August 1995, you state: "Colonel
8 Leslie, now UNCRO COS, called Lieutenant-Colonel Tymchuk and asked if I
9 would be willing to do him a favour, even though it was illegal (no photo
10 taking allowed) and possibly very dangerous."
11 Can you explain to the Court what exactly was "illegal" about the
12 favour Colonel Leslie asked you to do on that date?
13 A. The terminology of "illegal," in my opinion, it was not an
14 illegal order given by the general at the time. The order was fine and I
15 would have done it, and I had no problem in obeying that order. What was
16 illegal was the taking of photos or the order not to take photos given to
17 us by both the Sers prior to the offensive and then the Croats after the
18 offensive took place. That was the illegal portion of it. It was not
19 the order that was given to me by General Leslie through Colonel Tymchuk.
20 Q. Okay. I think I'm a bit confused by your answer.
21 You say that what was illegal was the taking of photos or the
22 ordering not to take photos given to us by the Serbs.
23 That seems to be a bit different than your entry. Your entry
24 saying that the favour that General Leslie asked to you do was illegal?
25 A. That is not true. That is not an accurate statement because
1 the -- the order was not illegal. It -- what was illegal was, in the
2 opinion of the Croats, was taking photos. It was not the order that
3 General Leslie gave.
4 Q. Thank you. And can I understand that to mean that you believed
5 it was illegal to take photos?
6 A. If you use the terminology "illegal" in the sense of disobeying
7 the Croats, the answer was, yes, on that one, it was illegal. But was it
8 illegal to take photos? Was it an illegal order by the General? The
9 answer was no. I was responding to a direct order from a colonel at the
11 Q. And staying in that same entry, pardon me, you indicate that
12 Colonel Leslie asked to you look for evidence that the HV/HVO had
13 committed war crimes by indiscriminately shelling the city, and you
14 stated: "Master Bombardier Parlee and I found the evidence that Colonel
15 Leslie was looking for big time."
16 Can you tell the Court what "big time" evidence was that you
18 A. The "big time" refers to the number of buildings or craters,
19 shrapnel, in various cars, buildings, windows, broken windows, et cetera.
20 That is what I meant by "big time."
21 To me, seeing destruction, as was throughout the sector, was a
22 lot, so that is why I put "big time."
23 Once again, I will go back to my personal journal and say those
24 were my own personal notes; and to me, it looked big time at that time.
25 Q. Thank you. Let's move back to your first statement at page 4.
1 First statement is it P739; that is the first one in your tab.
2 So P739, at page 4, and it's the third paragraph from the bottom,
3 in which you discuss acts of deliberate destruction witnessed by you in
4 several areas around Sector South.
5 In the last sentence of that paragraph, you state: "Major Juric
6 tried to explain it in the same way as Cermak; however, he was also
7 telling Captain Hill and myself that they had to make sure that the
8 Chetniks would not return."
9 Also, in the following paragraph, you stated: "Major Juric told
10 me and Captain Hill during one of our meetings following Operation Storm
11 that it was his responsibility to clean up the area and to ensure that
12 the Chetniks would not be able to come back to the area."
13 Can you tell the Court whether Major Juric ever indicated to you
14 exactly who he considered Chetniks to be?
15 A. It wasn't only Major Juric, but Major Juric in particular
16 indicated that the Chetniks were the Serbs. He did not distinguish
17 between Serbs civilians or Serb soldiers or Serb children or anything. A
18 Chetnik was a Serb, in general.
19 Q. Thank you. And when -- what exactly was Major Juric explaining
20 when he said that they had no make sure the Chetniks would not return?
21 What was it he was attempting to go explain to you?
22 A. I remember the incident quite well. It was up in the area of
23 Macure, when Kistanje was ablaze. He -- he had stopped us and asked what
24 we were doing in the area. We said we were just looking at what was
25 happening throughout the sector, trying to ascertain what activities were
1 still ongoing. We told Major Juric that we noticed there was a number of
2 buildings that were on fire or destroyed after the offensive itself.
3 That is when Major Juric indicated to us that we -- that the
4 purpose of the operation was to clear the area of any -- "Chetniks" in
5 the area had to be cleared out because they did not want them to come
6 back and reoccupy areas of the Krajina.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. RUSSO: I have no further questions, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask one clarifying question?
10 You used during your last answer the word "reoccupy." Did you
11 mean reoccupy in a military sense or in the sense of, again, living in
12 that area.
13 THE WITNESS: It was a combination of both, Your Honour, both the
14 civilians reoccupying the residence or the military coming back into
15 their former positions.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Berikoff.
17 Mr. Kehoe.
18 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: It will be you who is the first to cross-examines
20 Mr. Berikoff.
21 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour, if I just gather my information.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 Mr. Berikoff, you will now be cross-examined by Mr. Kehoe who is
24 counsel for Mr. Gotovina.
25 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
1 Cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe:
2 Q. Good morning, Captain.
3 A. Good morning, Mr. Kehoe.
4 Q. Consistent with our conversation yesterday, we will go through a
5 series of matters, and pardon me if I just go through some things and
6 jump around a little bit, but we will cover some matters that were
7 covered on direct, as well as covering some matters that are just contain
8 the in your statement but were not addressed. Okay?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. And, again, if you're not clear about any question, Captain,
11 please stop me and just ask?
12 A. If I may just ask one thing, Mr. Kehoe, may I be referred to as
13 Mr. Berikoff. My military days are long gone.
14 Q. Absolutely, Mr. Berikoff.
15 A. Thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: May I invite both speakers not to speak too quickly
17 and also to make a short break between question and answer and answer and
19 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
20 MR. KEHOE:
21 Q. Mr. Berikoff, prior to coming to the former Yugoslavia, even
22 coming into Zagreb
23 of the Yugoslav crisis cell back in the nationality defence headquarters
24 in Ottawa
25 A. Yes, it is.
1 Q. And how long did you do that?
2 A. From April 1991 until April 1994.
3 Q. So you were followed -- I'm sorry. So you were following the
4 sequence of events in Yugoslavia
5 A. Yes, I was, sir.
6 Q. Now let's go directly to your arrival, and if I could go to 748,
7 your daily journal.
8 A. What date is that?
9 Q. The 21st of July, 1995.
10 A. Yes, sir.
11 Q. Now, let me just cover a couple of matters that -- it will be the
12 21st of July, the 22nd of July. And if I could just reference those, and
13 then I did ask you a few questions about it.
14 In the 21st of July, you note that you are flying over the area
15 coming into Knin, and you note about halfway down that a lot of places
16 are destroyed.
17 Do you see that, sir, about one, two --
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 Q. And this is the -- this area was the area that was controlled by
20 the Serbs at the time, right?
21 A. Yes, it was.
22 Q. If we go down to the 22nd of July, about midway through, you
23 note: "As I drive through the villages, it is it hard to imagine what
24 these people have done to each other supposedly in the name of religion.
25 One village will be destroyed and deserted, while the village next to it
1 doesn't get touched."
2 A. Yes, I see that.
3 Q. Now, again, sir, this was -- these were Croatian villages that
4 had been destroyed by the Serbs after 1991. Isn't that right?
5 A. That is correct.
6 Q. And a little bit more description. I mean, tell us the level of
7 that damage, sir, the damage that was done by the Serbs against the
9 A. A lot of the damage done was very similar to the damage that was
10 done following the -- or during and following the offensive during
11 Operation Storm. There were villages that were completely destroyed,
12 there were villages that were partially destroyed, but the type of damage
13 was very similar -- similar that took place during Operation Storm, sir.
14 Q. So, even prior to Storm, you and the other UN personnel saw that
15 all these Croatian villages had been destroyed.
16 A. Yes. It was very obvious that the destruction had taken place
17 some time prior to August of 1995.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, when you're talking about Croatian
19 villages, could you please always make clear whether we're talking about
20 villages in Croatia
21 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: -- and villages which are predominantly inhabited by
23 those of Croatian ethnic origin, so that we have a clear designation
24 between what is a Croatian village.
