1 Wednesday, 3 September 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
7 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours, good morning to
9 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T, The
10 Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
12 Good morning to you, Mr. Berikoff.
13 THE WITNESS: Good morning, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Berikoff, I would like to remind that you the
15 solemn declaration you gave at the beginning of your testimony still
16 binds you.
17 THE WITNESS: I understand, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Higgins, are you -- oh no, before we start,
19 there was a deadline set on last Monday concerning translations. We have
20 received a submission by the Cermak Defence, not by any of the other
21 Defence teems, neither by the Prosecution. Should the Chamber understand
22 that there's nothing to report?
23 If you'd like to take your time until after the first break and
24 verify, then of course.
25 MR. KEHOE: If we could just chat about it, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll then hear from the parties other than
2 the Cermak Defence after the first break.
3 Ms. Higgins, are you ready to continue your cross-examination.
4 MS. HIGGINS: I am, Your Honour, thank you.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed.
6 WITNESS: PHILIP ROY BERIKOFF [Resumed]
7 Cross-examination by Ms. Higgins: [Continued]
8 Q. Good morning, Mr. Berikoff.
9 A. Good morning, Ms. Higgins.
10 Q. Now, from my recollection, I think we were dealing with or about
11 to deal with P500.
12 MS. HIGGINS: So if that could be brought up on to the screen,
14 Q. Now, Mr. Berikoff, just to explain this for you, we have in front
15 of us here Prosecution document. It's a Prosecution organigram showing
16 the hierarchy of the Croatian civilian police and the lines of
17 subordination from, you see at the very top, the ministry level?
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 Q. And it goes all the way down to the bottom to the police stations
20 on the ground.
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. It's fair to say that you, as we established yesterday, we were
23 not familiar with the names on the chart?
24 A. No, I was not, ma`am.
25 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers kindly pause between
1 question and answer. Thank you.
2 MS. HIGGINS: I'm so sorry. I will really try today. Sorry,
4 Q. Just take a moment, Mr. Berikoff, please, to just cast your eye
5 over the names on that chart. It's right, isn't it, that from the top to
6 the bottom, concerning control and command, that is illustrated in that
7 chart, there is no mention of the name Juric. Correct?
8 A. That is correct.
9 Q. And there is no mention of the name Cermak. Correct?
10 A. That is also correct.
11 Q. Now, you haven't had the opportunity of seeing this before, have
13 A. No, I have not, ma`am.
14 Q. And we know that post Operation Storm, if we calculate it from
15 that time, you were only in the region for four weeks, in fact,
17 A. That's correct, ma`am.
18 Q. Right to say that you weren't familiar with the complexities of
19 the structure in Croatia
20 civilian police.
21 A. That is also correct, ma`am.
22 Q. To use your words, and to put this into a context, given the
23 limited time you were there, you made assumptions about the way things
24 worked in Croatia
25 A. Not in all of Croatia
1 operating in, the answer to that is yes, ma'am.
2 Q. Thank you. I accept that. Thank you.
3 Now, given that I have limited time this morning, what I'd like
4 to do is make one point clear and deal with an example.
5 Going back to your diagram now, please, which is P745.
6 MS. HIGGINS: If that could be put up onto the screen.
7 Q. I think I made it very clear yesterday that there isn't one point
8 of this diagram that is accepted by the Defence but what I'd like to do,
9 Mr. Berikoff, is take an example. Do you understand?
10 A. I understand.
11 Q. And the example I'd like to take is the name that appears on that
12 chart. Let's take the individual you've named, Major Juric.
13 Now, you told me yesterday that you didn't know who appointed
14 Mr. Juric. Is that right?
15 A. That's correct, ma`am.
16 Q. Have you heard the name Mate Lausic, the chief of police
18 A. No, I have not, ma`am.
19 Q. Had you heard about the 72nd and the 73rd Military Police
20 battalions operating in Sector South?
21 A. No, I have not, ma`am.
22 Q. Is it right that you haven't been shown any military police
23 documents by the Prosecution, to support this notion of subordination of
24 Juric to Cermak?
25 A. That statement is correct, ma`am.
1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Berikoff.
2 MS. HIGGINS: Now, if I could, please, have on the screen D267,
4 Q. To put this into context for you, Mr. Berikoff, I'm going to take
5 you through the document. I'm presuming that you have never seen this
6 document or been shown it by the Prosecution on the front page, as you
7 see it?
8 A. I have never seen this document, ma`am.
9 Q. It's a document dated, as you can see, the 2nd of August, and you
10 will see, as we go through it, that it is from Major-General Mate Lausic
11 and you can see the addressees there on the right-hand side of the page.
12 Can you see those?
13 A. Yes, ma'am.
14 Q. And you will note that the garrison is nowhere to be seen.
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. Now, if I could move, please, to page 4 of that document, four of
18 six. Sorry, just to make the point clearly I should have been more
19 precise and said the Knin garrison was not on that front sheet.
20 A. I understood what you meant, ma`am.
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Berikoff.
22 Paragraph 10, if you look at the second part of that, the second
23 paragraph of paragraph 10, you can see there from this contemporaneous
24 document and I will take you to the end so you can see Mate Lausic's
25 name: I appoint major Ivan Juric, and if you look through you can see
1 that it refers to him assisting in commanding and organizing the
2 activities of the 72nd Military Police Battalion and the 73rd Split
3 Military Police Battalion and that the commanders of those two battalions
4 shall be subordinated to Major Ivan Juric.
5 Do you see that?
6 A. Yes, yes, I do.
7 Q. If I could follow through by taking you to the next page of that
8 document, please. Because one point that we have looked at is the
9 context of reporting, so it may be important to establish who, in fact,
10 Mr. Juric was supposed to be reporting to. Do you understand?
11 A. I understand.
12 Q. If we look on this page, the paragraph that begins: "Every day
13 at 2000 hours," and you just read that through to yourself, Mr. Berikoff.
14 To put it in a nutshell, the commanders of the 72nd and the 73rd
15 were to report to Mr. -- Major Ivan Juric who shall then report to the
16 military police administration, the chief of which was Major-General Mate
18 Do you see that context?
19 A. Yes, I see that, ma`am.
20 Q. One more document, I'd like, please, on the screen -- sorry,
21 before I leave that.
22 Again, if you look at the bottom of that screen you'll note again
23 the delivered to, there is no mention of the Knin garrison. Correct?
24 A. That is it correct, ma`am.
25 MS. HIGGINS: Could I have please have on the screen D268.
1 Q. Just while it is coming on to the screen, this is a document
2 dated the 2nd August 1995. It's, again a document from Major-General
3 Mate Lausic to various units of the military police administration. You
4 can see the front page there and the addressees, VP, General police, UVP?
5 Can you see that at the bottom of the page?
6 A. Yes, I do.
7 Q. Now, I'd like, please, to turn to page 3 of that document.
8 This document illustrates the expansion of Mate -- sorry, of
9 Juric's tasks and you can see there in that second paragraph it refers to
10 the cooperation and coordination and who he was to do that with.
11 Do you see that?
12 A. Yes, I do, ma'am.
13 Q. And if you look through the names, again, the Knin garrison is
14 not a name that we find there. Correct?
15 A. That's correct, ma`am.
16 MS. HIGGINS: Now, Your Honour, there are four other documents in
17 a series which show the reporting that continues between Mate Lausic and
18 Juric on the 9th, the 10th, the 11th and the 12th of August. I don't
19 intend to take this witness through them but I've discussed it with my
20 learned friend, Mr. Russo there are 65 ter documents and he accepts that
21 they can be admitted into evidence and I would seek their admission
22 before the Chamber. I can give the document references to put this
23 question into a context.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, even without asking you, I take it that
25 Ms. Higgins has informed the Chamber accurately on your consent, so if I
1 do not hear from you, that's how I always expect the parties to behave.
2 Then, could you please give the 65 ter numbers, and we have seen
3 now two documents --
4 MS. HIGGINS: Yes.
5 JUDGE ORIE: -- so they need a number to be assigned to them.
6 MS. HIGGINS: They're already D exhibits, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Oh yes, yes, I remember that you referred to them as
8 D exhibits.
9 Then the 65 ter numbers of the other documents are.
10 MS. HIGGINS: The first document is 3225, 65 ter.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes exhibit number D732.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Next one, Ms. Higgins.
14 MS. HIGGINS: 2300.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number D733, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: And the last one, Ms. Higgins.
17 MS. HIGGINS: The next one is 543, 65 ter.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number D734, Your Honours.
19 MS. HIGGINS: And, in fact, Your Honour is right, because the
20 last document I would seek to tender is in fact D211, just for the
21 Chamber's note. That forms the last document in that series. So there
22 is no need for another number.
23 JUDGE ORIE: D732, D733, and D734 are admitted into evidence.
24 MS. HIGGINS: I'm grateful, Your Honour.
25 Q. From the contemporaneous documents that have been shown to you
1 this morning, Mr. Berikoff, you would agree with me, I presume that there
2 is no evidence there to show a line of subordination or control and
3 command between Major Juric and Ivan Cermak.
4 Do you agree?
5 A. Ms. Higgins, I was not privy to any of these documents that you
6 have shown me this morning. However, I would agree to the contents of
7 them but on the ground what I saw was a different situation at the time,
8 in my own personal assessment. But the documents, I had not seen them.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Higgins, the witness has not had an opportunity
10 to fully check that, but of course you would not have asked that question
11 if there was any link in there and the Chamber of course itself can check
12 the content of the documents and see whether the Chamber doesn't find
13 anything in there, but especially since three documents have not even
14 been shown to the witness, he couldn't expound on that --
15 MS. HIGGINS: No.
16 JUDGE ORIE: -- but from what he has seen he agrees with you.
17 MS. HIGGINS: Yes, I take that point, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: That documentation. Please proceed.
19 MS. HIGGINS:
20 Q. Just dealing with one brief reference that you made there,
21 Mr. Berikoff, please take it from me, I'm only trying to show you
22 information that I know you weren't privy to at the time but you see why
23 I'm doing what I'm doing?
24 A. Yes, I understand exactly what you're doing, ma`am. No problem.
25 Thank you.
1 Q. And the other point is this. That you said that in your last
2 response: What I saw was a different situation on the ground in my
3 personal assessment.
4 A. Yes, ma'am.
5 Q. Just to remind you of yesterday, you did agree, however, that you
6 had never seen or heard an order given by Mr. Cermak to Major Juric.
8 A. That's correct, ma`am.
9 Q. Thank you very much.
10 And it's right that you are not able - and I wouldn't expect you
11 to be able - to produce any documents to show a contrary picture in terms
12 of the documentation, Mr. Berikoff. Correct?
13 A. That's correct, ma`am.
14 Q. Now, I don't want to pull back up on to the screen your diagram.
15 I think we're all very familiar it by now and I know you have a copy in
16 front of you. But just to deal very briefly with your reference there to
17 the 7th Guards Brigade and the 3rd Guards Brigade, just to -- so I'm
18 clear, Mr. Berikoff, you have no documents to support that. Correct?
19 A. No, I have not, ma`am. It's just what I saw on the ground of
20 when the 7th came in and that the 3rd replaced.
21 Q. That is it very different, isn't it, from saying that they
22 were --
23 A. Yes, it is, ma'am.
24 Q. -- subordinated to Mr. Cermak ?
25 A. Yes, it is.
1 Q. So my point is no document to show that line of subordination,
3 A. No, I do not, no, I don't, ma`am.
4 Q. Neither, Mr. Berikoff, have you been shown any document since you
5 made your first statement in 1996 to support that by the Prosecution. Is
6 that right?
7 A. That's correct, ma`am.
8 Q. Did you know or were you ever informed of the fact of a military
9 structure operating in Sector South completely outside the role and
10 function of General Cermak as garrison commander?
11 A. No, I was not aware of, ma`am.
12 Q. Now, considering yesterday's evidence and today, and you
13 understand that I understand your limited time in that area, considering
14 that, could it perhaps be that you have made a rash judgement about the
15 actual true role and capabilities of Mr. Cermak, Mr. Berikoff?
16 A. I -- I can't answer that question, ma`am.
17 Q. Okay. Now, as an information officer, did you know that in the
18 early days of the formation of the Croatian state even leading political
19 figures were given military ranks, regardless of their military function
20 and experience? Did you come to know about that?
21 A. Yes, I did, ma`am.
22 Q. Let me just finish by asking you this, Mr. Berikoff. Would this
23 be fair and accurate to say that the indicators of authority that you
24 relied on in relation to Mr. Cermak boiled down to the following.
25 Firstly, he wore a military uniform?
1 A. That's correct.
2 Q. Secondly, you knew he had a rank.
3 A. That's also correct.
4 Q. And those were two factors you relied on?
5 A. Yes, they were two of the factors, yes, ma'am.
6 Q. There was also the letter which we discussed which, to be fair,
7 you had described as a joke. But there was the letter. Correct?
8 A. Yes, ma'am.
9 Q. And there was the title which you have now seen from
10 contemporaneous documents was incorrect. Yes?
11 A. I would agree with you, ma`am.
12 Q. And it amounts -- that would be a fair summary. Would that be
13 right, Mr. Berikoff?
14 A. It would be a fair summary, ma`am. However, you have to take
15 into consideration that General Forand dealt constantly with General
16 Cermak, Colonel Tymchuk dealt with General Cermak I believe, so it was
17 the people involved with their dealings with General Cermak that also led
18 me to my assessment, ma`am?
19 Q. And this Court has heard evidence from General Forand and
20 obviously what we're interested in is the basis and remit of your
21 knowledge. You understand?
22 A. I understand.
23 Q. And we discussed that remit yesterday?
24 A. Yes, we did.
25 Q. Mr. Berikoff, have you heard of the phrase don't shoot the
2 A. Yes, I have, ma`am.
3 Q. I have no further questions. Thank you very much, Mr. Berikoff.
4 A. Thank you, ma`am.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, you're on your feet, and in light of
6 what we heard last week, I take it that you'll cross-examine
7 Mr. Berikoff.
8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: That's correct, Your Honour. Thank you.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Berikoff, you will now be cross-examined by
10 Mr. Kuzmanovic who is counsel for Mr. Markac.
11 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
12 Cross-examination by Mr. Kuzmanovic:
13 Q. Good morning, Mr. Berikoff.
14 A. Good morning, Mr. Kuzmanovic.
15 Q. I wanted to follow up along the lines with Ms. Higgins with
16 respect to exhibits D267 and D268 as well as the newly marked exhibits
17 that you had not seen.
18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Let's put up first D267, please.
19 Q. And while that is coming up, Mr. Berikoff, your job was that of
20 an intelligence information officer in Sector South. Correct?
21 A. That's correct, sir.
22 Q. And is it fair to state that people were relying upon you for
23 information upon which to describe the situation on the ground or to make
24 assessments on things that have happened during -- before and during
25 Operation Storm?
1 A. To the extent that I was able to get that information, yes, sir.
2 Q. Okay. And would you agree with me if that information was
3 incorrect --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, for you, pauses as well.
5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: And, Mr. Berikoff, to the extent that you could
7 assist Mr. Kuzmanovic in creating the quiet atmosphere for interpreters
8 and transcribers, it would be highly appreciated.
9 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
10 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour, I lost myself there.
11 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I think I'm looking back at the transcript so I can
12 repeat my question.
13 It is fair to state that the people, your superiors in many
14 instances who were relying upon you for information, if the information
15 was wrong that information ended up getting spread to the outside world.
17 A. That is correct. In the early stages I was one of the few people
18 that was able to get -- make my way throughout the sector.
19 Q. Nonetheless, if the information that you had received about, for
20 example, certain units and certain locations was incorrect then that
21 information would get spread not just to members of Sector South but to
22 the media and to the outside world. Correct?
23 A. That is quite possible. I agree with you.
24 Q. 267, which is up on the screen, is a military police document and
25 if we can go on the first page, you see that nowhere in this particular
1 document is the Ministry of Interior special police mentioned in any
2 shape or form. Correct?
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. Have you ever seen any documents provided to you by the Office of
5 the Prosecutor that describe the role, the location, the outfitting and
6 the function of the Ministry of Interior special police?
7 A. No, I have not, sir.
8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: If we go to the last page of this document,
10 Why don't we go to the second-last page where it shows the cc's,
11 to whom the document was copied.
12 Q. If we see to whom the document was delivered, there is no
13 notation of any Ministry of Interior special police, either commander or
14 officer, or member that received a copy -- or that was delivered a copy
15 of this document?
16 A. That's correct, sir.
17 Q. And without going through all of the other documents, I -- I
18 presume, Mr. Russo would agree with me that D268, as well as D732, D733,
19 D734, and D211, none of those documents indicate any copying in or
20 reference to the Ministry of Interior special police that you're aware
21 of, Mr. Berikoff. Correct?
22 A. I have not seen the documents, so therefore, I would have to yes,
23 I agree with you, sir.
24 Q. Okay. Now, the diagram that you were shown -- or that you drew
25 which was P745 that we've seen -- and for your benefit I'd ask that it be
1 put back up on the screen, so if you want to refer to it, you can.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, in view of the authorities to
3 which -- to which this letter was cc'ed I must admit that I do not have
4 on my mind all the abbreviations we find in that document.
5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I would ask, Your Honour, if it is all right
6 to -- and I did not have a chance to speak with Mr. Russo about this the
7 way Ms. Higgins did but I mean if he would agree that known of those
8 documents refer to or have anything to do with the Ministry of Interior
9 special police then we can move on.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I would have no problems. Perhaps if you,
11 together with Mr. Russo, could prepare just a short list of what UVP
12 exactly meant, et cetera I don't have it on my mind at this moment.
13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Sure.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Because it's not only what it doesn't mean, but
15 also --
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: What it does mean, understood, Your Honour. VP
17 means military police.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that is one of the few that I --
19 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Okay.
20 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... police, yes.
21 MR. KUZMANOVIC: We will do that, Your Honour.
22 Q. Okay. We've got your diagram up, Mr. Berikoff. This is a
23 diagram that you put together. Correct?
24 A. Yes, it was, sir.
25 Q. Okay. When did you put that together?
1 A. I believe it was during the interview with Mr. Elfgren during one
2 of the interviews, and it was done quickly as Ms. Higgins had suggested.
3 Basically like on a scrap of paper, to the best of my recollection, sir.
4 Q. And you have seen at least two of the documents now D267 and
5 D268, where you have Major Ivan Juric, special police. Can you explain
6 to me, please, what facts led you to believe that Major Ivan Juric had
7 anything to do with the special police? I'm just liking for facts.
8 A. One of the factors I took into consideration when I placed Major
9 Ivan Juric was part of the special police was the fact that he was
10 wearing grey coveralls. Now, this may seem silly on the surface.
11 However, I was informed by headquarters in Zagreb that members of the
12 special police wore grey coveralls. I don't recall who told me, but it
13 was through the intelligence section in headquarters UNCRO.
14 Q. So the sole basis for you to come to the conclusion that Major
15 Ivan Juric had anything to do with the special police had to do with grey
17 A. As silly as it sounds, that's correct, sir, because people in
18 grey coveralls responded to him and he also wore them as well, and from
19 the information I received from Zagreb
20 assessment on, sir.
21 Q. Okay. And was your basis that these were special police who were
22 from the Ministry of Interior special police or some other kind of
23 special police or do you not know?
24 A. I do not know, sir.
25 Q. So fair to state that the only basis for you to conclude that
1 Major Ivan Juric had anything to do what you term to be special police
2 were grey coveralls?
3 A. That's correct, sir.
4 Q. And that was something that was told to you verbally by HQ in
6 A. Yes, it is, sir.
7 Q. As an information intelligence officer did you attempt in any way
8 to find out from the Croatian authorities what the hierarchy or structure
9 was of the Ministry of Interior special police?
10 A. As I explained yesterday, I'd just been in country a short time
11 and didn't have an opportunity yet to do that. Had I stayed on, that
12 would have been part of my duty, sir.
13 Q. Would you agree with me that during the course of Operation Storm
14 and the aftermath of Operation Storm it would be fairly important to
15 accurately identify who you saw conducting activities on the ground?
16 A. I have to agree with you. However, at the time I was travelling
17 throughout the sector to try and get as much raw information as possible.
18 Q. Could it have been something as simple as calling the -- either
19 the Ministry of Interior or the Chief of Staff of the Croatian military
20 through your office in Zagreb
21 they were wearing and what kind of weapons they were --
22 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers kindly pause between
23 question and answer again. Thank you.
24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Apologies.
25 THE WITNESS: In response to that question, sir, I had informed
2 the intelligence cell in UNCRO headquarters of my findings. It was not
3 my responsibility to contact the Croatians with regard to the Ministry of
4 Defence. That was at a higher level than myself, sir. I would have
5 expected the headquarters in Zagreb
6 MR. KUZMANOVIC:
7 Q. Did anyone from the Office of the Prosecutor ever tell you that
8 your identification of these units in various areas, such as Cetina,
9 Civljane, Kistanje, and other places were not in fact Ministry of
10 Interior special police?
11 A. I was never told anything by the OTP regarding this, sir.
12 Q. Who was the person that you spoke with at G2 intelligence who
13 told you the grey coverall ID in Zagreb
14 A. I don't recall, sir. That's 13 years ago.
15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I apologise, and I apologise to the
16 interpreters for my speed. I will do my best to calm down.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. ...
18 Mr. Kuzmanovic, if I give a sign to calm down, if you start
19 apologising, then that has to be translated as well.
20 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood. I'm sorry, Your Honour. I'm
21 looking at the witness, and it is difficult for me to see and I will --
22 you, so I will do my best.
23 Q. Now, Mr. Berikoff, you gave several statements to the Office of
24 the Prosecutor in this case, the most recent statement being 30
25 August 2008?
1 And if we could go into closed session just for a moment, Your
2 Honour. Or private session, I'm sorry. Relating to this statement?
3 [Private session]
20 [Open session]
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Could we please have 3D00-001868 and not to be
24 shown to the public, please.
25 Not there?
1 [Defence counsel confer]
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: It's supposed to be up, but I don't know why it
3 isn't. Oh, here we go. All right. Thank you.
4 If we could go to page 2 of that document, please. Fifth
5 paragraph from the bottom.
6 Q. Mr. Berikoff, the paragraph that I'm referring to for my next
7 series of questions starts with: "Mr. Berikoff stated that his
8 understanding of the 'special police' was that they were part of the HV
9 and that they sometimes wore grey coverall-style uniforms."
10 Now, you said that the sole reason that you came to that
11 conclusion was a verbal that you got from someone at G2 in Zagreb?
12 A. That's correct, sir.
13 Q. Your understanding was that the special police of the Ministry of
14 the Interior was attached to the Croatian military?
15 A. At the time, I was not aware that the special police were part of
16 the ministry.
17 Q. Okay. So at least as of -- when did you come to the conclusion
18 that the special police were not a part of the Croatian military?
19 A. I probably came to that -- or I did come to that conclusion when
20 I was dealing with other cases while I worked in the OTP.
21 Q. Okay. So essentially until 2008, as of -- that correction was
22 not made in your supplemental information sheet dated 30 August 2008.
24 A. That's correct, sir.
25 Q. When did you become aware that the special police of the Ministry
1 of Interior was not a part of the Croatian military? What year?
2 A. I never studied the Croatian forces in detail, so even to, right
3 now, I cannot answer that question probably accurately. My assessments
4 are from dealing with both the Bosnian side and the Serb side. I had
5 no -- no dealings once I came to the OTP with the Croatian organisation
6 chart, sir.
7 Q. Okay. Would you agree with me, Mr. Berikoff, that as a military
8 intelligence information officer that it would be rather important and,
9 particularly when it comes to a criminal matter, crucial to know who was
10 subordinated to whom and what the order of battle was?
11 A. It would be, sir, but once I came to the OTP I was basically
12 requested to stay totally away from any of the Croatian cases, which I
13 did, sir.
14 Q. And I understand that, Mr. Berikoff, but you didn't even change
15 your knowledge of the background and structure of the special police of
16 the Ministry of Interior in your 30 August 2008 supplemental information
18 A. No I didn't, sir, based on the -- or my reasoning being that this
19 was information at that time, not what I had learned after working in the
20 OTP for seven years, sir.
21 Q. Would you agree with me that the HV special police and the
22 special police, as you refer to in that paragraph, are not part of the
23 Croatian military?
24 A. From what I have learned today, I would have to agree with you.
25 Q. You also, on the following paragraph, talk about --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, could the witness please explain
2 what he learned which led him to the conclusion he just gave.
3 Because, Mr. Berikoff, in your -- one of your previous answers -
4 and let me take you back to them - Mr. Kuzmanovic asked you the
5 following: "When did you become aware that the special police of the
6 Ministry of Interior was not a part of the Croatian military? What
8 So the question was about when.
9 And then your answer was: "I never studied the Croatian forces
10 in detail, so even to, right now, can I not answer that question probably
11 accurately. My assessments are from dealing with both the Bosnian side
12 and the Serb side. I had no dealings once I came to the OTP with the
13 Croatian organisation chart."
14 Now, that is a long answer, which does not directly deal with
15 when you learned something. I understood, but, please, correct me when
16 I'm wrong, I understood the answer to tell us that whether they were a
17 part of the military organisation or not, that you had no good knowledge
18 at the time to know and that has not really changed.
19 Is that correctly understood?
20 THE WITNESS: That's correctly understood, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: And Mr. Kuzmanovic, of course I had this question
22 already on my mind but in relation to your last question from what the
23 witness learned today, well, what the witness learned today has seen some
24 documents which, as far as I can see, shed some light on some matters but
25 not necessarily give a conclusive answer on some questions that might be
1 on our mind.
2 And apart from that, we learned from what the witness told us, so
3 I would like to know what exactly you learned today, which now allows you
4 to - and let me check the question again - what did you learn today
5 which tell you that the HV special police and the special police, as you
6 refer to in that paragraph, are not part of the Croatian military.
7 So both HV special police and the special police, as you refer
8 to, in the paragraph just mentioned.
9 THE WITNESS: Your Honour --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, in looking at the various documents
12 that I was shown this morning by Ms. Higgins, the address groups of the
13 Ministry of Interior Major Ivan Juric or the special police was not
14 present --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 THE WITNESS: -- in any of the documents. So based on that, I
17 would have to agree that they were not in the chain of command, Your
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's your conclusion and then for two HV
20 special police and for other special police.
21 THE WITNESS: That's correct Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Whereas in the beginning of your testimony you said
23 that they were all the same to you, isn't it?
24 THE WITNESS: My initial assessment was, yes, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: So that is the basis for agreeing with
1 Mr. Kuzmanovic.
2 THE WITNESS: Yes, it is.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
4 Please proceed.
5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 Q. Mr. Berikoff, do you know whether the Ministry of Interior
7 special police -- I'll change the question.
8 Do you know whether there were two sets of special police, one in
9 the Ministry of Interior and one from the military police?
10 A. I am not aware if there was or not, sir.
11 Q. Your statements, Mr. Berikoff, and we can go through them in
12 detail if it's necessary, mention the special police in many different
13 occasions, in many different locations as either conducting looting,
14 manning check-points, or conducting burning.
15 Now, is it fair to state that your -- you assumed that these were
16 Ministry of Interior special police?
17 A. I assume they were special police. I did not assume that they
18 were part of the Ministry of Interior, sir. But I assume they were
19 special police.
20 Q. Okay. And specifically in your supplemental statement you
21 have -- in the paragraph below the one that we referred to previously.
22 It says: "Mr. Berikoff stated that in his statements and exhibits he
23 incorrectly attributed the burning and looting he witnessed in Kistanje
24 on 9 August 1995
25 the HV camouflaged soldiers going house to house, looting and burning in
1 Kistanje. He attributed this to the special police as well, because when
2 he met Ivan Juric outside of Kistanje on that day, Ivan Juric was wearing
3 the grey uniform of the special police, and he believes that Ivan Juric
4 was directing the activity in Kistanje."
5 Now, a correct -- I mean, I read that statement, portion of your
6 supplementary statement to mean that the special police was not involved
7 in any way in Kistanje, correct, and the only reason you thought they
8 were was because you assumed that Juric had something to do with the
9 special police?
10 A. That's correct, sir.
11 Q. Do you know, Mr. Berikoff, where the Ministry of Interior special
12 police, where their battle sites were and from where and to where they
13 went during Operation Storm?
14 A. No, I don't, sir.
15 Q. Again, in your supplemental statement you note in the
16 paragraph below the one I just read, "... that the special police grey
17 uniforms were not involved in the looting and burning he witnessed along
18 the road from Knin to Drnis on 8 August 1995, as stated in his second
19 statement at paragraph 2 (o). It was only the HV (camouflage) and the
20 Croatian civilian police."
21 So that's, Mr. Berikoff, a second area where you were that you
22 mistakenly thought the Ministry of Interior special police were involved
23 in looting and burning. Correct?
24 A. That's correct. Once again it was an assumption on my part.
25 Q. And from the time that you gave your statements through and
1 including -- up until the time that you give the supplemental statement
2 in 2008, just a few days ago, on August 30th, what made you change your
3 recollection? Was it Office of the Prosecutor speaking to you about
4 this? Could you explain that?