25 MR. KEHOE: Yes, sir.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And, perhaps, we could ask Mr. Berikoff the
2 last questions about the damage to the villages, the question always was
3 about Croatian villages.
4 In your answers, when you confirmed what was put to you by
5 Mr. Kehoe, did you include that the damage was done to villages of a
6 predominantly Croatian population, or were you just talking about
7 villages you saw in Croatia
8 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, it was villages both on Croatian -- in
10 the Krajina.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
12 MR. KEHOE:
13 Q. Now, you noted that these -- this was the similar type damage
14 that you saw after Operation Storm.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Do you know when you -- prior to Operation Storm if the United
17 Nations was making any efforts with the RSK authorities to determine who
18 did all this burning of Croat houses?
19 A. I had heard rumours of that, but I'm not aware of anything in
20 particular, sir.
21 Q. Your were aware that a large number of Croatian civilians had
22 been driven out.
23 A. Yes, I am.
24 Q. Now, when you got to Sector South, would you agree that -- that
25 the whole area of the Krajina was very tense?
1 A. Without a doubt. There were indications and rumours and
2 conflicting stories of a possible Croatian offensive to retake the
3 Krajina. There were ongoing negotiations about the status of the
4 Krajina. And the days varied from -- well, we may have an offensive
5 starting tomorrow, we may have an offensive in ten days, a week,
6 whatever. So, yes, it was a very stressful situation throughout. Even
7 prior to my deployment, even while I was in Canada at the nationality
8 defence headquarters, I was still aware of the possibility of an upcoming
9 offensive against the Krajina.
10 Q. Now, in your diary -- I'm just -- there was also a problem with
11 the Krajina Serbs conducting criminal activities against the United
12 Nations as well. Isn't that right?
13 A. Yes. There were a number of instances when United Nations
14 vehicles were hijacked. In one instance prior to my arrival, one of the
15 UN personnel was shot during -- shot and killed during a hijacking; and
16 yes, this was done by the local Serbs.
17 MR. KEHOE: And, by way of clarity, Your Honour, this is -- I
18 believe Mr. Berikoff is on the bottom of page 2 on to page 3 of P748.
19 Q. Now, in addition to that, sir, if I may, and just trying to get
20 your statements together.
21 When you got there, sir, there was also a significant degree of
22 restriction of movement, wasn't there?
23 A. Yes, there was. Throughout the whole -- whole area, we were
24 restricted at a number of check-points of being able to go any further.
25 Q. And the restrictions were by the ARSK, weren't they?
1 A. Yes, they were.
2 Q. And that began towards the latter part of July of 1995, didn't
4 A. Yes, it did, that I'm aware of. It may have happened before, but
5 definitely when I was there.
6 Q. So when you got there, Mr. Berikoff, the ARSK, at least in your
7 experience, began to refuse your entry into certain areas. Isn't that
9 A. Yes, they did, or they let us in after we waited a certain amount
10 of time; or if we were able to pay them certain items such as Coca-Cola
11 or cigarettes, then they would let us through. So the answer is yes.
12 Q. In the areas they were moving in to, were they moving troops and
13 other mechanized vehicles?
14 A. It was usually in areas where there was military activity, yes.
15 Q. And where would that have been?
16 A. I don't recall exactly; however, I do know that it was on the way
17 to -- from Knin down south towards Drnis in that area. I don't recall
18 the exact areas. We also went to other areas where we were restricted at
19 various check-points throughout the whole sector, sir.
20 Q. But to follow up on what you said before, you learned during this
21 period of time that these restrictions were taking place because they
22 were moving troops and mechanized vehicles.
23 A. In a lot of the cases, it was because of troop or vehicle
24 movement. Whether it was mechanized or not, sir, I'm not sure, but it
25 was vehicle movement.
1 Q. Now you note for news your diary, again, at -- if I may, on the
2 1st of August, that you were supposed to take a helicopter recce along
3 the zone of separation to visit CanBat 1's area of responsibility. Do
4 you recall that?
5 A. Yes, I do. And it was it wasn't only the CanBat's 1's area of
6 responsibility, it was the whole zone of separation, sir.
7 Q. Tell us, and tell the Chamber, what you were intending to do with
8 the recce.
9 A. Basically, what the reconnaissance would do would give --
10 provides us with information about troop movement, troop locations,
11 et cetera, on both sides of the warring factions.
12 Q. And when you tried to take this reconnaissance flight on the
13 1st of August, the ARSK refused, didn't they?
14 A. Yes, they did.
15 Q. And did they give you a reason why they refused?
16 A. No, they did not.
17 Q. Now, you attempted to take that reconnaissance flight again the
18 next day, didn't you?
19 A. Yes, I did.
20 Q. And that would have been 2 August of 1995?
21 A. Yes, it was.
22 Q. And did you, in fact, take that reconnaissance mission?
23 A. It was either the 2nd or --
24 Q. Or did you take it thereafter?
25 A. It was on the 2nd of August, as you indicated. That's when the
1 pilot picked me up at the UN compound on our helipad. We departed at
2 8.00. At 8.08, I believe, is when we got fired upon by the ARSK from the
3 area of Oklaj.
4 Q. So they refused permission on the 1st; you got fired upon; and
5 going back to your diary, on the 3rd, your reconnaissance mission - and
6 I'm talking about your diary, P748, on the 3rd of August - your
7 reconnaissance mission on that day was, once again, refused by the ARSK?
8 A. Yes, it was. Because after the incident and after the apology
9 from the ARSK colonel, we had put in another request for permission to
10 fly again the next day; however, that mission was cancelled completely.
11 Q. Now, did the -- did you learn during this period of time when you
12 were being denied this movement, Mr. Berikoff, that the ARSK was
13 preparing an offensive against the HV?
14 A. No, I did not. We were denied numerous attempts of doing many
15 things by the ARSK in the early days.
16 Q. Such as what else, sir?
17 A. Such as entry into areas along some of my travels. My task, when
18 I was there, was to gain information. So on numerous occasions, I would
19 drive to various locations throughout the sector and was denied entry
20 into various areas, not necessarily just military. If there was a
21 civilian police check-point, I would be turned around and told I could
22 not go into the area. No reason was given; however, there were numerous
23 incidents when we were turned, and permission was not given for us to go
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
1 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: I earlier did not know whether it was important
3 enough to take the witness back to page 68, lines 16 and following; but
4 in view of your line of questioning, I think it might have gained some
6 Mr. Berikoff, you were asked about the restrictions of movement,
7 and one of the questions put to you: "And that began towards the latter
8 part of July of 1995, didn't it?"
9 You said: "Yes, it did, that I'm aware of. It may have happened
10 before, but definitely when I was there."
11 Then the next question was: "So when you got there,
12 Mr. Berikoff, the ARSK, at least in your experience, began to refuse your
13 entry into certain areas; isn't that right?"
14 And you said: "Yes, they did."
15 Now, the whole of the context leaves some doubt as to whether
16 what you noticed upon arrival was something that began - that is, that
17 they began to restrict freedom of movement - or whether you say, I
18 experienced that there was freedom of movement, and I do not know whether
19 it began at that time or before I arrived.
20 Could you please clarify this.
21 THE WITNESS: Yes, I could, Your Honour.
22 There was restriction of movement and even before I got there.
23 The restriction of movement was in effect. There were hijackings, there
24 was everything, so there restrictions of movement imposed by ARSK, as
25 well as some restriction of movement imposed by the UN command within
1 Sector South itself, sir.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 Mr. Kehoe, the first answer of the witness already hinted quite
4 clearly at whether it began at the time he arrived that that might not
5 have been the case. You more or less ignored that answer. In
6 introducing the next question, when saying that: "When you got there,
7 they began to refuse." Apart from the -- well, of course, in your
8 experience, but I noticed that. But if you haven't been there before,
9 you can't have any experience.