5 A. I can't explain it. I think it was just -- it was not the Office
6 of the Prosecutor that led me to this assessment. I think it was my own
7 recollection of the number of incidents that happened and trying to
8 remember everything. I could not recall with certainty whether it was
9 special police, in my opinion, or not, sir.
10 Q. So it would be a guess?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. Again, the following paragraph to the one that I just read:
13 "Mr. Berikoff -- "
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, what does that mean "so it's just a
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I can follow up on that, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand the witness says I cannot say
18 with certainty affirm what I earlier said was the case, which is not, in
19 my view, a guess, but of course, you have to put some questions to the
20 witness if on the basis of what the witness observed, what he observed,
21 what he saw, as you rightly stated -- well, you -- we see that on the
22 basis of what he observed, what he saw, that he could not reach certain
23 conclusions he included in his earlier assessments. That is a fair
24 statement of what he tells us. And in all your question -- in most of
25 your questions you add something to that and you say for example, on the
1 basis of your observations you could say that unit A, B, or C was
2 involved because the way in which the witness has identified those units
3 is -- is -- is not reliable. Uniforms, whatever. But then to say, Did
4 you actually mean to say they were not involved requires a totally
5 different kind of knowledge which is an oversight of everything.
6 So let's try to focus on what the witness saw, what conclusions
7 he earlier has drawn from those observations, and then to see to what
8 extent these conclusions are corrected, are perhaps taken out, but not --
9 unless you specifically address the issue of whether he had a total
10 overview, whether some units he may not have seen were involved or not in
11 certain actions.
12 You see my point?
13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood, Your Honour, I will try to clear
14 that up with my next question.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC:
17 Q. Mr. Berikoff, in your statements and in your supplemental
18 statement specifically, you mention special police on many, many
20 Is it fair to state that the sole factor for you to state that
21 the special police were or were not involved in certain activities that
22 you witnessed was based on the fact that they wore grey coverall-style
24 A. That is correct, as well as a linking them with Major Juric who
25 also wear grey coveralls and gave me the same assumption, sir.
1 Q. Okay. And we know now that Major Juric was not in any way with
2 the Ministry of Interior special police. Correct?
3 A. Based on the documents I saw this morning, sir.
4 Q. So my statement is correct?
5 A. As far as --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, the witness clearly says, he
7 testified that he did not know who appointed Major Juric and that his
8 charge where he puts him in a certain position is based on information
9 which is apparently not very reliable.
10 Now, whether he was involved in any way with that, it is a totally
11 different question.
12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood.
13 JUDGE ORIE: And if the witness then says, On the basis of what I
14 have seen he limits the source of his knowledge for the conclusion, and
15 then to say, So you do agree with me, where you did not limit your
16 question to that, is not what I expect to be done.
17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: All right. Thank you, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
19 MR. KUZMANOVIC:
20 Q. Mr. Berikoff, you also state in your supplemental statement the
21 second-last paragraph on this particular page: "That the special
22 police," and again you identify them in grey uniforms, "were not
23 observing or directing traffic around the looting he witnessed between
24 Knin and Drnis on 10 August. This was the Croatian civilian police."
25 Now, again, your assumption that the special police were involved
1 in directing traffic and/or involved in -- strike that.
2 Your assumption is that it was the special police again because
3 they wore grey uniforms?
4 A. That's correct, sir.
5 Q. Now, can you tell me any facts that you have which would support
6 the conclusion that the Ministry of Interior special police were involved
7 in manning check-points?
8 A. No, I cannot, sir.
9 Q. Can you give us any facts to back up your conclusion in certain
10 instances that you have not changed in your supplemental statement that
11 demonstrate the Ministry of Interior special police were involved in
13 A. No, I cannot, sir.
14 Q. Similarly can you give us any facts upon which you can base the
15 conclusion that the Ministry of Interior special police were involved in
17 A. No, I cannot, sir.
18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: If we could please call up ERN -- we might have
19 a D number for this, I'm sorry.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, supplemental statements.
21 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Oh, Your Honour, I'd lake to move that
22 supplemental statement, I'm sorry. Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Can I hear from the parties whether they consider
24 supplemental statements to be 92 ter statements. These are written
1 Mr. Russo.
2 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I think in a very strict sense I don't
3 think we can consider them 92 ter statements unless the witness is taken
4 through the formalities of the rule.
5 JUDGE ORIE: That is of course what I was hinting at, whether
6 statements taken for the specific purposes of the proceedings before this
7 Tribunal, whether we would need to meet the requirements of 92 ter. I
8 don't want to be overformalistic on the matter.
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: But just for my information, how you consider this
11 statement compared to the other statements which are 92 ter statements.
12 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, from our perspective the statements are
13 clearly written by the Prosecutor's office. They're not written in the
14 first person as would a statement of the witness. Nevertheless, I do
15 think the witness's review, acknowledgment on the actual document and
16 again acknowledgment here in Court would suffice for us to have no
17 problem with its admission to be included as consideration along with the
18 92 ter statements.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I would agree with that, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Let's, again, I just wanted to know from a
22 procedural point of view what exactly the status is of the supplemental
23 fact sheets. It's a kind of information on the basis of -- of the
24 information given by the witness.
25 Mr. Russo, I take it that I, because I see them now for the first
1 time as well -- let me just check how they end. Yes, they are -- this is
2 an -- this is a witness acknowledgment at the bottom of the supplemental
4 Now, Mr. Berikoff, I make take it that what you -- the
5 information you gave and which you confirmed in the witness
6 acknowledgment under the supplemental information sheet that you gave
7 this information to the best of your recollection, as being truthful,
8 that if you were asked the same questions that you would have given the
9 same questions -- same answers and that you would -- that you also
10 acknowledge the accuracy of the way in which it was put on paper.
11 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, could you please assign a number to
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes exhibit number D735,
15 under seal.
16 JUDGE ORIE: D735 is admitted under seal.
17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour, and I know we've run
18 into this issue before with the supplementals and I think probably that
19 methodology of going through the 92 ter procedure should be done and I
20 will remember that --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And we could do it if the witness is there and
22 if the parties have no doubt as to whether this is really the -- the last
23 information given by the witness even if it doesn't take the form of a
24 statement in the proper sense. This is what I saw, et cetera --
25 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I think, Your Honour --
1 JUDGE ORIE: -- if you do that quickly.
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I think, Your Honour, what -- I mean the
3 Prosecutor didn't move this document as part of its 92 ter submission
4 obviously probably because of timing issues but there were substantial
5 changes especially with regard to the special police so I would have
6 thought they would have gone through that in direct.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Therefore, if these documents get the same status I
8 think that would be appropriate, because it is a correction to or it is
9 an addition to another 92 ter statement.
10 Mr. Russo.
11 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, with regard to Mr. Kuzmanovic' last
12 comment the Court can check the transcript, I did go through all of the
13 corrections which are contained on the supplemental information sheet
14 with the witness prior to submitting his statements as 92 ter. He made
15 the corrections, he made the clarifications which are contained in that
16 document and that's the procedure by which the OTP has chosen to deal
17 with the supplemental information sheets. We certainly have no problem
18 with them being admitted along with that. I just believe it is a
19 difference of procedure.
20 JUDGE ORIE: But, Mr. Russo, of course the Chamber is lost under
21 those circumstances. Why, because you go through some corrections, but
22 we haven't seen the supplemental information sheet. Therefore, we cannot
23 see whether everything which is contained in the supplemental information
24 sheet has been covered by you. So, it may well be true what you say, but
25 at the time you are doing it we cannot verify whether that's the case yes
1 or no.
2 Now, if, of course, you have gone through all the details of
3 everything that was corrected or what was added, then of course there
4 would be no need for Mr. Kuzmanovic to, again, get this admitted into
5 evidence, because then it is already part of your examination-in-chief.
6 I can't verify it now. I would have to read the supplemental information
7 sheet in full detail in order to know whether everything has been covered
8 in your examination-in-chief.
9 Let's not spend too much time on it. It certainly doesn't hurt
10 if, in addition to the examination-in-chief the supplemental information
11 sheet is now admitted into evidence.
12 Please proceed, Mr. Kuzmanovic.
13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I will call 3D00-1871, please.
15 Mr. Berikoff, this was an article written by Garth Pritchard that
16 you had provided to the Office of the Prosecutor and they had provided to
17 the Defence and which you brought with you to your proofing session?
18 A. That's correct, sir.
19 Q. Okay. And Mr. Pritchard was someone you spoke to at the time of
20 the events in Knin, after Operation Storm?
21 A. Yes, it is, sir.
22 Q. And the article, in the first page, toward the bottom, says,
23 talking about Knin and I'll read from the line that says: "This time."
24 "This time Knin is back in the Croatian fold, so to speak, but is
25 a devastated, ravaged, broken town scene of massive looting, reprisals
1 killing not by the triumphant Croatian blitzkrieg that recaptured the
2 whole of Krajina in early August but by those who followed the
3 disciplined, controlled Croatian army."
4 Were you the source of information for the section in this
5 article that discusses the controlled -- disciplined controlled Croatian
7 A. No, I was not, sir.
8 Q. Do you know who was?
9 A. No, I don't.
10 Q. Then on the second page of this particular article.
11 MR. KUZMANOVIC: If we could go to the top of the second page,
12 please. Actually, the bottom of this page, please.
13 Q. You had made a correction in your supplemental statement at the
14 bottom of the page. There's a discussion that begins: "Then there's
15 captain Phil Berikoff of the Vandoos." You were not a member of the
16 Vandoos, correct?
17 A. No, I was not.
18 Q. And it discusses the things that you had done, including, at the
19 bottom, he, meaning Berikoff, tells of finding a woman on a corner just
20 after the Croatian army swept through.
21 If we could scroll to the top of the page because that is where I
22 had read to and if we could move the document to the left. Not all of it
23 had been included in the scan but most of it has.
24 "She was hysterical and wailing and surrounded by her family,
25 husband and eight children all dead. I tried to persuade her to come to
1 the camp but she wouldn't leave her familiar. He finally got body-bags,
2 put the dead in them and had them pulled off to the side of the road to
3 be picked up later. The woman still wouldn't leave. When Berikoff
4 returned the next day, the woman was gone and tire tracks of trucks led
5 off the road and over the body-bags which had been ripped open and bodies
6 mutilated, just another day in the Balkans."
7 Now, Mr. Berikoff, that's really not what happened, was it?
8 A. That's not at all what happened, sir, and that is why I brought
9 the article to the proofing session because it is totally erroneous
10 information. The facts are not accurate in that paragraph at all, sir.
11 Q. Now, do you deny telling Mr. Pritchard this particular story?
12 A. Not the story about the mortar shell that hit the intersection
13 nor about the woman wailing as she sat beside her husband. There were in
14 fact no children involved at all. The number eight is definitely is
15 wrong. The track trucks, et cetera, over the body-bags is also wrong.
16 There was only the one body-bag that was -- to the best of my
17 recollection that was run over by a tank and riddled with bullets.
18 So the whole paragraph is filled with erroneous information, sir.
19 Q. Do you have any idea where Mr. Pritchard got that erroneous
21 A. No, I do not, sir.
22 Q. Was not from you?
23 A. Not from me. Bits and pieces were. I took him out to the
24 intersection. However, I did not give those figures at all, because they
25 are not accurate in the least.
1 Q. So would you agree with me that this article, at least parts of
2 this article and the part I reflected on where we discussed it was
3 incorrect information that was spread out to the world about what
4 happened during Operation Storm?
5 A. That's correct, sir, and that's why I brought the article to the
7 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I would like to tender this
8 document, please.
9 MR. RUSSO: No objection, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: No objection.
11 Mr. Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes exhibit number D736.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Before we decide on admission --
14 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, there's no --
15 JUDGE ORIE: -- What is the probative value apart from that
16 nothing is right in this article?
17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Well, Your Honour, I think it goes to describe
18 that Mr. Berikoff is purported to be quoted in this article or the
19 information is purported to be given from him in this article and I'm
20 demonstrating that based on information that was erroneous, many things
21 in this article are incorrect just like the assumption that the special
22 police were involved in various areas has been incorrect, just like the
23 fact that there were eight children dead, which is incorrect. You know,
24 just an example of how information --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. KUZMANOVIC: -- gets twisted and distorted.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I hope, Mr. Kuzmanovic, that this Chamber
3 will not have to look at all the incorrect information about what
4 happened even it is an attributed to a witness that takes distance of it.
5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood, Your Honour. Just an example.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And therefore the --
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber admits the document into evidence, and
9 just to avoid whatever confusion, it is D736. What I said, you'll
10 understand is of some guidance. We have still some pending issues about
11 publications being admitted into evidence.
12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: One could even think of it as a notorious fact that
14 a lot of wrong information is published especially about war
16 Again, it is admitted and the Chamber accepts your explanation.
17 At the same time, as guidance for the parties, let's try not to include
18 in the evidence everything that was written by whomever at whatever time
19 on whatever information, because the trial might take another six months.
20 Please proceed.
21 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood, Your Honour. It was simply an
22 example, and I --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it is accepted.
24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you.
25 Q. Mr. Berikoff, the Ministry of Interior special police -- and you
1 had said earlier the Prosecutor did not bring to your attention where
2 they were and what kind of activities they were involved in. Correct?
3 A. Not -- not that I recall, sir, no, they did not.
4 Q. Were you aware aside from the Office of the Prosecutor that the
5 Ministry of Interior special police were involved in front line military
7 A. No, I was not, sir.
8 Q. Were you aware that when you were in Donji Lapac that the
9 Ministry of Interior special police were already out of Donji Lapac?
10 A. No, I was not.
11 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry. If we could just have a clarification on
12 that, I think the witness's evidence is that he was in Donji Lapac on two
13 separate days. If that questions includes both days, I believe it is the
14 11th and 12.
15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes. And that question does include both days.
16 Q. Were you aware that on 11th and 12th August of 1995 the Ministry
17 of Interior special police were already out of Donji Lapac?
18 A. No, I was not aware of that. I did not know that the Ministry of
19 Interior was involved. I assumed -- my assumption was because of the
20 mixture of grey coveralls and camouflage uniforms, sir.
21 Q. So your sole basis for determining that the Ministry of Interior
22 special police were in Donji Lapac when you were there at the same time?
23 on the 11th and 12th of August of 1995 was the grey coveralls?
24 A. That was my assessment throughout the whole sector, sir.
25 Q. Were you aware of the significance of the battle that went on in
1 Donji Lapac, in terms of artillery?
2 A. No, I wasn't, sir. I know there was heavier than usual fighting
3 up in the Donji Lapac area, but I was not aware of the significance at
4 that time.
5 Q. Were you aware that when ... thank you, Your Honour.
6 Were you aware that when the Ministry of Interior special police
7 took Donji Lapac that they came under friendly fire, artillery fire?
8 A. I was not aware of that, but as I say, I knew there was heavier
9 than usual fighting in the Donji Lapac area, sir.
10 Q. Did you observe or hear that the ARSK forces shelled Donji Lapac
11 after the Ministry of Interior special police had taken the town?
12 A. I'm not aware of that, but once again I will go back to my answer
13 that there was fighting, so it is logical that there would have been a
14 return of fire, sir.
15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Could we please call up P614. And page 23,
17 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I'll represent to that you this is a Prosecution
18 tendered document dated November 26th, 2001, to the Chief of Staff of the
19 Croatian army, entitled Analysis of the progress of Operation Storm.
20 Page 23 of this document discusses the progress of day 4 of
21 Operation Storm and specifically mentions the special police of the
22 Ministry of Interior.
23 If you go to page 25 of this document, please, there's a notation
24 at 1400 hours on the 7th of August of 1995 that Donji Lapac is liberated.
25 And below that, that Donji Lapac suffered friendly fire artillery with no
2 Now, if we go to page 31 -- actually, page 30, I'm sorry.
3 This is progress of day 6 of Operation Storm, 9 August 1995.
4 Do you know where the city or village of Kulen Vakuf
6 A. Not offhand, no I do not, sir.
7 Q. Were you up among the Bosnian border near Donji Lapac?
8 A. I went to Donji Lapac, and then I was taken to one crossing
9 point. I don't recall exactly where the crossing point is, sir. The
10 Jordanian I believe it was the Deputy Commander or the Chief of Staff
11 took me to the border crossing.
12 Q. Okay. If you look at page 31 of this report, again on the 9th of
13 August, at 1900 hours, it shows that the special police staff in
14 Ostrovica village ceased work and the special police forces that had been
15 engaged there were sent to their home units with the approval of the
16 operation commander.
17 Now, you said earlier you were not aware that the Ministry of
18 Interior special police had been called to stand down as of August 9th to
19 go back to their home units. Correct?
20 A. That's correct, sir.
21 Q. Were you aware of what units or troops were in Donji Lapac when
22 you were there on the 11th and 12th of August?
23 A. No, I wasn't. The reason I went up to Donji Lapac was to follow
24 the alleged route of the evacuation of civilians and the withdrawal of
25 the ARSK up towards the Donji Lapac area.
1 Q. It's fair to state that you cannot state with any certainty
2 whether the Ministry of Interior --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
4 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Sorry, Your Honour.
5 Thank you, Your Honour, and I apologise again to the
7 Q. It is fair to state, Mr. Berikoff, that you cannot state with any
8 certainty whether the Ministry of Interior special police were involved
9 in any way in the burning and/or looting of Donji Lapac. Correct?
10 A. That's a fair statement, sir.
11 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Could I please call D557.
12 Q. Mr. Berikoff, D557 is an order from the Chief of Staff of the
13 Croatian army, Mr. Cervenko, ordering the Ministry of Interior special
14 police to take up positions in the area of Petrova Gora. Do you know
15 where the area of Petrova Gora is?
16 A. I don't recall where the area is, sir.
17 Q. Okay. Is it in Sector North?
18 A. It is in the northern portion, from what I believe. I don't know
19 if it is actually in Sector North or not but it is in the northern
20 portion, sir.
21 Q. So at least this particular order, D557 shows that the Ministry
22 of Interior special police were in the -- ordered to go the area of
23 Petrova Gora as of 10th of August 1995. Correct?
24 A. That's what the information shows.
25 Q. You don't have any information to the contrary. Correct?
1 A. No, I do not, sir.
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, in order to save time there are
3 several other documents that I would like to refer to that have been
4 marked in evidence both by the Prosecution and the Defence, I can speak
5 with Mr. Russo about them during the break, that show when and where the
6 Ministry of Interior special police were in this time-frame and that they
7 were not areas of Kistanje, Civljane, Drnis, and other places where
8 Mr. Berikoff states that he thought he saw Ministry of Interior special
9 police conducting burning and/or looting.
10 So I can speak with Mr. Russo about that rather than having to go
11 through each of the documents with Mr. Berikoff, for reference purposes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I can imagine that you put to the witness that there
13 are documents which say that the special police were at place A where the
14 witness said they were at place B. However, the evaluation of that
15 information, whether the document is wrong, whether the recollection of
16 the witness is wrong, whether there were several units at several places
17 is of course all a matter of evaluation of the evidence.
18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Certainly.
19 JUDGE ORIE: So there is no problem in putting this to the
20 witness, but seeking from this witness, who may have limited oversight
21 over the totality of the information, seeking him to draw conclusions is
22 tasking him to some extent with what is the task of this Chamber.
23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understand.
24 JUDGE ORIE: So, therefore, the Chamber, despite perhaps the
25 wisdom and knowledge of Mr. Berikoff would take that task as its own
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood. And that was my whole purpose in
3 asking that, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you would keep that in the back of your
5 mind and if perhaps you, together with Mr. Russo, try to summarize the
6 gist of those documents so that you can put it to the witness, we have
7 documents that say, there, there, et cetera, then you can put that to the
8 witness you can put that to the witness --
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: All right, thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: -- and get his response.
11 MR. KUZMANOVIC: We can do that -- I see it's break time now.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's break time.
13 Mr. Berikoff, we will have a break for 25 minutes.
14 Could you give us an indication, Mr. Kuzmanovic, on how much
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, can I ask how much time I have used
17 so far. I thought I said an hour and a half.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I have to rely on Mr. Registrar.
19 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Putting him under the gun here.
20 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
21 JUDGE ORIE: Net time was a little bit over half an hour.
22 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Okay. I -- I would like to -- I'm probably
23 going to use the rest of my hour, Your Honour. I said an hour and a
24 half. I might be done in less than that.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 All right. We will have a break and we resume at five minutes to
3 --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.
4 --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Any report on the matter I raised earlier today,
6 about translations.
7 Mr. Waespi.
8 MR. WAESPI: Good morning Mr. President, Your Honours.
9 Yes, according to our count there are 251 exhibits that are still
10 labelled draft or unrevised but that is a continuous process so I think
11 we are, over time receiving the final translations and hopefully within,
12 I guess, a couple of months we'll down to zero.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But there at least we have provision
15 MR. WAESPI: Yes, that's correct.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Any other report.
17 Mr. Mikulicic.
18 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, Your Honour. We just sent a report to the
19 registry and it is about 19 exhibits that we are still waiting for
20 appropriate translations, and we will check out whether this will be due
21 in a due time and then we could inform the Chamber more precisely.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
23 Mr. Misetic.
24 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I can report that the Gotovina Defence
25 does not have any outstanding translation issues.
1 JUDGE ORIE: So you didn't miss the deadline.
2 MR. MISETIC: Yes. Thank you.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Then one other issue, P760 was MFI'd for the time
4 being. The Chamber said that it would consider admission. The Chamber
5 has decided that P760 will not be admitted into evidence. There are
6 various reasons for that, one of them being that if the author is unknown
7 that this is a risk that this document, which is not very clear as to the
8 facts on which it is based, but there is even a risk that it repeats
9 evidence, which has been given already by witnesses before this Court,
10 because if you do not know who the author is, and certainly this document
11 has not been put to all of the witnesses, it's too -- the Chamber
12 considers that the probative value of it is subject to such serious
13 doubts and risks that it should not be admitted into evidence.
14 And I think it is important for the parties to know before that
15 witness leaves this courtroom.
16 Mr. Kuzmanovic, please proceed.
17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I will -- Your Honour
18 should know that Mr. Russo and I did discuss the issue of Ministry of
19 Interior special police documents that show the locations of which --
20 where the special police were during the time-frame of Operation Storm
21 and we've come to the agreement it's not the exclusive list of where they
22 were but for the purpose of these dates, we've agreed to those exhibit
23 numbers, and when I find my list, Your Honour, I will make sure I read
24 them. Mr. Russo can correct me if I'm wrong.
25 Am I wrong?
1 MR. RUSSO: He's not wrong, Your Honour.
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Here we go.
3 For the benefit of the Court, I will just read the exhibit
4 numbers in a list format.
5 P614, P621, D561, D554, D557, D552, D550, P606, and D543. And,
6 again, these documents show the locations of the Ministry of Interior
7 special police between the 4th and 9th of August, 1995, and then
8 including the order on the 10th of August for the special police to go to
9 Sector North, to Petrova Gora. That particular -- that particular order
10 of August 10th was D557.
11 We've also discussed the issue of abbreviations, Your Honour.
12 Mr. Russo and I will sit down with those two exhibits, D267 and D268 and
13 we will get that information to the Chamber.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
15 MR. KUZMANOVIC:
16 Q. Mr. Berikoff, you had answered some questions previously
17 regarding your knowledge or assumptions regarding the Ministry of
18 Interior special police. Were you aware that the -- between August 4th
19 and August 9th, the Ministry of Interior special police came down
20 August 4th from the Velebit mountain through Gracac, Mazin, Donji Lapac,
21 and ended up in Kulen-Vakuf Bosnia
22 A. I knew it was one of the axes of advance. I did not know it was
23 the special police, sir.
24 Q. You would agree with me, would you not, Mr. Berikoff, that if, in
25 fact, the documents that I had just read off, the exhibit numbers both
1 from the Prosecution and the Defence, show that between the 4th and 9th
2 of August of 1995 the special police of the military police -- of the
3 Ministry of Interior were not in the area of Knin, Drnis, Civljane,
4 Kistanje, Cetina and Vrlika, you would have no facts upon which to base
6 A. I have no other facts to base that on, and I would have to agree
7 with what's on the documents, if that's what the documents say, sir.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: If we could please pull up 65 ter 2061. And --
10 Q. This is a 11-page document which is a report of the military
11 police units during Operation Storm dated August 13th of 1995.
12 Mr. Berikoff, in the third paragraph there is an formation of the
13 military police called the AT formation or anti-terrorist formation.
14 Were you aware of that formation?
15 A. I was aware of that formation -- if it is the same as
16 anti-sabotage or terrorist unit, yes, I was, because it was the same
17 group -- or a group of people wearing the same type of patch I believe
18 when President Tudjman came into the town of Knin, sir.
19 Q. What kind of uniform did those people wear?
20 A. They wore camouflage uniforms and it had the crest with
21 lightening bolts on it, sir.
22 Q. Now, with AT formation of the military police do you know whether
23 or not those formations were also called special police?
24 A. No, I do not, sir.
25 Q. This particular report 13 August 1995, which is 65 ter 2061,
1 discusses the various members recruited from the military police, the
2 traffic police that were involved in Operation Storm. Were you at all
3 familiar with these formations?
4 A. No, I was not, sir.
5 Q. I just want to make one thing perfectly clear and we may have
6 made this clear before, but I just want for the purposes of the record to
7 make sure that it's clear.
8 The military police that were -- that Major Juric commanded, it's
9 true, is it not, that Major Juric, based on what you have learned today,
10 had nothing to do with the Ministry of Interior special police.
11 A. I cannot verify that. However, based on the information you
12 said, I -- if they're accurate, that's true, sir.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, again, if you refer to what the
14 witness learned today, this assumes that he was in a position to draw any
15 conclusions from what he has seen, and sometimes people learn things not
16 as they were taught. I'm not saying that we're teaching the witness
17 anything here.
18 But the witness is limited to what he saw on paper today.
19 Whether he learned that it's true what was on paper, whether he learned
20 that the paperwork does not match with his own recollection, whether --
21 that's totally unclear. So, therefore, I would invite you to refrain
22 from unspecified reference to what the witness learned today.
23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I will do that, Your Honour.
24 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I would like you to -- can you tell me without
25 having known -- without having reviewed the documents today, irrespective
1 of those documents, do you know whether Major Juric was the head of the
2 special police of the Ministry of Interior?
3 A. At the time I felt that he was a member and head of the military
4 police/special police. The reason I say that is on numerous occasions
5 that I had myself or myself with other people had run into Major Juric,
6 he had the authority over the -- definitely over the military police
7 throughout the sector at check-points that we got stopped at, it was
8 Major Juric's name that was recognised beyond anybody else's, and when we
9 first met Major Juric at the Ministry of Defence or in the police station
10 it was Major Juric who seemed to command all of the control even when a
11 lieutenant-colonel came into the room, it was the -- it was the major
12 that was, in fact, giving the orders to the lieutenant-colonel, sir.
13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Could we please pull up D268. Page 2.
14 Actually, we can start on page 1.
15 Q. Ms. Higgins had this document tendered into evidence and asked
16 you some questions about it.
17 This was an order from Major-General Lausic describing what
18 Major Juric's tasks were, and if you look on the second page of this
19 document, would you agree that at least as per this document, D268, there
20 is nothing in this document that shows major Lausic, at least on paper,
21 has any type of control over the Ministry of Interior special police?
22 A. According to the document, that's correct, sir.
23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I neglected to move 65 ter 2061
24 into evidence. I'd like to move that document into evidence, Your
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
2 MR. RUSSO: No objection, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes exhibit number D737.
5 JUDGE ORIE: D737 is admitted into evidence.
6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: By the way, I have 45 minutes, Your Honour, not
7 an hour. Sean and I discussed this over the break, just so you know.
8 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If this happens with the text authorities, you
10 usually say you made a mistake. Now you are bound. I think we all
11 accept the authority of our registrar for the time keeping.
12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Sure, just as an officer of the Court I wanted
13 to make the Court aware I had less time than I had previously.
14 Could we please call up P747.
15 Q. Before getting into P747, Mr. Berikoff, I enumerated a list of
16 areas in which you thought you had seen the special police during the
17 course of Operation Storm and shortly afterwards from the 4th and 9th of
18 August. One area which I neglected to include was the area, the village
19 of Strmica. I did not add that to the list of Knin, Drnis and other
20 places. Would you agree with me that with respect to the village of
21 Strmica the Republic of Croatia Ministry of Interior special police, at
22 least according to the reports that I enumerated, was not in Strmica?
23 A. I would agree sir.
24 Q. Back to P747. This was a list that you had compiled?
25 A. Yes, it is.
1 Q. And it was a day-by-day brief summary of places you had gone to.
3 A. Yes, it is, sir.
4 Q. Now on the 8th of August, in 1 e you discuss HV troops or
5 Croatian special police likely responsible for destruction in Knin.
6 Now, based upon P614, which showed that -- which I had gone over
7 with you earlier, that the special police, at that point in time, were
8 located in Kulen Vakuf in Bosnia
9 being likely responsible is mistaken. Correct?
10 A. According to the information I received today, it's possible,
12 Q. You also mention for example on August 11th the village of
13 Civljane on page 2 of this document, which is 1 h.
14 If we could go to page 2, please. Thank you.
15 Again, on August 11th, you note you witnessed HV troops,
16 including the special police, going into numerous residences.
17 Again, going back to P641 by August 11th the special police were
18 in Sector North, at least according to the documents that you were
19 presented with earlier today. Correct?