10 And from the explanation of the witness now, it appears that he
11 had knowledge of what happened before he arrived, and he noticed that
12 when he was there, that there was restriction of movement. And in the
13 beginning, I think it would have assisted the Chamber better if would you
14 not have, again, used that word "began to refuse."
15 Please proceed.
16 THE WITNESS: If I may, Your Honour, I think using the words
17 "ongoing restriction of movement" might explain it easier. I was ongoing
18 when I got there. I was aware that there was restriction of movement
19 prior to my arrival; and when I got there, the restriction of movement
20 was ongoing, sir.
21 JUDGE ORIE: You experienced that it was there.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Kehoe.
24 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
25 Q. If we could be a little bit more precise on that, Mr. Berikoff,
1 and I can turn your attention to P740, paragraph 2-A.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps, I might explain to Mr. Berikoff who might
3 not be familiar with the Dutch testing system of --
4 THE WITNESS: Yes, I am.
5 JUDGE ORIE: -- our alarm sirens. That is what happened every
6 Monday, first of the month at 12.00.
7 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour. As everyone in the courtroom
8 blithely ignores.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
10 MR. KEHOE: Hopefully, nothing will happen --
11 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know if -- -
12 MR. KEHOE: [Overlapping speakers] ... at noontime.
13 Q. If I can direct your attention to that document.
14 MR. KEHOE: It is P740, if we can bring that up on the screen,
15 paragraph 2-A.
16 Q. Perhaps I should have clarified this for you prior to my
18 It notes that: "Prior to Operation Storm on 27 July, while
19 returning from Primosten to Knin, ARSK soldiers stopped everybody at
20 their check-points. There was no UN vehicle movement allowed into areas
21 that we had previously been permitted."
22 A. That's correct.
23 Q. Okay. And the stoppage of going into these areas was being done
24 by the ARSK, was it not?
25 A. Yes, it was.
1 Q. And they were stopping you - not you - they were stopping UN
2 personnel from going into areas that UN personnel had previously gone to.
3 A. Yes, they had.
4 Q. And you began to -- well, you put this in your -- your statement,
5 so I take it that that was an indicator to you that things were changing?
6 A. Yes, they were. They were changing substantially, in that there
7 was very different types of activity throughout area, in particular with
8 the ARSK either through the -- through the means of call-up or whatever.
9 We were stopped on numerous occasions and not allowed to go into areas as
10 indicated in my report, sir.
11 Q. Now, in addition to that, sir, there was also some
12 dissatisfaction with the ARSK personally, as you reflect in paragraph 2-C
13 of this document, that the ARSK, in fact, put you on a hit list.
14 Do you see that?
15 A. Yes, I do.
16 Q. And I think you explain it in a little bit more detail in your
17 diary, P748, which is the entry for the 30th of July, if you can go to
18 that, sir.
19 MR. KEHOE: If we can go to P748, next page. It's the 30th.
20 Q. Towards the bottom of that entry on the 30th, it notes the area
21 about the hit list and the black market ring.
22 Tell us a little bit about that what was going on?
23 A. Myself and Captain Dangerfield and his driver Sergeant Green made
24 numerous visits to the observation post or OP up in Strmica. During one
25 of our visits, the Kenyan platoon commander informed us that he had been
1 told by a Serb police officer that, in fact, Captain Dangerfield and I
2 were placed on a hit list. There was a contract out on both of us
3 because there -- they accused of us passing information back to our UN
4 headquarters regarding troop movement, et cetera.
5 There was further -- he further stated to us that we were
6 interfering with an ongoing trade agreement between the local ARSK and
7 the observation post personnel themselves. And by us being there, we
8 were infringing on their, I guess, extra circular activities.
9 Q. And what was this trade agreement between the UN personnel and
10 the ARSK?
11 A. The ARSK allegedly were providing food rations, et cetera, and
12 female company for the exchange of fuel.
13 Q. So it was an exchange of prostitutes going to the UN in exchange
14 for fuel?
15 A. That is one of the things that we were told, yes.
16 Q. And because you revealed that with Captain Dangerfield, you were
17 put on this hit list?
18 A. Yes. Well, both Captain Dangerfield and I were told of this at
19 the same time. I did not reveal it to Captain Dangerfield; he and I were
21 Q. Now, in addition to these other issues, there was also a degree
22 of tension that arose because of the fact there was a general
23 mobilisation at the latter part of July, isn't it?
24 A. Yes, it is. There was tension throughout the area, yes.
25 Q. And you became -- the gap in time, Mr. Berikoff, is to allow the
1 translators to catch up.
2 A. No problem, sir.
3 Q. And you, yourself, began do travel to areas that were up near
5 ongoing military activity for which this mobilisation was to support.
6 Suspect; isn't that so?
7 A. Yes, it is.
8 Q. Now what did you observe coming back and forth, going in and
9 outside of the Bosansko Grahovo area?
10 A. We observed a lot of military movement between the Krajina and up
11 into the Bosansko Grahovo area, as well as military movement coming back:
12 Types of vehicles included tank -- track vehicles, including tanks.
13 There soft-skinned vehicles, ammunition carriers, troops, there were also
14 ambulances taking casualties down the hill into the Serb area.
15 Q. And when you say "tanks," sir, what are you talking about and in
16 what numbers?
17 A. I can't be specific, but it was -- a number of tanks were going
18 back and forth. Whether it was the same tanks or whether it was
19 additional tanks, I cannot answer that, sir.
20 Q. Just to put this in a time-frame, let us turn our attention which
21 is 744, which is your time-line with Mr. Williams, and it notes the date
22 of this Knin radio call as the 27th of July.
23 Do you see that, sir? It's on the first page of P744, your
24 Sector South --
25 A. Yes, I do, sir.
1 Q. Is that about right?
2 A. That's about right, sir.
3 Q. Now, you were also aware, sir, that -- that the president of the
4 Republic of Serbian Krajina, Mr. Martic, noted that there was a state of
5 war in the entire area of the RSK. Isn't that right?
6 A. That is correct.
7 Q. Now, sir, when you got to Sector South headquarters, General
8 Forand sent you down to find out what was going on, sent you to find out
9 what happen being in the area, didn't he?
10 A. Yes, he did. When we got there, there was a bare map on the
11 wall. He told me, he said, "Phil, I need information. I don't have
12 anything on any of the warring factions." And he gave me a set of keys
13 to an SUV, and it was my task to go out daily and virtually push the
14 envelope to -- as far as I can, to see if I would encounter any troops on
15 either side of -- either warring faction, sir.
16 Q. And pursuant to that, Mr. Berikoff, he sent you up to Strmica on
17 the 30th of July.
18 A. Yes, he did. There was a great deal of activity, artillery
19 shelling, et cetera, up in the Bosansko Grahovo area. He sent myself --
20 myself, and I believe Captain Williams came with me, up there to spend
21 the evening. I'm not sure if it was Williams or Dangerfield, but we
22 spent the evening up in the Strmica area observing and just sort of
23 listening to the amount of artillery that was going on, on the other side
24 of the -- on the Bosnian side of the border.
25 Q. Now, did you hear the artillery fire going back and forth?
1 A. Back and forth, yes. It was -- there was extensive artillery
2 fire that evening.
3 Q. And if I can turn your attention back to your diary, P748, for
4 the entry of the 30th of July, 1995. Do you have that, sir?
5 A. Yes, I do, sir.
6 Q. I'm just waiting for it to come back up on the screen. The next
8 MR. KEHOE: It should be the next page, page -- there we go. The
9 30th of July.
10 Q. If you read that for us, about four lines down, it begins with
11 the sentence: "It was very interesting ..."