20 A. The information I put in this document was based on the
21 information I had and the assumptions I had at that time, sir, of people
22 wearing grey coveralls and those wearing camouflage. However, based on
23 the documents you showed me today, yes, sir.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, you earlier referred to P614 which
25 is among the documents you referred to at the beginning of the session
1 after the break.
2 Now we have 641. Is that --
3 MR. KUZMANOVIC: It should be 614, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: 614. And think you said --
5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes. I didn't see the transcript, but thank
6 you. It's 614. If I said 641, I was incorrect.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's the 26th of November document.
8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: 2001.
10 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Correct.
11 Q. Similarly on August 11th, you note going into Donji Lapac, again,
12 this is in P741, 1 i, when you go back to P614, Donji Lapac, the --
13 according to that document, the Croatian special police were already out
14 of Donji Lapac as of August 8th, correct?
15 A. That's correct. And, once again, my assumption was for the same
16 reason, sir.
17 Q. And at least with respect to P614, any ID of Ministry of Interior
18 special police, would you agree with me in areas identified as Cetina or
19 Strmica or Kistanje is mistaken?
20 A. I won't say it's mistaken, sir. It was my assumption at the time
21 based on the information I had. On the information I received today from
22 you, according to the documents they were not there.
23 Q. And, again, other than noting that they were in grey coveralls
24 there's nothing specific about these people that would identify them as
25 members of the Ministry of Interior special police. Correct?
1 A. No, there was not, sir.
2 Q. Did you ever speak to any of these people?
3 A. No, I did not, sir. Other than Major Ivan Juric.
4 Q. Now, I'd like to go, please, to -- one of your statements, D284,
5 page 22.
6 The date of this statement, by the way, is May 26th and 27th of
7 1997, and we had Captain Hill here who testified earlier in this case,
8 and he talked about this particular incident that I'm going to refer to
9 between lines 18 and 36.
10 One thing I'd like to ask you is, you state in the -- line 20 at
11 the end of line 20: "We were forced out of our vehicle at gunpoint by a
12 number of intoxicated Croat soldiers."
13 Can you describe for me what do you mean by that? Can you
14 describe for me how you knew they were intoxicated and what do you mean
15 by intoxicated?
16 A. You could smell alcohol on their breath. They were acting
17 erratically, they were yelling and screaming at us, and mainly you could
18 smell a vast amount of alcohol on their breath, sir.
19 Q. Okay. I'd like to go to P748 for a moment, please. Page 9 of
20 17. If we could to the section of 9 August 1995.
21 And about a third of the way down there's a sentence that begins
22 at the far right-hand side.
23 And I'll read this. "We went travelling in a 'restricted area'
24 today just to see how far we could push the envelope. Very, very tense.
25 I'm getting tired of being constantly afraid. We were stopped at an HV
1 check-point near the KenBat headquarters today when one of the HV
2 soldiers spotted the rifle that Geoff was carrying."
3 Meaning Geoff Hill, correct?
4 A. Yes, that's correct.
5 Q. "He went ballistic and forced us out of our vehicle at gunpoint.
6 We were made to lay face down on the ground and wait. They took Captain
7 Hill's weapon from him because it was a Serb AK-47, one that had been
8 collected from a Serb soldier who was killed the first day of the
9 offensive, pure stupidity on Jeff's part, and a HV soldier who actually
10 came from Canada
11 Now, this from your daily journal. Correct?
12 A. That's correct, sir.
13 Q. And that was made contemporaneous with roughly that day of
14 August 9th, 1995
15 A. Yes, it was.
16 Q. And there's not one mention in this August 9, 1995 entry of
17 someone being -- or anyone being intoxicated that confronted you.
19 A. That's correct. However, to the best of my recollection, there
20 was a strong stench of alcohol, sir.
21 Q. Okay. So two years later in 1997 you included the fact that you
22 were stopped by a bunch of intoxicated Croatian soldiers while on
23 August 9th of 1995, you simply say they were stopped at an HV check-point
24 in a restricted area. Correct?
25 A. The recollection of the alcohol was done or was recalled a lot
1 earlier. It was two years later when I was spoken to.
2 Q. You further say in this same paragraph in P748: "He," meaning
3 the HV soldier who was from Canada
4 the CO of KenBat. What a useless piece of trash."
5 Are you referring to the CO of KenBat there?
6 A. Yes, I was, sir.
7 Q. Why was he a useless piece of trash?
8 A. I don't recall my opinion of why. He seemed -- at the time he
9 seemed more interested in himself and didn't really care what was
10 happening elsewhere and that is my opinion of him at that time, sir. I
11 don't recall the whole incident of speaking with the CO of KenBat.
12 Q. Three lines down from that you say: "We ran into Major Ivan
13 Juric again. He asked us a few questions and was wondering why we were
14 in a restricted area. We gave him some story which I'm sure he did not
15 believe for a minute. He invited Geoff and I into a HV/HVO compound for
16 a bite to eat."
17 Now I noticed, Mr. Berikoff, that in several portions of your
18 statements you use HV/HVO. Why do you use the term HVO? First of all,
19 what is HVO?
20 A. HVO the Bosnian side of the Croatian military.
21 Q. And was there any identifying mark that would note these soldiers
22 as HVO?
23 A. No, there was not, and that's why I put it down either/or, sir,
24 at the time.
25 Q. So HV/HVO was something that you just put down because you
1 weren't sure?
2 A. That's exactly it, sir.
3 Q. Did you have any --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. ...
5 Yes, may I remind you of the pauses. At the same time, you
6 mentioned KenBat several times. Now we know that sometimes CanBat is
8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I will --
9 JUDGE ORIE: -- and sometimes it is K-e-n-B-a-t. What did you
10 refer to?
11 THE WITNESS: In this instances, Your Honour it's Kenya
12 JUDGE ORIE: Kenya
13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: K-e-n, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you.
15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I should have made that clear. Thank you.
16 Q. Let go back to D284, same page, number 22.
17 Now in May of 1997 as you described this incident at lines 23,
18 you had talked about being forced out at gunpoint for a reason that was
19 quite stupid on the part of Captain Geoff Hill. You also note on line 27
20 that not just Captain Hill but Corporal Tremblay decided to carry an AK
21 because of the folding stock, rifle stock.
22 So there were actually two Serb weapons in the vehicle. Correct?
23 A. Yes, there were, there were Captain Hill and Corporal Tremblay
24 who was Captain Hill's driver.
25 Q. Okay. Now were Captain Hill or Corporal Tremblay reprimanded ed
1 for this?
2 A. Yes, they were -- I'm not sure about Corporal Tremblay. I do
3 know for a fact that Captain Hill was reprimanded, because when we
4 returned back to the UN compound I reported the incident to General
5 Forand and General Forand, he also got quite upset about the incident and
6 called Captain Hill in.
7 Q. Do you know what kind of reprimand Captain Hill received?
8 A. No, I do not, sir.
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Let's go to P729, please, and when we get there
10 we can go just to the cover sheet at first. I don't think this is the
11 document. Did I say 729?
12 Q. The document I'm referring to, unless I wrote it down wrong and
13 I'm sorry, is the daily journal -- yes, 729, Sean. I'm sorry.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this is P729.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, are you referring to the daily
16 journal of the witness?
17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes. 30 July to 20 August, 1995.
18 JUDGE ORIE: 30 July, yes, that's ...
19 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I'm sorry, D729; my mistake. Thank you,
21 Thank you, Mr. Registrar; my mistake. And that's page --
22 Q. Mr. Berikoff, before we go to page 5 of this document, this is a
23 daily journal that you compiled. Correct?
24 A. Yes, it is, sir.
25 Q. And is it an excerpt of the previous daily journal that I
1 referred to, P748?
2 A. Yes, it is, sir. As I indicated at the beginning of my
3 testimony, the journal was an ongoing project as I changed it from
4 handwritten notes into electronic format.
5 Q. Okay.
6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Why don't we go to page 5 of that document,
8 Q. And we, again, referenced the check-point incident of August -- 9
9 August. And in the middle of the paragraph -- or about a third of the
10 way down in that entry, there's a sentence that begins with: "Went,"
12 A. Yes, sir.
13 Q. "Went travelling again today in a restricted area. Very, very
14 tense. I'm getting tired of being constantly being afraid. For example,
15 today we got stopped at a Croat check-point near the Kenyan Battalion
16 headquarters." And, again, the issue of the Serb AK that Captain Hill
17 was carrying is referenced.
18 There is no indication in this entry of you being accosted by
19 intoxicated Croatian soldiers, is there?
20 A. No, there is not.
21 Q. And this was on August 24th of 1996. Correct?
22 A. That's correct. However, that is not when the journal was done
23 was August 1996. The journal was done ongoing as soon as I went to
25 Q. I do. What was the purpose of signing it on August 24th, 1996?
1 A. The purpose that I signed was it was a document that I turned
2 into the investigator during an interview, sir.
3 Q. Page 7 of this document toward the bottom, you have a notation
4 here, it's the 12th of August, about the last quarter of the page,
5 there's a sentence that -- on the right that begins: "We were
6 spotted ..."
7 And it says: "We were spotted by a number of HV special police
8 (death squad) who surrounded us and placed us under arrest, supposedly
9 for being in a restricted area."
10 What is the HV special police death squad?
11 A. Once again, from rumours or raw information that I had heard
12 while I was there, people wearing the grey coveralls were also in many
13 instances referred to as death squad. Some of that information came from
14 the refugees in the camp. That's what they called them.
15 Q. Okay. You have no evidence, factual evidence, to show that there
16 were anything resembling a death squad in this area, do you?
17 A. No, I do not, sir.
18 Q. Now, was it your impression that -- or did you gain the
19 impression during the course of your time that there were certain squads
20 that went house to house?
21 A. I'm not sure if it was certain squads. But numerous soldiers and
22 civilian police did go from house to house, yes, sir.
23 Q. Now, at some point in time, did you report your knowledge and
24 information that you gained to your -- you did report your knowledge or
25 information that you gained to your superiors. Correct?
1 A. Following every -- every trip that I took throughout the sector,
2 when I returned back to the compound, I gave verbal reports to General
3 Forand and the operations staff.
4 Q. And was that Colonel Leslie?
5 A. In the first couple of days it would have been Colonel Leslie.
6 Later on it would have been the Jordanian Chief of Staff who I don't
7 recall what his name is, sir.
8 Q. Colonel, now General Leslie, testified earlier that he left on
9 the 7th or 8th of August of 1995. Does that square with your
11 A. It was -- it was shortly after the offensive that he left, so,
12 therefore, yes, it would have probably been the Jordanian Chief of Staff,
14 Q. Now, I'd like to pull up D329, just the transcript, please.
15 Mr. Berikoff, earlier in this case during General Forand's
16 testimony this document and transcript was introduced into evidence. It
17 was an interview done in July of 2003 of General Forand and General
18 Leslie regarding Operation Storm and its aftermath.
19 Now, you had earlier testified that you had changed your opinion
20 on the nature of the artillery attack on Knin, and I wanted to ask you a
21 question about casualties during that time-frame.
22 You've given us some estimate of -- or not some estimate, but you
23 have given us some observations of a number of people that were dead that
24 you had seen during the 4th and 5th of August. Correct?
25 A. Yes, sir.
1 Q. On page 2 of that transcript, the third -- fourth paragraph, and
2 I'll represent to you that L means Leslie, in answer to a question about
3 shelling stated that the shelling, at the bottom, "it killed a lot of
4 civilians and we'll never know the exact number but estimates range from
5 10 to 25.000 dead."
6 Now, as intelligence and information officer for Sector South,
7 you did not give that estimate range to General Leslie, did you no?
8 A. No, I did not, sir, because I did not see anywhere near that
9 amount. It was in the double or triple digits at the very most, sir.
10 Q. So the number of 10 to 25.000 is flat wrong?
11 A. I would say it is flat wrong based on the information I had at
12 the time, sir.
13 Q. Now page 3 of this particular document in the middle, there's a
14 comment by the reporter in the transcript that says: "General Leslie
15 says that he saw Croatian police afterwards going house to house and
16 killing anyone they found."
17 And then the quotation is attributed to him: "There were a
18 variety of organisations that then swept into the former Serbian Krajina.
19 There were special police teams wearing their very distinctive blue
20 uniforms who were engaged in hunting and killing in the mountains of
21 Serbian civilians and I saw dozens and dozens of farm houses and even
22 villages burning many, many days, in some cases, months after the initial
23 assault had taken place."
24 Now, I wanted to ask you a question about the special police
25 teams wearing their very distinctive blue uniforms.
1 Did you as the intelligence and information officer provide that
2 information to General Leslie?
3 A. No, I did not because the only time I saw blue uniforms was when
4 I was in fact in Bosnia
5 not see any blue uniforms in Croatia
6 I had seen in Croatia
7 Q. Now, were you aware at any time of any forces engaging in what
8 Leslie, General Leslie called hunting and killing in the mountains of
9 Serbian civilians?
10 A. No, I'm not, sir. I am aware of the destruction of homes in the
11 area, but not of hunting and killing.
12 Q. Okay. Thank you. Do you know as a military intelligence
13 information officer what kind of movements the ARSK had during the 5th
14 and 6th of August in the area of Donji Lapac?
15 A. No, I don't, in the area of Donji Lapac, no, I don't, sir. It
16 was later on that I learned and followed the route that they had
17 withdrawn from the area of Knin.
18 Q. Were you aware that before your arrival in Donji Lapac, I believe
19 it was the 11th and 12th of August of 1995, that UNMO sitreps designated
20 that there was looting going on by the army of BH coming across the
21 border into Donji Lapac.
22 A. I was not aware of the UNMO report, sir.
23 Q. Did you have access to UNMO reports at all, sitreps?
24 A. The only access I had to UNMO reports were what was given to us
25 in the morning prayers and it was a verbal report, not written. I did
1 not see the UNMO reports. They would have gone through the operations,
2 through a different chain of command to headquarters.
3 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Can we please pull up P114. If we could go to
4 page -- on the right-hand corner 9592, on the right-hand upper corner of
5 this sitrep.
6 Q. Toward the middle of this UNMO sitrep on this page there's a
7 notation at 10 -- at 10 12.30 Bravo, meaning the 10th of August at 12.30
9 A. Yes, it is, sir.
10 Q. "At Donji Lapac UNMO patrol observed soldiers wearing BiH
11 insignia helping refugees from Bihac with trucks to collect cows and
12 other household items left behind by the Krajina Serbs."
13 Now, you said you were not -- you did not observe that when you
14 were there, on the 11th and 12th?
15 A. No, I did not, sir.
16 Q. Were you -- and I already talked to you about the fact that the
17 Ministry of Interior special police were already out of Donji Lapac
18 before the 10th of August. Correct?