12 Do you see that, Mr. Berikoff?
13 A. Yes, sir.
14 Q. "It was very interesting, and I was able to see all kinds of
15 equipment on the way. This includes BMPs, M-12 anti-tank guns, M-84
16 tanks, and a lot of other pieces of kit I don't recognise."
17 A. That's true.
18 Q. What is that stuff?
19 A. The M-12, it is an anti-tank gun. It fires armour-piercing
20 shells. The M-84 is a more modern Yugoslav-type tank. That are those
21 two, and the BMP is an armoured personnel carrier, sir.
22 Q. Now, I think we missed the entry for what the M-12 is. What is
23 the M-12?
24 A. It is an anti-tank gun. It fires armour-piercing rounds or high
25 explosives, sir.
1 Q. You not there that, two lines down, there are -- many RSK are
2 around the area?
3 A. Yes, there was. There was an ARSK camp down about an a thousand
4 metres from the Kenyan outpost.
5 Q. And say there are many RSK around. How many did you observe?
6 A. I observed at least a company strength in that area at various
7 times. There was always sentries on duty, there was different types of
8 vehicles in the compound, et cetera.
9 Q. Now, these tanks and BMPs and other items, did you notice them on
10 the move?
11 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry. I apologise. I don't mean to cut counsel
13 Your Honour, I believe at page 79, here at line -- I'm sorry. It
14 has just been corrected. It was first "canyon" outpost. It has been
15 corrected now to "Kenyan" outpost. I just wanted to make sure that
16 correction was been made at line 3. It has been. Thank you.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
18 MR. KEHOE:
19 Q. Mr. Berikoff, did you notice these vehicles on the move?
20 A. At what time?
21 Q. You indicated you were up there on the 30th of July?
22 A. Yes, we did. In fact, on numerous occasions that we were in the
23 area of Strmica, there was vehicle movement from that compound up over
24 the border into the Bosansko Grahovo area. I assume that it was in the
25 Bosansko Grahovo area. But, yes, there was vehicle movement quite often.
1 Q. And where was the ARSK moving this equipment from?
2 A. I don't know exactly where the ARSK was moving the equipment
3 from, but some of it, I assume, would have come from the compound or
4 garrison a thousand metres from where the Kenyan observation post was.
5 Q. Were you familiar, Mr. Berikoff, with the ARSK ammunition depot
6 at Golubic?
7 A. Yes, I am familiar with it.
8 Q. Tell us about it.
9 A. I am not familiar -- I know it was there. That is my familiarity
10 with it. I don't what was there.
11 Q. And how do you know it was there?
12 A. Because it was information that I was given, that's all, prior to
13 my arrival in the Knin area.
14 Q. Now, with this mobilisation that you learned and with --
15 With this mobilisation that you were aware of and with the
16 vehicle movement and number of troops up in Strmica, was it your belief
17 at that time, Mr. Berikoff, that that the ARSK was moving their personnel
18 towards the front line?
19 A. At the time, it was my impression that ARSK members were going
20 across the border to assist with the operation in the Bosansko Grahovo
22 Q. Well, just trying to be a bit more specific here, Mr. Berikoff,
23 were they moving their troops towards what was a front line area with
24 the HV?
25 A. I would have to say yes.
1 Q. Now, just going back to your -- your supplemental sheet that you
2 provided -- that was provided us, while you were up in Strmica, you did
3 not observe any shelling of HV of residential areas, did you?
4 A. No. I did not observe direct evidence of shelling in the Strmica
5 area; however, there were indications of buildings destroyed and they
6 were recent -- it was recent destruction, rather than -- than
8 Q. And this recent destruction, did it appear to be part of this
9 artillery barrage that was going back and forth?
10 A. It could have been; however, I did not witness any shelling into
11 the Strmica area.
12 Q. Staying with this issue, if we can go back, you noted that were
13 there on the 30th of July. If I can go back to your P744 which is your
14 chronology that did you with Captain Williams, and if we can go to the
15 second page of that document, we go to the entry for the 31st of July.
16 Excuse me. It notes on the 31st of July : "118 artillery
17 shells, 30 HV, 30 HVO; 88 ARSK were fired or impacted between the warring
19 Is that right, WFS?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. "ARSK appears to be reacting to the offense of Bosansko -- in
22 Bosansko Grahovo by redeploying forces."
23 Going down to the entry for the 2nd, there is another entry for
24 artillery fire: "Between 10.30 and 13.58, HV, HVO fired 34 artillery
25 rounds in the area of Strmica, between ..." --
1 A. "Towards an unknown position in BiH."
2 Q. "0430 to 0530, RSK fired 50 artillery rounds from the general
3 area of Strmica to ward an unknown position in BiH."
4 Suffice it say, Mr. Berikoff, there was a lot of activity going
5 on --
6 A. Yes, there was.
7 Q. Let me just finish. I'm just waiting for the --
8 A. All right.
9 Q. Suffice it to say, Mr. Berikoff, there was a lot of activity
10 going on -- military activity going on between the ARSK and the HV, HVO
11 towards the latter part of July and the early part of August; wasn't
13 A. Yes, there was, and I'm not denying that. There was a lot of
14 activity up in the Strmica area.
15 Q. And, sir, please understand I'm not challenging what you're
16 saying, just clarifying a few issues here.
17 A. Yes, sir.
18 Q. Now, during this period of time, and I direct your attention to
19 your supplemental information sheet, you told the Prosecutor that you
20 personally observed "people leaving Knin prior to Operation Storm and
21 recalls that it was a significant number of people that left."
22 If I can turn your attention to your 21 May 1997 statement at
23 paragraph 2-B, that's P270 -- excuse me, P740.
24 You note as of the -- on "B": "On 29 July, many of the UN
25 civilian employees did not show up for work. We later found out that
1 they had started to evacuate from the area because they were afraid of a
2 Croat offensive in the Krajina at a near future" -- excuse me, "in the
3 very near future."
4 So based on your observations, Mr. Berikoff, the departure of
5 civilians or the evacuation of civilians took place some five, six days
6 before Operation Storm even took place. Isn't that right?
7 A. Yes, it does. Because as I indicated earlier, we weren't certain
8 of when a possible offensive would start. We were given information
9 anything from one day to ten days. I'm sure the civilian population
10 would have had the same type of information. On that day in particular,
11 we were placed on Orange Alert because of additional information through
12 various means that we received. So it's -- it is quite possible that,
13 yes, they did, sir.
14 Q. So based -- if I may -- based on your observations, Mr. Berikoff,
15 as early as the 29th of July, civilians were leaving on their own?
16 A. Yes, they were.
17 Q. Now, let me address some of your observations concerning the
18 actual military situation in the Krajina as -- and Knin, as well as the
20 Now, the first is that -- and you said this in direct
21 examination --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, are we moving to another subject?
23 MR. KEHOE: Yes, we are, Judge.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Then perhaps, looking at the clock, it would be
25 better to have a break now and resume at a quarter to 1.00.
1 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
2 --- Recess taken at 12.25 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 12.48 p.m.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, please proceed.
5 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
6 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I was go to go on to a new topic now that deals
7 with actual shelling of Knin on the 4th of August.
8 I think you told us that on direct that you did changed your
9 opinion on the indiscriminate nature of the shelling. Did I hear you
10 correctly that that change of opinion took place sometime in 1997 or
12 A. That's correct. It was -- in addition, it was on my mind
13 immediately after the offensive and over a period of time, yes, it did,
15 Q. Before we talk about Knin directly, Mr. Berikoff, I want to draw
16 a little bit on your experience in the military, and especially the JNA
17 and Warsaw Pact nations' methodologies.
18 You are familiar with those based or your experience, are you
19 not, sir?
20 A. Yes, I am.
21 Q. And you do know that within the JNA, the structure of the
22 military is very much a top-down type of enterprise, where the lower
23 level soldiers and units don't do anything without an order from the top.
24 Isn't that right?
25 A. That's correct. It very similar to the -- as in all former
1 Warsaw Pact counties, the chain of command, the structure was very
3 Q. And that's quite different than the approach taken by NATO
4 countries, isn't it?
5 A. Yes, it is.
6 Q. In what sense?
7 A. In the sense that in NATO countries, everybody from the top down,
8 for instance, can read a map. Everybody knows what the operation is,
9 what the objective of an operation is normally, and the sequence of
10 events that will follow, following an operation.
11 Q. Would you agree with me that among the NATO philosophy that if
12 there is a destruction of communication and command and control
13 operations at a high level, that lower level entities or elements can
14 essentially think for themselves?
15 A. In most cases, I would have to agree with you. There are those
16 instances where information may not have been passed down; but, yes, in
17 general terms, I would totally agree with you.
18 Q. Now, you knew that Operation Storm was -- had taken place not
19 only in Sector South but also the in Sector North?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. So it was a broad range of -- or broad area of geography, was it
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Now, as a military person, Mr. Berikoff, if you were to disrupt
25 the structure of the ARSK, you would strike at their headquarters and
1 their communication networks, wouldn't you?
2 A. In particular the communication, yes. However, with regard to
3 communications, the one thing that the former Warsaw pact countries did
4 have which was very, very good in comparison to NATO-type countries was
5 the redundancy of communications. So there may have been a redundancy of
7 Q. But, in any event, if you were planning the operation, you would,
8 first and foremost, attempt to destroy a headquarters and the
9 communications because that would affect the operations, not only in
10 Sector South in Knin but throughout the Krajina. Isn't that right?
11 A. I would have to agree with you.
12 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry. I don't mean to interrupt. It is just
13 unclear to me if he is being asked if he would do that or if he is being
14 asked, if you were a Warsaw
15 Warsaw Pact nation, would you do that. I'm not clear.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I understood the question to be what the witness
17 would do if he would.
18 MR. KEHOE: That's correct.
19 JUDGE ORIE: That's how it was phrased, Mr. Russo.
20 Please proceed.
21 MR. KEHOE:
22 Q. By the way, what was the "redundancy of communications" mean?
23 A. It means that they have extra capabilities that they would not
24 lose communications at any given time; that if one communications system
25 was destroyed or made inoperable, there was another system that would
1 take over.
2 Q. So a wise military commander that wanted to destroy the
3 communication network would, in fact, attempt to target all communication
4 networks because of this redundancy issue. Isn't that right?
5 A. That would be the ideal situation, yes.
6 Q. And that would come in conjunction with attempting to take out
7 the headquarters?
8 A. Yes, it would, normally.
9 Q. Now let me direct your attention to D117, and this is a NATO
10 glossary of terms.
11 MR. KEHOE: And if we could move to the second page of that, and
12 if we could move towards the bottom of that page and blow up the centre
13 column last entry.
14 Q. And we're talking about NATO'S discussion of the centre of
15 gravity, characteristics, capabilities, or localities, from which a
16 nation and alliance on military force or other grouping derives its
17 freedom of action, physical strength, or will to fight.
18 Now, Mr. Berikoff, that is Knin, isn't it?
19 A. At that point in time, the answer is yes. It was their main or
20 one of their main headquarters, it had a garrison, it had other barracks,
21 et cetera. So, yes, it would be.
22 Q. And, again, if you were a military commander, you would do
23 everything in your power to talk out - you mentioned the communication,
24 the headquarters - but anything that was supporting that structure as
25 well, wouldn't you.
1 A. If you knew where the locations were, yes.
2 Q. Now, if I may -- oops.
3 When you were in -- well, let me direct your attention to page 9
4 of D284.
5 MR. KEHOE: And if we can go page 9 of to 284, line 32.
6 Q. You note in this that: "In my opinion, the type of ammunition
7 that was used for the offensive against Knin was ... a high explosive
8 variety mainly used for destruction of buildings and facilities."
9 So you would agree, Mr. Berikoff, that as a commanding officer,
10 if you were to take out these buildings which housed communication
11 facilities, you would use weaponry such as that used by the HV, that was
12 designed for the destruction of buildings and facilities, wouldn't you?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. So, in the destruction of the buildings and facilities, based on
15 your statement herein, the HV used the right type of ammunition, didn't
17 A. Yes, they did. For the targets intended, if that was their
18 intention, yes.
19 Q. Now, your issue is the number of shells involved, and that's your
20 question, is it not?
21 A. Yes, it is.
22 Q. And the information concerning the number of shells, you received
23 that information from Colonel -- excuse me.
24 JUDGE ORIE: There seems to be some kind of interference which
25 has now stopped again.
1 MR. KEHOE: I'm sorry, Judge. Am I okay to go?
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. KEHOE:
4 Q. Now the number of shells is information you received from Colonel
5 Leslie, isn't that right?
6 A. It was both Colonel Leslie and Master Bombardier Parlee who were
7 both artillery personnel and had knowledge of how to count the rounds.
8 As a military officer, I also had the basic knowledge of artillery
9 shelling from flash-to-bang counting.
10 Q. Since your time in the former Yugoslavia, and I include both your
11 time in Knin and Sarajevo
12 A. No, I have not, sir, at all.
13 Q. Did you learn either directly or indirectly that he has stated
14 that these shell counts were not accurate?
15 A. No. I am not aware what General Leslie has said.
16 Q. Now, we note the level of shelling that was going on. And if I
17 could just take you through some of the items that you have presented to
18 us to just discuss a little bit, the shelling and number of shells that
19 you maintain was improper given the fact that the -- you say the ARSK had
20 vacated the area. Is that right?
21 A. That's right, sir.
22 Q. That issue, of course, has nothing to do with taking out the
23 communications network, does it?
24 A. No, it would not.
25 Q. Now, if we can go to P744, which, again, is your chronology with
1 Captain Williams.
2 A. I wouldn't say that is my chronology with Captain Williams, sir.
3 I would say I had input in some of the information that was given. He.
4 Captain Williams, received information from a variety and a multitude of
5 sources to put that document together. I only provided bits and pieces.
6 Q. I understand. But let us, nonetheless, go through some of those
7 entries, and let's turn to page 3 of this document. We're talking about
8 the evening of the 4th of August. Now, if you look at the entry for
9 1715, which is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, down on the 4th, there were reporting that
10 start: "Much of the reporting ..."
11 This comes from the ARSK: "Much of the reporting speaks of
12 repelling the HV."
13 Now, throughout the 4th, there was significant fighting going on
14 with the HV and the -- and the ARSK, wasn't there?
15 A. I would not disagree with that, because if the intention of the
16 Croats was to take the Krajina, there would be fighting throughout the
17 Krajina, not just in Knin.
18 Q. And you noted for us during the course of your direct examination
19 that you had spent quite a bit of time with Captain Dangerfield?
20 A. Yes, I did.
21 Q. And Captain Dangerfield was another British officer attached to
22 UN Sector South.
23 A. Yes, he was. He was a liaison officer from Gornji Vakuf in
25 Q. Let us turn to his report, which is P698, if we may. What I'd
1 like to do, Mr. Berikoff, is go through a few of these excerpts here, as
2 opposed to go through one by one, and allow you to speak about them just
3 a bit.
4 And this is a brief overview from Sector South on the 4th of
5 August at 0500 to 2200 on the August [sic], and Captain Dangerfield gives
6 some information about the shelling.
7 He notes in paragraph 2: "It was a long time before the HVO,"
8 excuse me, "HV/HVO made any headway on the ground. In the early
9 afternoon, the picture began to develop as soon as we saw five main areas
10 of attack."
11 And he discusses those particular areas in paragraph 3, and
12 notes: "By mid afternoon, five main axis of attack had developed."
13 MR. KEHOE: If we could turn to the next page.
14 Q. This is his assessment for the 5th of August : "Saturday,
15 05 August, should see another -- should see another initial heavy
16 artillery barrage of HV objectives. G2 assessment ..."