19 A. According to the document you showed me, yes, sir.
20 Q. Were you aware that the ARSK, as they were going through
21 Donji Lapac, was harassing the UN forces in the area and were demanding
22 fuel before they left Donji Lapac?
23 A. With regard to the harassing by the ARSK, that was ongoing when I
24 first got there right until we left. As far as asking for fuel, I cannot
25 respond to what they asked for up in the Donji Lapac area. I've already
1 indicated the fuel issue in the Strmica area, sir.
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Why don't we go to P111, please. If we could go
3 to 9575 of that document, please.
4 Q. Toward the middle of that document there's a discussion that
5 around -- that on the 6th of August, ARSK trucks carrying 100 persons
6 arrived at B platoon 5th, is that company?
7 A. Yes, it is, sir, 5th company.
8 Q. In Donji Lapac area and starting harassing and asking for fuel
9 and rations. After negotiations with them, they left the area.
10 Now, you were not in Donji Lapac until the 11th?
11 A. That's correct, sir.
12 Q. Were you aware of the shelling that had gone on in Donji Lapac
13 both before it was taken and after the Croatian special police entered
14 Donji Lapac?
15 A. Yes, I was. As I indicated earlier, I am aware of heavier combat
16 activities up in that area, sir.
17 Q. Mr. Berikoff, if you could please tell us the nature and extent
18 of the briefing that you got when you got to Zagreb before you became
19 intelligence and information in Sector South.
20 A. I virtually -- I was just given a general sitrep of the situation
21 in the whole area of the former Yugoslavia
22 Sector South, saying that the situation was very tense, there was a
23 likelihood of a possible HV offensive to retake the Krajina if
24 negotiations that were being held were not successful.
25 I was not given a detailed briefing to the extent of what forces
1 were in the area, where they were located, or the identification of those
2 forces, sir.
3 Q. Would that be for both sides. Correct?
4 A. That was for both sides, sir.
5 Q. And stated in one of your statements that on the 27th or 28th of
6 July several local UN personnel did not show up for work and they were
7 leaving the area.
8 A. Yes, sir.
9 Q. Did you come to a conclusion as to why that was happening?
10 A. Yes, I did. In the sense that there was also mobilisation of
11 ARSK forces and it was my conclusion that a possible offensive by the HV
12 was near at hand.
13 Q. And that mobilisation I believe you had stated was broadcast on
14 Radio Knin?
15 A. Yes, it was, sir.
16 Q. Did you hear the broadcast?
17 A. I did not hear it myself. I had heard from various sources
18 including our operations staff.
19 MR. KUZMANOVIC: One moment, Your Honour.
20 [Defence counsel confer]
21 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Mr. Registrar, can you please pull up P112. If
22 we could go to 9581.
23 Q. This is a sitrep, Mr. Berikoff, from the 8th of August of 1995,
24 and on this page, at the bottom of the page, JorBat was on the border
25 there. Correct?
1 A. That's correct sir.
2 Q. And the border area near Donji Lapac, right?
3 A. That's right. Their headquarters was just north of the town of
4 Donji Lapac.
5 Q. And this particular sitrep reports that on the 8th of
6 August artillery shelling was reported in the general area at Boricevac
7 from the BH side, correct?
8 A. That's what the document says, yes, sir.
9 Q. So at least on the 8th of August, according to this sitrep,
10 Donji Lapac was still in play in terms of combat operations?
11 A. Yeah. And I indicated that previously as well, sir.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, you were kind enough to draw our
13 attention to the corrected time given to you by -- you are now well --
14 you're over one hour and a half. Can you please try to conclude.
15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes, Your Honour, if I could have one moment,
16 and I will conclude.
17 [Defence counsel confer]
18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: One other question, Your Honour, and I will be
20 Q. Mr. Berikoff, in the area of Boricevac were you aware of a very
21 large weapons storage facility that was in that location?
22 A. No, I was not, sir.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: That's all I have. Thank you, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kuzmanovic. Could you assist me in
1 one of the documents, I think it was 614, refers to Otrovica. Could you
2 assist me to find this on a map.
3 MR. KUZMANOVIC: What was the name of the place, Your Honour?
4 I'm sorry.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Otrovica.
6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Mitrovica?
7 JUDGE ORIE: No. Otrovica, I think it was. Let me just check.
8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Are you thinking of Otravic, perhaps, Your
10 JUDGE ORIE: It says Ostrovica. It was -- you referred to
11 page --
12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... yes, 26. On 31, it's
13 on 26 as well. That is in Bosnia
14 across the border into Bosnia
15 operation in Kulen Vakuf, at the edge of Kulen Vakuf. So Ostrovica is a
16 village right next to Kulen Vakuf.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I found it.
18 Yes, may I then ask you in relation to the same page 31 of
19 P614 --
20 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: -- I think it was, it is a draft translation on the
22 second line, the semi-last word is their, t-h-e-i-r, which I would be
23 inclined to read as there, t-h-e-r-e.
24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I would agree, Your Honour, the second-last line
25 where it says "engaged there," it should be t-h-e-r-e. The second their
1 on the second-last line should be their own units. I agree.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I agree and we will see to it -- actually, this
4 is a P document if I'm not mistaken. P614.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: We can have that corrected. We'll work with the
7 Prosecution to get that fixed.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Because one of the questions that came into my
9 mind, and you might want pay further attention to it in the future, is
10 special police forces that had been engaged there, what that exactly
12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Being engaged there, whether -- how many there were
14 and how limited that is -- or what limitations are included in that that
15 had been engaged there.
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood. Thank you, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, any need to re-examine the witness.
18 MR. TIEGER:
19 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Your Honour, I would estimate approximately 30
21 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed.
22 Re-examination by Mr. Russo:
23 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Your Honour. I will make my best attempt
24 to be brief.
25 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I'd like to take you back to a few areas covered
1 during your cross-examination.
2 Let me first ask Mr. President, I know on several occasions I
3 will be referring to the transcript of the last two days. My particular
4 transcript begins from 1 on every day, and I know that there was some
5 issue about that with previous witnesses. I don't know if the Court's
6 begins at a different number, but I can give it --
7 JUDGE ORIE: I can tell you very quickly. The 1st of
8 September transcripts starts at page 7588, whereas the transcript of
9 yesterday, the 2nd of September, starts at page 7702. So it takes some
10 calculations, but I take it that you have access to e-court as well.
11 MR. RUSSO: I do, Your Honour. I just don't have the same page
12 beginnings as you do and there's sometimes a bit of a miss. I have done
13 the calculations although I think mine were off by --
14 JUDGE ORIE: If there's ever any problem with the Word Wheel and
15 search facilities, if you give a key word, then we will be able to find
16 it rather quickly.
17 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
18 Q. Referring to transcript page - and the page starting from 1, it
19 would be page 83 from lines 3 to 6, and I believe in Your Honours'
20 transcript that would be page 7670 or 7671, depending where you begin.
21 Mr. Kehoe asked you about the departure of civilians from Knin
22 prior to Operation Storm and I believe Mr. Kuzmanovic just touched on it.
23 Do you recall that?
24 A. Yes, I do, sir.
25 Q. And can you tell the Court whether you observed any RSK military
1 or police involvement in the departure of those civilians?
2 A. In the actual departure of the civilians, no, I did not, sir.
3 Q. Thank you. I noticed your qualification of the term actual
4 departure. Does that mean that in some other fashion you saw their
6 A. No, I did not.
7 Q. Referring to page -- transcript 88, page 1 to 7, for Your Honours
8 that would be transcript page 7675, 1 to 7, Mr. Kehoe asked you about
9 whether the HV used the right type of ammunition for the destruction of
10 buildings and facilities in Knin, and you indicated that they did.
11 First let me ask you, approximately how many military buildings
12 and facilities did the HV actually destroy in Knin?
13 A. I cannot answer that, sir, because I don't know how many military
14 installations there were in Knin, sir.
15 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, counsel. I'm just a little bit -- I
16 apologise. I am a little bit confused on the pagination. I think the
17 official transcript, Mr. Russo, 7675 covers the evacuation issue and this
18 ammunition issue, I'm not sure I'm following the transcript exactly.
19 My apologies. I certainly didn't mean to interrupt, but I think
20 I have the official transcript and my pagination appears to be a tad
22 MR. RUSSO: In any case, it should be approximately four to five
23 pages beyond the departure issue. That is probably --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, if you give precise words. For example,
25 you earlier used departure. Now departure appears not on my WordWheel
1 there. So if you would give one word which is exact, then with WordWheel
2 it is so easy to find it.
3 MR. KEHOE: I beg to differ. I'm not that quick. I'm a bit of a
4 dinosaur. I'm still back on the old hard copy, so to the extent that we
5 get some assistance on the hard copy, I would appreciate it.
6 MR. RUSSO: I will try to assist both parties, Your Honour.
7 With respect to departure issue the word to look for is
8 evacuation. With respect to the questioning I'm now asking, the Court
9 can look for destruction, buildings, or facilities and should find the
11 MR. KEHOE: I will say just for the record that the departure
12 issue is the one that is on 7675. So if we can start from that premise.
13 JUDGE ORIE: That's line 5, yes, I found it.
14 MR. KEHOE: I apologise, Mr. Russo, I'm just trying to stay with
16 MR. RUSSO:
17 Q. So, Mr. Berikoff, first of all, let me get your definition of
18 what it means for a building to be destroyed.
19 A. For a building to be destroyed, it would mean that it's no longer
20 inhabitable, sir.
21 Q. And I understand your last answer was that you couldn't tell me
22 how many military targets were destroyed. Can you give the Court an
23 approximation of how many buildings in Knin were completely destroyed
24 under your definition of that term?
25 A. Under my definition of that term, I would say approximately 100
1 homes were destroyed during the offensive, and then following the
2 offensive, looting, et cetera, and further destruction continued.
3 Q. And taking homes out of that calculation, and speaking only about
4 buildings or facilities and assuming these were not places where people
5 are living, how many of those kinds of buildings or facilities did you
6 see destroyed under your definition of that term?
7 A. I cannot give an accurate number. However, the -- the factory
8 was hit, the POL
9 indications of shell impacts in and near the Ministry of Defence. The
10 barracks at the northern end of town was also hit, the area of the police
11 station, so I would consider these all military-type targets, sir.
12 Q. I understand that. I think you may be misunderstanding my
13 question. You have named the factory, the POL station, the railway, the
14 Ministry of Defence building, the barracks and the -- and the area around
15 the police station.
16 What I'm trying to determine is of those, how many were
18 A. I cannot give an accurate figure on that one, sir. I do not
20 Q. Okay. Now --
21 A. Or I don't recall.
22 Q. Regarding the weaponry that was used against Knin, I believe
23 you've already testified and certainly it is in your statements that MBRL
24 rockets were fired into Knin?
25 A. Yes, they were.
1 Q. Do you think that MBRL rockets are appropriate weapons to use
2 against military targets in civilian-populated areas?
3 A. The multiple-barrel rocket launcher is an area weapon and a
4 commander would definitely have to take into consideration the collateral
5 damage that this has caused. I believe I explained there to Mr. Kehoe as
6 well, sir.
7 Q. And I understand?
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
9 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Your Honour.
10 Q. I understand your answer that a reasonable commander would have
11 to take into consideration the damage that that would cause.
12 Is that a particular concern where, as you call them, area
13 weapons are used?
14 A. Yes, it is.
15 Q. And from your perspective, are -- would the use of airburst
16 ammunition be considered an area weapon?
17 A. Yes, I would.
18 Q. Thank you. Now, Mr. Kehoe also asked you whether it would be
19 reasonable for a military commander to fire artillery at the tanks which
20 you saw driving through Knin on the morning of 5 August. Do you recall
22 A. I recall the question.
23 Q. And let me just ask to you briefly to explain to the Court your
24 understanding of how artillery should be used to hit a target that is
25 moving through an urban area?
1 A. It all depends how the -- how the withdrawing force is leaving an
2 urban area. If they are going in massive built-up areas the commander
3 should consider the likelihood of collateral damage that it would cause,
4 and if possible, it is better to use more of a weapon system that would
5 be able to bring fire immediately upon the withdrawing force.
6 However, as Mr. Kehoe indicated the other day, the -- the
7 withdrawing force going through an area, yes, you would try to also
8 eliminate that force, if possible, sir.
9 Q. I don't want to expand the scope of my question. Let's just take
10 the example of -- you saw several tanks, if I'm not mistaken, several
11 tanks making their way through Knin on the morning of 5th August, right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Can you explain to the Court from your perspective what would be
14 the appropriate way for a commander to engage those tanks with artillery?
15 A. What -- in -- now, this is just my opinion, but in my opinion the
16 commander could wait until the tanks have gone out of the city on the
17 outskirts and then engage them. However, it's up to the commander, sir.
18 Q. And if the commander chose to engage them while they were driving
19 through the city, would a reasonable commander expect that the likelihood
20 of collateral damage would be higher than if he waited for those tanks to
21 leave the city?
22 A. Yes, he would, sir.
23 Q. And the whole concept of mobile targets is that targets are
24 mobile, obviously, so if a tank is moving -- let me ask you this: How
25 far can an ARSK tank move?
1 A. It all depends what type of tank it is, sir. Some can go as high
2 as 50 miles an hour, depending on the model.
3 Q. Well, the model that --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
5 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, if you'd take a breath now and then, the
7 interpreters can do the same.
8 MR. RUSSO: My apologies, Your Honour.
9 Q. Can you tell the Court or give the Court some idea of how fast
10 the kinds of ARSK tanks that you saw moving through Knin on the morning
11 of the 5th can move.
12 A. The type of tanks that we saw moving through Knin were the older
13 T-54, 55 tank and the old SU type tank and they are much slower than the
14 newer model, sir.
15 Q. Can you give us an idea how much slower?
16 A. About half the speed or less, sir. They're also moving through a
17 town of -- with streets, et cetera, and turns where they would have to
18 slow down, sir.
19 Q. Now, do you know from which direction or directions the HV
20 advanced toward Knin on the 4th of August?
21 A. There was a couple of directions that they came. They came from
22 the -- from the east and I -- and, as far as I am aware, they also came
23 from the south.
24 Q. And do you know how far the HV advanced toward Knin from the
25 east, by the end of 4 August?
1 A. By the end of 4 August, I believe they were within ten to 15
2 kilometres inside the Krajina.
3 Q. Is that ten to 15 kilometres away from Knin?
4 A. No, it's not. It's ten to 15 kilometres from the border of the
5 Krajina, coming either from the east or from the south.
6 MR. RUSSO: Mr. Registrar, if we could please have Exhibit D728.
7 Q. And while that is being pulled up, Mr. Berikoff, can you tell me
8 how far away Knin was from the confrontation line on the 4th of August,
9 in the eastern direction?
10 A. I -- I don't recall, sir.
11 MR. RUSSO: If we could go it page 11 of D728.
12 Q. Mr. Berikoff, this is the -- if you'll recall the collection of
13 maps that you generally agreed with and was admitted during Mr. Kehoe's
15 MR. RUSSO: If we could, Mr. Registrar, please zoom in on the
16 light blue area, immediately to the left of where it says "OG North,"
17 roughly the middle of the page. Further over to the right. Thank you.
18 Q. Now, the exhibit indicates that this light blue area immediately
19 to the left of the letters OG North indicates that the HV, on the 4th of
20 August, achieved some distance just within -- just beyond the
21 confrontation line towards Knin. Is that right?
22 A. According to the map, that's correct, sir.
23 Q. Well, did you agree with that map?
24 A. In general terms, yes, I did and I would say, yes, they came over
25 the border about that far, sir.
1 Q. And looking at the map, I understand there's not a scale on the
2 map, but judging the distance from Knin to that line, how many kilometres
3 are we talking about?
4 A. Probably ten to 15 kilometres from the eastern portion of the
5 border, sir.
6 Q. Okay. Now, how long would it take an artillery projectile fired
7 from ten kilometres to reach Knin?
8 A. Depending on the weapon system, sir, not very long.
9 Q. Can you give us an area of not very long?
10 A. No, I can't. I'm not artillery person.
11 Q. Seconds?
12 A. It would be within seconds.
13 Q. Less than a minute?
14 A. Less than a minute, yes.
15 Q. Okay. And in less than a minute would you agree that the tank
16 could move from one position to another relatively -- even ten metres, 20
18 A. That's possible, yes.
19 Q. Okay. And assuming that tanks are moving through Knin on the 5th
20 of August, would a reasonable commander believe that firing artillery at
21 those tanks from a distance of approximately ten kilometres away was
22 going to be very effective?
23 A. That depends if the artillery was already targeted on a certain
24 location that the tanks would be passing, sir.
25 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Judge, I would object on the scope because
1 the -- I'm sorry, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, I was listening to the French
3 translation, which is a bit behind, so --
4 MR. KEHOE: Much more interesting than I am.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, your words would be translated as well.
6 Let me just read. Yes. You would object because --
7 MR. KEHOE: We are talking about a reasonable commander and what
8 a reasonable commander knows and does at the time he fires in on a
9 particular area. And that I think is the objection to the scope of this
10 question. Because the question that counsel is asking is asking
11 questions about what a reasonable commander would do which I trust. What
12 this commander knew at the time i.e., General Gotovina or if it was a
13 brigade commander doing the firing.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, I think the objection to the extent that
15 it is an objection that's clear that what was reasonable or not depends,
16 often, on what the person acting knows or doesn't know. Sometimes it may
17 include as well what he should have known.
18 Would you please keep this in mind when continuing your line of
20 MR. RUSSO: I will do that, Your Honour. Mr. Kehoe had asked the
21 same question with respect to a reasonable commander. I understand the
22 qualifications to be the same and I do agree that it's what a reasonable
23 commander would know at the time and what he should know.
24 Q. So, Mr. Berikoff, in asking these questions please bear that in
1 Now, again, I'll restate the question.
2 Assuming that there were tanks as you say moving through Knin on
3 the 5th of August, would a reasonable commander believe that firing
4 artillery at them from a distance of ten kilometres away is likely to be
5 very effective?
6 A. It would not be very effective unless as I indicated earlier he
7 had a pre-set target that he was firing upon and waited for those tanks
8 to cross there, sir.
9 MR. RUSSO: If we could please have Exhibit D299.
10 Q. Mr. Berikoff, this was a document shown to you by Ms. Higgins and
11 if you'll recall -- let's just wait till the English translation comes
13 This is a document in which General Cermak is requesting the
14 assistance of General Forand and his resources to remove damaged vehicles
15 from the town of Knin
16 Now, did you hear from anyone in the HQ compound or anyone in the
17 UN possibly assisting with this that anybody had to remove either a
18 damaged or a destroyed tank from Knin?
19 A. No, I did not.
20 Q. Did you personally observe a damaged or a destroyed tank in Knin
21 after the 5th of August?
22 A. No, I did not.
23 Q. And in attempting to destroy tanks that are moving through a
24 city, would a reasonable commander have to consider the amount of
25 collateral damage likely to occur from that attempt?
1 A. A reasonable commander would definitely have to consider that as
3 Q. Based on what you personally observed, would you consider the
4 amount of collateral damage to the residential areas of Knin to be
6 A. It was extensive, yes.
7 Q. Now at -- Mr. Kehoe also read you an intercept by General Mrksic
8 on the 4th of August suggesting that ARSK forces had withdrawn from their
9 positions for the defence of Knin. Do you recall that?
10 A. Yes, I do.
11 Q. Let me refer to your third statement which is tab 3 in your
12 binder. It's Exhibit D84, at page 12, lines 1 through 13. For the court
13 officer, this appears in the B/C/S at page 9, lines 7 through 23.
14 Now, in that passage, Mr. Berikoff, you state your opinion that
15 the stories being put out by the Krajina media on 4 August about the ARSK
16 fighting and maintaining high spirits was all a deception because the
17 ARSK had left the area and the town of Knin itself was extremely lightly
19 Is that correct?
20 A. That is my assessment, yes.
21 Q. And let me ask you: Did you see any evidence that -- personally
22 observe any evidence that the ARSK forces actually made a defensive stand
23 at or outside of Knin?
24 A. I did not personally see them make the defensive. However, I did
25 know where their defensive deployment area was located.
1 Q. Did you know where that defensive deployment area was located on
2 the 5th of August?
3 A. I was the assumption that it was the same area where I had seen
4 the positions prior to the offensive itself.
5 Q. And can you tell the Court where that was?
6 A. It was on the outskirts of Knin on the way to Otric.
7 Q. And was that area a civilian-populated area?
8 A. No, it was not. It was an open area on the outskirts of Knin.
9 Q. Now, Mr. Kehoe also asked you whether the war lords that you
10 referenced in your statement were wearing camouflage uniforms and other
11 military paraphernalia and accoutrements, and I believe you agreed that
12 they were. Is that right?
13 A. That's correct.
14 Q. First of all let me ask you, please, to define for the Court what
15 is it that you mean when you say the word war lord?
16 A. My assessment of a warlord is like a gang leader. It will be a
17 group of locals that get together and respond to the command and orders
18 of an individual who they feel has authority.
19 Q. Did you ever meet any individual that you would consider to be a
21 A. I did not meet any individual specifically. However, there were
22 groups that appeared to be like a gang that definitely would not have
23 responded to the military.
24 Q. And are these the people that Mr. Kehoe asked you about and who
25 you said were wearing camouflage uniforms?
1 A. I believe they are part of the group that Mr. Kehoe asked about.
2 Q. Did you ever speak to any members of these groups?
3 A. Specifically in the Cetina area when we were detained and taken
4 to Vrlika police station, we were surrounded by such a group, and the one
5 gentleman in particular got in the vehicle and escorted us to the Vrlika
6 police station, sir.
7 Q. And did that individual or any of the troops that you attribute
8 to being part of a warlord's gang, did any of them ever tell you that
9 they worked for a warlord or for anyone other than the Croatian military?
10 A. No, they did not. It was just my assumption based on the type of
11 uniform they were wearing, the disorganisation that existed and just the
12 very -- various attitude that they had.
13 Q. I'd like to be clear about this. The only distinction you're
14 drawing between what you call HV/HVO soldiers and the people in the
15 service of these warlords is their uniforms and their attitude?
16 A. The uniforms, their attitude, their demeanour towards everybody
17 basically, and -- yes, you can say that.
18 Q. Did their demeanor include being drunk?
19 A. On numerous occasions there was alcohol involved, yes.
20 Q. I'd like to show you if I could, please, Exhibit P423.
21 Looking at the people riding on that tank, Mr. Berikoff, how
22 would you compare them to the people that you say you saw around the
23 sector being in the service of warlords?
24 A. That is similar to some of the people that I would say belonged
25 to a group of warlords. However, they did not have in many instances
1 those type of weapons systems.
2 Q. I don't think you indicated earlier that the weapons systems were
3 a basis that you used to distinguish between warlords and non-warlords.
4 Focussing strictly on the uniforms that these people --
5 MR. KEHOE: Object to commentary by counsel. If counsel wants to
6 ask a question, that's fine, but I object to commentary.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Your objection is to be taken seriously, yes.
8 MR. RUSSO: I understand that, Your Honour. I was just trying to
9 focus the witness on the fact that my question was not relating not to
10 the weaponry but to the uniforms.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but you did more. Please proceed.
12 MR. RUSSO:
13 Q. Focussing Mr. Berikoff, just on the uniforms that these
14 individuals in the photograph are wearing, how would you compare them
15 with these warlords that you saw in Sector South?
16 A. Quite similar, sir.
17 Q. Did you receive any information or intelligence from anyone to
18 indicate that there were, in fact, warlords in Sector South?
19 A. Yes, I did. Right from -- right from 1991 when I worked on the
20 Yugoslav crisis cell and onwards we were aware of groups of warlords as
21 well as their local group of I guess soldiers, you can call them, and
23 When I got to Knin I was also -- so I was aware in general that
24 there were in fact groups of -- I would -- I don't know how to exactly
25 describe them but that there were warlords with troops loyal to them.
1 Q. Was it your understanding that those warlords were not within the
2 control of the HV?
3 A. Yes, it was.
4 Q. Where did that understanding come from?
5 A. Just from my understanding of a warlord and the group of troops
6 they have loyal to them throughout -- throughout anywhere, Somalia
7 anywhere they are loyal to the warlord themself and not the rest.
8 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I would like to be very specific about the
9 situation in Sector South immediately following Operation Storm.
10 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I understand counsel doesn't like the
11 answer but the question was just asked. He is asking the same question
12 in a different fashion because didn't like the answer that the witness
13 just gave.
14 I object.
15 MR. RUSSO: I haven't asked my question yet so I'm not asking the
16 same question.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, whether Mr. Russo likes the answer or
18 not, perhaps we'll -- he will never tell us, I don't know. He had not
19 put the question yet.
20 Mr. Russo, would you please focus on questions rather than on
21 introductions to questions.
22 MR. RUSSO: Certainly, Your Honour.
23 Q. Can you give the Court any particular location that is either a
24 town or a particular area that you believe was controlled by a warlord
25 immediately following Operation Storm?
1 A. In particular, I would say the town of Oklaj had a group of these
2 type of people where they wore Rambo type shorts, cross-bandoliers
3 bandannas on their head and had an attitude very unmilitary-like.
4 Q. Other than Oklaj can you give the Court any other location that
5 you believe was controlled by a warlord?
6 A. The area around Cetina, I believe, was. Also areas around
7 Razvode and the Macure area, I have also seen them up there. Other than
8 that, I don't recall other specific names at this time, sir.
9 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I see that we're at the break.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Even at half the hour you indicated, Mr. Russo.
11 How much time would you still need?
12 MR. RUSSO: I would estimate another 15 minutes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: That is more than you indicated before.
14 I suggest that you try to conclude in the next six to seven
15 minutes. Then we will have a break until 1.00 and then after the break
16 there will be an opportunity for further questions from the Bench and
17 perhaps from the Defence.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. RUSSO:
20 Q. Mr. Berikoff, you've just given us the areas of Cetina, Razvode
21 and Macure. On the 12th of August, I believe you indicated that you were
22 arrested by Croatian forces when you were watching the destruction IN
23 Cetina. Isn't that right?
24 A. Yes, I did.
25 Q. And weren't you taken to a police station after that?
1 A. Yes, I was. However, we were taken to the police station by the
2 Rambo type soldiers without -- they had the cross-bandoliers, et cetera.
3 Q. And do you think that the Vrlika police station was under the
4 control of a warlord?
5 A. I don't believe they were, sir.
6 Q. Were the individuals in the grey coveralls also in Cetina when
7 you were watching the destruction?
8 A. They were at the check-point when we attempted to get into the
9 Cetina area, yes.
10 Q. And did you also see the individuals in grey coveralls in the
11 area of Macure?
12 A. Yes, we did.
13 Q. And did you ever see the people you identify as these warlords
14 fighting with or against HV troops or individuals in grey coveralls?
15 A. No, I did not.
16 Q. Now, on the 9th of August, Mr. Kehoe and as well Mr. Kuzmanovic
17 asked you about the incident where you were stopped at a check-point
18 outside Bribirski Mostine by a drunken soldier. Do you recall that?
19 A. Yes, I recall that.
20 Q. And I believe in your statements you refer to that person as
21 sometimes a Croatian soldier but then you also use the term paramilitary
22 organisation. Is that the same thing that you refer to as being one of
23 these warlords?
24 A. It was a combination of both. They had HV soldiers as well as
25 these -- I guess, paramilitary-type forces, sir.
1 Q. I understand. I'm trying to find out if you're equating
2 paramilitary organisations with warlords?
3 A. Paramilitary, yes, I am, based with the warlord and gang-type
4 style of grouping.
5 Q. Do I understand your answer to mean that HV soldiers were also
6 working with these groups that check-point?
7 A. It was my understanding that's how it was, yes, now, but that's
8 all my understand was.
9 Q. And you were pulled out of your vehicle by drunken soldiers,
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And I think your diary that you just indicated during
13 Mr. Kuzmanovic' cross-examination, it was a HV liaison officer that came
14 to the rescue?
15 A. Yes, it was.
16 Q. Did the HV liaison officer have to fight with or otherwise
17 threaten the drunken soldiers in order to get you released?
18 A. They did get in a heated discussion. However, at the end of the
19 day the liaison officer was able to negotiate and take us to the
21 Q. Did the liaison officer --
22 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Sorry to interrupt. Just for clarification,
23 there is only one reference in one statement and it refers to one
24 intoxicated soldier. I thought that was -- not intoxicated soldiers.
25 MR. RUSSO: Let me ask you, Mr. Berikoff --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Do you know whether the question has to be put
3 Did you understand the question to refer to the event where you
4 said you have seen one indicated soldier?
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, I do, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Then I don't think there is any need to further
7 repeat the question.
8 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
9 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
10 Q. Mr. Berikoff, did the HV liaison officer have to brandish a
11 weapon at the drunken soldier in order to get you released?
12 A. I don't recall him brandishing a weapon. I know there was a
13 heated discussion. Whether he -- I can't recall the weapon, sir.
14 Q. And you were questioned by Mr. Kehoe concerning whether or not
15 you thought that the Croatian forces had the ability to stop these
16 warlord-type people. Correct?
17 A. I believe I was, yes.
18 Q. And you've made a number of indications in your statements and
19 also during your testimony here about the level of authority that you
20 perceived Major Juric to have.