17 That is you, is it not?
18 A. No, it's not. That is probably the G2 from UNCRO or the G2 from
19 Gornji Vakuf who he answered to. Captain Dangerfield didn't not respond
20 to UNCRO headquarters; he normally responded to the operational side or
21 to Gornji Vakuf, sir.
22 Q. Fair enough. "G2 assessment is that Knin may fall dark,
23 05 August. In order to do, I believe that the HV will require a more
24 successful day than today."
25 Now, Mr. Berikoff, was it your assessment, consistent with
1 Mr. Dangerfield, that the ARSK was putting up a pretty good fight against
2 the HV throughout the 4th?
3 A. In certain areas of the sector, yes, there was, heavy fighting to
4 medium amount of fighting, but, yes, there was fighting throughout the
5 sector, sir.
6 Q. So the answer to my question that the ARSK was putting up a
7 pretty significant fight, the answer is yes.
8 A. The answer is yes, at times they were, yes.
9 Q. Continuing on. "Troops approaching from the south face stiff
10 opposition. SLO recces, last week, saw consider use of road use by ARSK
11 track vehicles."
12 Now, were you aware of these ARSK track vehicles moving into
13 areas in the southern part of the sector?
14 A. In the southern part of the sector, yes. Not so much that it was
15 track vehicles; however, there was military movement. As I said to you
16 earlier on, we -- there was a further restriction of movement down in the
17 area from Drnis to Knin. So there was military movement. Whether it was
18 track movement, I'm not sure, sir.
19 Q. Did you talk -- I'm sorry. Did you talk to Mr. Dangerfield
20 about -- I'm sorry.
21 Did you talk to Captain Dangerfield about these track vehicles,
22 ARSK track vehicles, moving in the south part of the sector?
23 A. I don't recall specifically talking to Captain Dangerfield
24 regarding the tank vehicles. A lot of the information that
25 Captain Dangerfield received was through the operations who got reports
1 from all the various parts of the sector. So, although I spoke regularly
2 with certain topics to Captain Dangerfield, I don't recall specifically
3 talking about the track vehicles. We did speak about military movement,
4 movement of personnel, movement of BMPs. If you call a BMP a track
5 vehicle versus a tank, then the answer is, yes, to that, sir.
6 Q. Captain Dangerfield is the officer that you were travelling
7 around the sector with quite frequently prior to Operation Storm, is he
9 A. Yes, he is. And, again, on a few occasions following the
10 operation as well, I was with Captain Dangerfield; but prior to, yes.
11 Q. Going down to the next paragraph, 11: "In the west, HV advances
12 face problems of indirect major routes, and at times difficult terrain in
13 approaches towards Knin. With reports being unclear on the successes of
14 these axis of advance and the distance still required to cover, it is
15 unlikely that Knin will come under direct fire from them."
16 A. What's the question, Mr. Kehoe?
17 Q. Just a moment.
18 A. Oh, okay.
19 Q. Now, both the terrain and -- was it both the terrain and the
20 existence of a significant force of the ARSK in the west that the UN
21 believed that the -- that the HV was not going to be able to make it down
22 into Knin, or, certainly, as this item notes, that Knin was not going to
23 come under direct fire from them?
24 Go ahead.
25 A. That's quite possible because there were ARSK strongholds in
1 Oklaj and areas. So there may have been areas where there were buildup
2 of ARSK troops. The terrain, as Captain Dangerfield indicates, was not
3 conducive to a wide area of movement by armoured vehicles, so they would
4 be restricted. There were also a lot of land-mines throughout the
5 sector. That would restrict movement. So, yes, his assessment is
7 MR. KEHOE: If we can turn to the next page, paragraph 12.
8 Q. Paragraph 12: "While Knin may come under heavy artillery attack
9 again, the considerable presence of the ARSK forces in the area will
10 require more time before they come under direct fire from HV tanks."
11 If we can just go down to paragraph 15, we'll deal with this
13 "The request for aid to evacuate women and children, leaving
14 behind ARSK troops only, shows signs of a disturbing final showdown.
15 With the advancing HV/HVO troops looking at Knin as their final
16 objective, and ARSK troops remaining, Milan Martic will have to surrender
17 or face a bloody last stand in the capital of Krajina."
18 Now, before I ask you something about this, I'd like to show you
19 something else, which is a transcript of a radio intercept. And it is
20 D106 of ARSK General Mrksic on the evening of the 4th of August, 1995
21 2130 hours.
22 About midway down in this Radio Belgrade conversation with
23 General Mrksic, it reads:
24 "Q. Does that mean our lines have been penetrated?
25 "A. No. We are maintaining contact. Our forces withdrew to the
1 positions for direct defence of Knin. The other range units are still
2 successfully holding their positions."
3 MR. KEHOE: If we can stroll down that page just a bit.
4 Q. About three-fifths of the way down, it says, "If the VRS ..."
5 Do you see that?
6 A. Yes, I do.
7 Q. "If the VRS, army of Republika Srpska, succeeds in putting the
8 pressure on the forces attacking in the direction of Grahovo-Knin, we
9 shall then stabilize the defence and switch to a counterattack."
10 Lastly, if I could just read to you, this was an audio
11 presentation, Mr. Berikoff, by Colonel Leslie on the evening of the
12 4th of August, at 2340, CET: "In your judgement ..." --
13 MR. KEHOE: By the way, this is D123. Thank you, counsel.
14 Q. The reporter asks: "In your judgement, are the Croats on the
15 point of taking the town?"
16 Leslie: "Taking Knin, no. We had no reports of Croatians being
17 within direct fire range of Knin, and there's still a lot of Serbs in
18 Knin and in the surrounding hills. So there we go."
19 Now, Mr. Berikoff, at this particular point, the assessment of
20 the UN is that the ARSK is going to retreat into Knin, and, as
21 Captain Dangerfield said, either surrender or face a bloody last stand.
22 Isn't that right?
23 A. I wouldn't totally agree with Captain Dangerfield's assessment.
24 In my journal, I had indicated that there were ARSK forces; and, in all
25 likelihood, they had moved up to defence lines to protect the city of
1 Knin. I wouldn't go as far as when he said there was strong opposition.
2 It was in certain areas where there was opposition, but not throughout
3 the sector. But, generally, I would agree with his assessment, but not
4 totally, Mr. Kehoe.
5 Q. Well, you're familiar, Mr. Berikoff, of street fighting in and
6 around a city, aren't you?
7 A. Yes, I am. It is one of the most complicated and difficult
8 operations to conduct.
9 Q. And it is very costly when it comes to personnel, too, isn't it?
10 A. Yes, it is. One person can stop a whole platoon or company,
12 Q. Well, do you agree that on the evening of the 4th, consistent
13 with Colonel Leslie's comments, that Knin was not on the verge of
15 A. Not at that time, no. However, there were no troops right in the
16 town itself either or very minimal. But was it on the verge of falling
17 that evening? The answer is no to your question.
18 Q. Now, as we --
19 MR KEHOE: Am I okay, Judge? I'm just trying to make sure that
20 I'm not getting ahead of the translators, Judge.
21 Q. As we move into the 5th, the UN observed a series of troop and
22 mechanized elements moving in the Sector South area towards Knin, didn't
24 A. Yes, they did, as indicated by Captain Dangerfield in his report.
25 I generally agree with that portion.
1 Q. Well, let me show you a sitrep, specifically D124. This is a
2 sitrep, an UNMO sitrep, on the 5th of August at 1900.
3 MR. KEHOE: If we can go that page, number 3, "CanBat."
4 Q. This is it at 0535. It notes: "RSK movement of tanks and
5 vehicles," and it notes in the following paragraph that the vehicles seen
6 headed towards Knin. As we move back down that page, you can see the
7 second-to-last note saying that they're headed towards Knin. If go
8 towards the next page, it likewise notes in the first two entries that
9 they are headed towards Knin.
10 MR. KEHOE: If I can bring up on the screen 65 ter 1634.
11 Q. This sitrep, Mr. Berikoff, of CanBat at 0800 Zulu on 5 August.
12 MR. KEHOE: If we can go to the second page.
13 Q. This is began a CanBat update.
14 MR. KEHOE: If we go down towards the --
15 Q. As you can see, it is talking about ARSK elements. And 4, at
16 0530 vehicles heading towards Knin, six T-54s and six T-34s and one BRDM.
17 MR. KEHOE: If we can offer this up into evidence at this time,
18 65 ter 1634.
19 MR. RUSSO: No objection, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
21 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit D727, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE ORIE: D727 is admitted into evidence.
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. KEHOE: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. Staying with P744, that's, again, the chronology with
1 Mr. Williams -- excuse me, on page 3.
2 At 6.10 a.m.
3 What is a BOV, sir.
4 A. It's a -- APC is an armoured personnel carrier.
5 Q. "One BOV, one truck, heading from the south to north through
7 So if can we can just set the stage for these questions,
8 Mr. Berikoff, we have a significant amount of fighting going on through
9 the 4th; the lines haven't been penetrated; General Mrksic says that they
10 are preparing a defence of Knin; troop personnel and mechanised units are
11 heading towards Knin; you, in fact, see or UN observes tanks moving
12 through Knin in the earlier morning hours of the 5th.
13 Under those circumstances, is it reasonable for a commander to
14 believe that there's going to be ongoing fighting in Knin throughout
15 the 5th?
16 A. Not necessarily. Knin -- the troop ARSK troops that moved out of
17 Knin went to the forward deployment area. So would there be fighting in
18 Knin? Quite possibly not. In the area of Knin? Yes. Up in the forward
19 line? Yes, quite possible.
20 Q. You note here that there are tanks moving through Knin?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Okay. And is it reasonable for a commander to fire on those
23 tanks as they move through Knin?
24 A. If they were observed and the opportunity arose, yes, it would
1 Q. And if, in fact, a defence is going to take place, as General
2 Mrksic outlined, is it reasonable for a commander to continue to fire on
3 headquarters and communication facilities that were going to be used to
4 support that defence of Knin?
5 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry, Your Honour. I don't mean to interrupt
6 the flow, and I'm certainly not objecting to the line of questioning. I
7 just want to be clear. This has come up several times, the Defence has
8 made a motion about fact witnesses offering opinions regarding this. I'm
9 not suggesting that you shouldn't be doing it, but I just want to be
10 clear that we're now putting hypothetical information to a fact witness
11 and soliciting an opinion about whether or not it is reasonable for a
12 commander to act in one set or another.
13 I want to be to clear that if that is okay with the Defence, I
14 just want to make sure that we're not still subject to the objection that
15 made regarding this line of questioning to fact witnesses.
16 MR. KEHOE: If I may respond.
17 The Prosecution asked this witness about his assessment of
18 shelling and whether or not it was excessively shelled, and that entails
19 both the 4th as well as the 5th. That is an opinion that has been
20 brought out by Mr. Russo.
21 We are attempting to meet that opinion with the sequence of facts
22 for Mr. Berikoff to take into consideration as to whether or not a
23 reasonable commander can continue to fire when a commanding officer says
24 that there's going to a defence of Knin, and that there has been
25 continuous fighting throughout that day, and, at least the assessment of
1 Mr. Dangerfield is, that there was a significant possibility of a bloody
2 last stand in Knin.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, you did not raise an objection, so there
4 we have a non-objection and we have an explanation.
5 It seems to me that having heard quite a bit of evidence on that,
6 it is not uncommon for both parties to elicit, especially in the field of
7 military matters, to seek testimony which is not of a purely factual
8 nature and even includes wise commanders, as I meanwhile understand.
9 Let's move on.
10 Mr. Kehoe.
11 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
12 Q. Moving back to that question, Mr. Berikoff.
13 A. Can you please repeat the question, Mr. Kehoe.
14 Q. Under the circumstances of the 5th of August, when General Mrksic
15 maintains that there is going to be a defence of Knin to take place,
16 General Leslie says that Croat lines have not been penetrated, and that
17 there is ARSK movement towards Knin, and there's no evidence that the
18 communication network is - I meant the Serb lines haven't been
19 penetrated - no evidence that the communication network per General
20 Mrksic has been taken out, is it reasonable for a commander to again
21 engage in artillery attack to take those elements out?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
23 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I just want to be clear that
24 Mr. Berikoff is being asked to assume the accuracy of the facts upon
25 which he is now being asked to offer an opinion. He has been shown
1 evidence. There is no indication -- well, he certainly has not been
2 asked whether he is aware of this evidence, whether he agrees with it in
3 particular, but I just want it be clear that the question is asking him
4 to assume the accuracy of the information.
5 JUDGE ORIE: That's, of course, always the problem with questions
6 about opinion, that on what is the opinion based.
7 Again, I repeat, that this is it not uncommon in the examination
8 of both parties; and by highlighting it, Mr. Russo, you may have
9 emphasised also that, of course, questions of fact do more assist the
10 Chamber than to elicit too much opinion.
11 At the same time, although it should be kept to a minimum --
12 MR. KEHOE: Yes, sir.
13 JUDGE ORIE: -- some assessment of what is useful, wise,
14 effective, I'm afraid that we can't get totally rid of it, although the
15 Chamber certainly would encourage you to get rid of it as much as
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. KEHOE: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Q. Mr. Berikoff, do you recall my question?
20 A. Even if the assessment and the reports are accurate, I think it
21 is a commander's responsibility to take into consideration the
22 possibility of collateral damage that may be caused by any firing upon
23 any mean, whether they're travelling through a town or whether they were
24 deployed into the area of the town itself.
25 But, yes, if there is an opportunity to take out the troops while
1 they're in movement, I would say yes, taking into considerations all or
2 facts and based on the accuracy and inaccuracy of the report itself.
3 Q. And your answer would include efforts to take out any
4 communication facilities?
5 A. I would have to an I agree that one of the goals and objectives
6 is the infrastructure of the organisation.
7 Q. By the way, Mr. Berikoff, were you aware that on the evening of
8 the 4th of August, that General Mrksic put troops and artillery on the
9 hill outside of Knin known as Bulina Strana? Were you aware of that?
10 A. No, I am not, sir.
11 Q. Okay. Now, let us talk a little bit about some of your items
12 that you put into evidence and some of the charts that you put into
13 evidence. You did talk in your -- I believe your 2007 statement, which
14 is P741, at paragraph 2.
15 MR. KEHOE: If could you pull that up for us, please.
16 Q. In the middle part of that page, you talk about -- you see the
17 shelling damage in this area?
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 Q. It's extensive, and it came from both convention artillery and
20 multi-barrel rocket launchers.
21 Again, at paragraph 4 -- I'm sorry. Again paragraph 4, you note
22 that: "There were multi-barrel rocket launcher impacts in residential
23 areas between the hospital and downtown Knin, which is not in the
24 vicinity of any military targets."
25 Now, Mr. Berikoff, I think in our conversation yesterday you said
1 that you didn't hear any shelling after 12.00 on the 5th. Is that right?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. And that was shortly before the HV units came to your gate, the
4 Sector South gate. Isn't that right?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. Now, you do know that both the ARSK and the HV had multi-barrel
7 rocket launcher systems. Isn't that right?
8 A. Yes, they did. It's a weapon similar to both sides.
9 Q. Now, the shelling that you heard in and around Knin on -- didn't
10 happen after noon
11 MR. KEHOE: And if we can go to P744, and if we can go to the
12 entry for 10.00 on page 4 of that document.
13 Q. At 10.00 on the 5th, it notes: "10.00 on 5 August, HV reportedly
14 entered the city."
15 If I can just address you to an item that the Prosecution has put
16 into evidence. Which is the statement of a Mira Grubor, P54, she notes
17 that: "Around 10.30 on Saturday morning, some shooting was heard at the
18 entrance of the hospital. I saw a group of Croatian soldiers."
19 So if the HV came into town on the 10th and you didn't hear
20 shelling in Knin after noon
21 1000 hours on the 5th, or thereabouts, and you didn't hear shelling after
22 noontime, there was shelling going on in Knin when the HV was moving in,
23 wasn't there?
24 A. That's quite possible.
25 Q. Now, you were aware that the ARSK was moving through the area and
1 going back up into Strmica on the 5th. Isn't that right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And you were -- are aware, as a military person, of an army
4 protecting its rear by putting elements in their rear, to fire on to any
5 oncoming soldiers, any oncoming enemy. Isn't that right?
6 A. As a rear echelon, yes, that's true.
7 Q. And often -- often, a rear echelon will use mortars because
8 they're so mobile. Isn't that right?
9 A. The use of mortars is normally as an area weapon vice [sic] a
10 direct impact area; but if, in fact, they are firing upon troop movement
11 and stuff, they will use mortars.
12 Q. Let me direct your attention to the aerial that you talked about;
13 and, if I may, it was aerial map that you had put up.
14 MR. KEHOE: I believe it is it P746.
15 Q. Bear with me, Mr. Berikoff, because I know this is difficult to
16 see. Let us take, for instance, the area up by the hospital, and you see
17 that circled with blue. I can't see the letter; it may be C? Is it?
18 A. I know the area you're talking about, sir.
19 MR. RUSSO: I believe it is a "Q."
20 MR. KEHOE: Oh, Mr. Misetic, says it is "F" ; you say it is "Q."
21 JUDGE ORIE: We are talking about the blue circled area, which is
22 just underneath the word "hospital" on the map.
23 MR. KEHOE: That's right. That area, Judge.
24 Q. Now, you know that the hospital had not been shelled. Is that
1 A. It's my impression that -- or my further assessment was the
2 hospital itself was not targeted. If any damage was done, it was
3 probably done through collateral damage.
4 Q. And you do know that, as we look at this photograph, the Dinara
5 mountains are off to the -- where? Would it be the east of the city?
6 A. East of the city, yes.
7 Q. And the HV came down those hills.
8 A. That was one of the axis, yes.
9 Q. And, as a retreating force, you know, Mr. Berikoff, that it would
10 have been perfectly reasonable for the ARSK to fire on the HV troops as
11 they moved into Knin. Isn't that right?
12 A. It would have been logical, but I don't recall if they did or
13 not, sir.
14 Q. Well, you don't recall because, on the 5th, you were still back
15 in Sector South headquarters and didn't have the opportunity to go out
16 and see what was going on, right?
17 A. That's correct. I was busy tasked doing other things on the
18 morning of the 5th; and then once the HV came to the gate, movement was
20 Q. And when you told us, Mr. Berikoff, that you saw evidence of
21 shells in that location, and I'm talking about that area in blue right
22 below the hospital, you have no idea when that took place, do you?
23 A. The actual impacts, no. However, during the actual offensive on
24 the 4th and the artillery was coming in, there were artillery impacts and
25 rocket impacts throughout the field. So if some landed by the hospital,
1 they may have been that. But, yes, you're correct, some of it may have
2 been caused by other forces.
3 Q. And you have no idea when you went back to that field which was
4 caused by the HV and which was caused by the ARSK?
5 A. I have to agree with you, sir.
6 Q. In fact, let us turn our attention to P60.
7 P60 is a joint statement by two UNMOs, Tor Munkelien and Kari
9 MR. KEHOE: If we can go to the third page.
10 Q. This is a discussion where on the 17th - you can read it
11 Mr. Berikoff - Mr. Munkelien and Mr. Anttila retrieved a piece of an
12 M-63, 128-millimetre MRL, which had been fired from approximately 20
13 degrees north by northeast.
14 I will let you finish with that, sir.
15 A. No problem. I have read the document.
16 Q. And if we can go to D88, taking the degrees of impact, sir, from
17 north by north-east, as you can see from this map, and the angle. And
18 they did a crater analysis upon this. As reflected in that report, it
19 was fired from the direction 20 degrees north by north-east into an area
20 of Strmica.
21 Now, you know, sir, that Strmica was controlled on the 4th and
22 the 5th and thereafter by the ARSK, wasn't it?
23 A. Are you saying on the 4th and 5th, it was still under ARSK
25 Q. Yes, sir.
1 A. Yes, it was.
2 Q. And it remained in ARSK control until approximately when?
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Berikoff, it is visible that you're consulting
4 your notes. Would you please always indicate when you are doing that.
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, sorry.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
7 MR. KEHOE:
8 Q. If I can help you, Mr. Berikoff, and if you just go to the
9 entries for the 13th and 14th of August.
10 A. When we went up to Strmica on those days, in fact, it was upped
11 HV control. Whether it was ARSK prior to those day, I'm not sure.
12 Immediately, on the 4th and 5th, I assume that it still would have been
13 under ARSK control.
14 Q. Now, in fact, if we go back to P744, and go to the entry on page
15 4 of this document, for 1500, it's noted here that -- do you see that?
16 "ARSK soldiers of unknown strength were seen occupying defensive
17 positions in the general area of Strmica."
18 A. Yes, that's on the 5th, then I have no problem with that.
19 Q. Okay. Now, if we can go back to this aerial.
20 MR. KEHOE: That was P746.
21 Q. And, Mr. Berikoff, focussing on these blue areas that you have
22 designated, where you saw evidence of artillery fire, as you sit here,
23 sir, the artillery damage that you looked at, given what you've just
24 seen, you have no idea which army, the HV or the ARSK, shot the actual
25 shell that you observed. Isn't that right?
1 A. No, I don't, and I don't think there is many people would unless
2 they physically did the firing themselves, sir.
3 Q. Well, let's take that question.
4 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I see there is a collective looking at the clock by
6 the Gotovina Defence.
7 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour. I'm sorry.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, you don't have to apologise for looking
9 at the clock.
10 MR. KEHOE: It's kind of like, you know --
11 JUDGE ORIE: If you would have one concluding question, I would
12 allow you; but if you enter a new area, then I think it would be wiser
13 to --
14 MR. KEHOE: I don't want to mislead you, Judge. I have a few
15 concluding questions in this area, so --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll adjourn soon.
17 But, Mr. Berikoff, first of all, I would like to instruct you
18 that you should not speak with anyone about your testimony, whether it is
19 the testimony you've given today or the testimony still to be given
20 tomorrow or day after tomorrow. I will explore that with the Defence on
21 how much time will still be needed.
22 Mr. Kehoe, could you give us any indication as far as time is
24 MR. KEHOE: [Microphone not activated] ... finish sometime in the
25 second session tomorrow at the latest.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Other Defence counsel.
2 Ms. Higgins.
3 MS. HIGGINS: Your Honour, I have approximately two hours, no
4 more, and I hope to be significantly less.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.
6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, obviously, depending on what is
7 covered before me, an hour and a half, at the most, probably less given
8 the ground that will be covered, which I assume will be the same as I
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So there is a fair chance, if I also looks at
11 Mr. Russo who might have some questions as well, the Bench may have some
12 questions --
13 MR. RUSSO: Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: -- we will not finish by tomorrow, Mr. Berikoff. I
15 do not know what you expected, but it is it unlikely that we will not
16 finish tomorrow.
17 THE WITNESS: I have been given a heads up on that it may go into
18 Thursday, so I am prepared for that, sir.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At the same time, from the submissions, it
20 might well be that we can conclude your testimony on Wednesday.
21 We adjourn until tomorrow, Tuesday, the 2nd of September, 9.00,
22 Courtroom III.
23 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.50 p.m.,
24 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 2nd day of
25 September, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.