21 From your perspective do you think that Major Juric had the
22 ability to stop these warlords, if he wanted to?
23 A. I would say it would have been extremely difficult for
24 Major Juric to have stopped these -- these warlords and their -- their
25 troops or their followers. They were very unruly, and they had a
1 different type of demeanour about them. So it would have been extremely
2 difficult for him as well, sir.
3 Q. From your perspective, were these warlord-type people more
4 equipped weaponry wise than the Croatian forces?
5 A. In some instances, yes, they were.
6 Q. Now, you also indicated during, I believe, Ms. Higgins
7 examination --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, could I ask one question.
9 "More equipped weaponry wise than the Croatian forces," what did
10 they have more, are you talking about quantity or about quality, and if
11 you are talking about quality, could you tell us what they have, the
12 Croatian forces did not have.
13 THE WITNESS: I'm talking about both, Your Honour, both in
14 quantity but at times also quality where they would have various types of
15 western type equipment, sir.
16 JUDGE ORIE: That is still a bit too vague to me. Is it same
17 type of weaponry but more modern and from western fabrication or would it
18 be other types of weapons?
19 THE WITNESS: More modern and from western fabrication, Your
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
22 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
23 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I've stolen one and a half minutes from you.
25 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
1 Q. You indicated, Mr. Berikoff, during Ms. Higgins' examination that
2 the letter that you had from Cermak was a joke, and I think there was a
3 suggestion that Mr. Cermak's authority was totally ineffective outside of
5 Do you recall that discussion?
6 A. Yes, I do, sir.
7 Q. Now, when you were taken to the Vrlika station, what was it that
8 got you released from the Vrlika station on the 12th of August? We're
9 talking after the Cetina incident.
10 A. After a period of time, we presented the letter, the letter was
11 taken from us, and the police officer had gone away for a while and after
12 some time he came back, gave us the letter back, and that's when we were
13 escorted from the Vrlika police station and out of the sector.
14 Q. Last exhibit.
15 MR. RUSSO: If I could have P363. And we will go to page 3 of
16 that exhibit.
17 Q. I think you indicated, Mr. Berikoff, that you drafted several
18 reports --
19 MR. RUSSO: My apologies. I don't believe that --
20 Can we try, I'm sorry, P361. I'm sorry these are not the correct
22 Q. Do you recall an incident, Mr. Berikoff, in which you had
23 presented Mr. Cermak's letter at a check-point and HV soldiers were
24 arguing with other types of soldiers, one who saw authority in the letter
25 and another set that didn't? Do you recall that?
1 A. Yes, I do, sir.
2 Q. Can you tell the Court about that?
3 A. We were down in the Pakovo Selo area assisting the Kenyans
4 evacuate from their OP. On our way back we got stopped -- on our way
5 back from Pakovo Selo to Knin we got stopped at a check-point. They
6 detained us there and -- for a period of time. We showed the letter, a
7 telephone call was made to I guess their operation centre or wherever. A
8 gentleman came, another officer came. There was an argument that took
9 place between the two people with regard to the letter, and whether the
10 signature on the letter, or the name on the letter itself, was a person
11 of authority.
12 Some said it was; others said it was not. After a period of
13 time, we finally mentioned Major Juric's name and very shortly thereafter
14 we were allowed to be proceed.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo --
16 MR. RUSSO: No further questions, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I think you have been more than compensated for the
18 time stolen from you.
19 We will have a break. And may I inform the parties that the
20 Chamber thinks that we can conclude the evidence of this witness today.
21 That will mean that you are limited in your time. The Chamber may have
22 some questions to the witness as well.
23 We will have a break and resume at five minutes past 1.00.
24 --- Recess taken at 12.45 p.m.
25 --- On resuming at 1.06 p.m.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I have a request for the parties, D735 is the
2 supplemental information sheet, which was admitted under seal.
3 Is there any way -- we didn't explore fully the reasons why, but
4 is there a way of having a redacted version which could be made public.
5 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, we have prepared a redacted version. We
6 can it uploaded, that for the court if that --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we'll deal with that so that the public
8 character of this trial is, to the extent possible, guaranteed.
9 MR. KEHOE: I do believe that we're talking -- I do believe we're
10 on the same page with that redaction. We have no objection to that
12 JUDGE ORIE: That's good to hear.
13 Any need for further questions before the Bench will put
14 questions to the witness? Mr. Kehoe.
15 Further cross-examination by Kehoe:
16 Q. With regard to some of the questions that were asked of you by
17 Mr. Russo on redirect, and talking about tanks going through town on the
18 5th, and without going to the -- I will read you that on P744 you have
19 eight tanks going through Knin on the 5th at 6.10 in the morning and one
20 BOV, and a BOV is an armoured -- or an APC isn't it?
21 A. Yes, it is. It's an APC
22 Q. Now, the way that you take out a -- before we go into that,
23 armoured or mechanised units, armoured units that are on the move through
24 an area with infantry with them don't they?
25 A. Normally that is the case, yes.
1 Q. And the most effective way to take out a tank system is with a --
2 an anti-armour rocket system, isn't it?
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. And when you're taking out that type of system, tanks plus
5 infantry, you would go to -- or try to get a preset target area that you
6 mentioned in redirect examination, would you not?
7 A. Yes, that's what I said to Mr. Russo.
8 Q. And that preset spot could be something like a bridge or a
9 cross-roads. Isn't that right?
10 A. A choke point of some sort, yes.
11 Q. Because that would be an important spot for your people shooting
12 artillery to aim.
13 A. Yes it would and it would also be pre-positioned as a target.
14 Q. Now, you noted in your statement in response to some of the
15 questions that were asked by Mr. Russo concerning the right ammunition
16 and the destruction. When you were referring to that in your statement -
17 and this is D284 - about using a weapons or ammunition for the
18 destruction of buildings and facilities, what you mean by "destruction"
19 is to render or attempt to render those buildings unusable. Isn't that
21 A. That's what I said, with regard to my definition of destruction.
22 It was to make it uninhabitable, yes.
23 Q. Uninhabitable or unusable such as a communications facility?
24 A. If they knew where the communications facility was, yes.
25 Q. So when you use the term "destruction" you're not talking about
1 leveling a building like Monte Cassino in the Second World War. You're
2 talking about just rendering it unusable for, for instance, communication
4 A. That's correct.
5 Q. Now, Mr. Russo referred to -- about this air burst rounds. You
6 didn't see any air burst rounds, did you?
7 A. Not that I recall, sir.
8 Q. Okay. Now, with regard to the -- these warlords, tell me, sir,
9 when you wept through D728 and that is the series of maps and certainly
10 we're not going to go through that, you saw the series of offensives that
11 were taking place from 1994 through the fall of 1995. You knew that
12 General Gotovina was on the command of those HV forces as they moved
13 through Bosnia
14 A. Yes, I did. I -- I had learned that through my various briefings
15 that I had.
16 Q. And you also found out that there was significant amount of
17 fighting going into Bosnia
18 A. Yes, there was. There was throughout the Livno valley,
19 Bosansko Grahovo, Bihac area, et cetera.
20 Q. Back it up, sir, did you -- you were also familiar, based on your
21 intelligence position, with these home guard units, were you not?
22 A. Yes, I was.
23 Q. Some of them that had lived in the Krajina area that had come
24 back there?
25 A. Yes, I was.
1 Q. Sir, were you aware that approximately 70.000 of those units were
2 demobilised at approximately the 9th of August?
3 A. I'm not aware of the figure. I was aware of the -- did you say
4 mobilisation or demobilisation?
5 Q. Demobilisation as of 9th of August?
6 A. I was aware that there was supposedly a demobilisation. I do not
7 have any figures, sir.
8 Q. Were you air that those demobilised home guard forces came back
9 into the area with weapons and wearing camouflage and based on what you
10 saw exacted a -- their level of revenge?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, in putting this question to the witness
12 can you tell us how you see whether an act is done in revenge or not.
13 Explain that to the witness.
14 MR. KEHOE: Maybe I will let the witness.
15 Q. You saw what you referenced at various points in your testimony
16 as acts of revenge. Isn't that right?
17 A. Yes, I did, sir.
18 Q. Now, in that observation, did you conclude that these people that
19 were coming back in, these home guard demobilised units, were part of
20 those individuals coming in and exacting revenge?
21 A. That is a possibility.
22 Q. And just one last question, sir, with regard to the matters that
23 were raised by Mr. Kuzmanovic, concerning Mr. Juric and being in these --
24 these grey coveralls.
25 When you observed people that were doing, looting, burning, the
1 things that you saw - and I'm not questioning that, Mr. Berikoff - in
2 camouflage uniforms, you didn't know if they were HV military police or
3 some of these -- these demobilised units just coming back and doing what
4 they were doing for revenge purposeless. Isn't that correct?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Berikoff.
7 MR. KEHOE: I have no further questions.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kehoe.
9 Ms. Higgins.
10 MS. HIGGINS: No further questions. Thank you, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.
12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: No questions, Your Honour. Thank you.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Kinis has one or more questions to you,
15 Mr. Berikoff.
16 Questioned by the Court:
17 JUDGE KINIS: Mr. Berikoff, referring back to your statement,
18 P739, page 4, second paragraph from the bottom.
19 You mentioned here that Major Juric told me and Captain Hill
20 during one of the meetings following Operation Storm that he was his
21 responsibility to clean up area and ensure the Chetniks will not be able
22 to come back in area.
23 Could you please explain your understanding of wording "Chetniks
24 should not come back at the area," would it mean that is's a general
25 understanding of Serb ethnicity at all or it is just question on special
1 revenge groups or war groups. Thank you.
2 A. Yes, Your Honour, it is my understanding that the word Chetniks
3 referred to any Serb, whether it was military, civilian, male, female,
4 child. It was a general term used by most Croats to describe the
5 ethnicity of a Serb.
6 JUDGE KINIS: Thank you for this answer.
7 And next question is, in third paragraph in the same page. There
8 you mentioned such sentence: "Majority of the arson and looting had been
9 done with knowledge of Cermak and his officers."
10 My question is, could you please clarify what do you mean under
11 wording "his officers."
12 Do you know directly his some -- some subordinates, military
13 subordinates of him?
14 A. It is my understanding from the meetings General Cermak had with
15 General Forand and the answers that General Cermak gave to General Forand
16 was that he had informed his troops. By informing his troops, I would
17 assume that he also informed his officers, sir.
18 JUDGE KINIS: And a short question regarding your statement,
19 D284, page 15, line 23 to 27.
20 You mentioned that Croats turned off main water supply to the
21 compound and to Knin.
22 What is your opinion? Was it made for purposefully, is it
23 because this water supply pipe was damaged or there was some -- some
24 intent to create some problems for UN components.
25 A. I think it was a combination of both, Your Honour. At the
1 beginning there was a request from the Croats to -- for assistance from
2 Major Bellerose to assist in repairing the water works. After that,
3 there were occasions when they were turned off and left off for a period
4 of time. Then the water would come back on.
5 So I think it was a combination of both, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE KINIS: Thank you very much.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Berikoff, I have a few questions for you as
9 I think your testimony was that you learned later that when you
10 experienced that on the 29th of July many local UN employees did not show
11 up for work, that this was caused because they had begun to evacuate.
12 Could you tell us from whom you learned that and what it was
13 exactly that you learned about the evacuation? You have told us already
14 something about whether this was influenced by ARSK authorities, but
15 could you tell us a bit more in detail what you learned, from who you
16 learned it, and what it exactly was.
17 A. There was indications of an evacuation evident a couple of days
18 before the offensive. The information was gained through a number of the
19 locals, saying that they had heard that an offensive was about to start.
20 Had also heard from Zagreb
21 time when I went to Primosten and on my way back there was a forced
22 mobilisation by the ARSK. There was soldiers standing alongside many
23 intersections carrying weapons and rucksacks, et cetera. When I asked --
24 when we stopped and asked some of them what was happening they said that
25 they were being mobilised, people were being told to leave the area and
1 that there was a possible offensive, sir.
2 JUDGE ORIE: People were told to leave their area. Was there any
3 specification as told by whom?
4 A. Not that I'm aware of, Your Honour. I don't know, sir.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do I understand that both, then, men of
6 military age would move out because being mobilised and that civilians
7 were moving out as well?
8 A. That's correct, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: You said the information was gained by -- through a
10 number of locals.
11 Did you hear directly from them, or in which way was the
12 information given by these locals channelled to you?
13 A. The locals I'm referring to, Your Honour, are those employees
14 that had come to the compound and informed me that others were leaving.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. During your trips at this time, because you
16 referred to forced mobilisation, did you learn anything from locals
17 outside the UN circles?
18 A. Just through the rumour mill, Your Honour. Nothing specific.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.
20 Could I take you to your third statement; that is the long
21 statement. Page 14, last sentence, where you refer to the same doctor
22 that now wanted our help in evacuating casualties from the Knin hospital
23 because the Croats had, number one, shelled the hospital, and, number
24 two, captured the hospital, and he was afraid of what would happen to the
25 Serb patients that were now under the control of the Serbs.
1 Especially the last portion of this sentence, I do not fully
2 understand what you meant by that.
3 A. To the best of my recollection, Your Honour, the doctor was
4 afraid that if in fact the HV had taken over the hospital, that those
5 Serb patients were in danger.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But the last portion of the sentence reads:
7 "Serb patients that were now under the control of the Serbs."
8 Whereas you say that the hospital had been captured by the
9 Croats. What do I have to understand then being under control of the
11 A. I don't recall, sir, I'm sorry.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any chance that it is just a mistake, that
13 you intended to say were now under the control of the Croats?
14 A. That is possible, Your Honour. I don't recall at this time.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.
16 Then -- let me find it before I ...
17 One second, please.
18 When asked about the shelling to be indiscriminate or not and how
19 you developed your thoughts about that, and I'm referring to page 7649
20 for the parties, you said: "And that is when I formulated my own
21 assessment that it was not indiscriminate, as other people had
23 It was not clear to me to whom you referred when you said "as
24 other people had indicated."
25 A. The other people that I am talking about is people such as
1 General Leslie, General Forand, other -- other UN soldiers, and myself
2 included during my initial assessment when the offensive initially
4 When I went to Sarajevo
5 look at an actual map of the city plan of Knin and saw those targets that
6 were in fact hit and indeed they were military targets, sir.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Do I have to understand this, that you had
8 conversations among yourselves, the people you just mentioned and --
9 A. Yes, we did, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: About whether this was indiscriminate shelling, yes
11 or no.
12 A. That's correct, Your Honour, yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.
14 You have, in your evidence, you state how you were told how the
15 houses were destroyed, light a candle, turn on the gas and leave.
16 Now, you became familiar with some Croatian soldiers who told you
17 this. Could you be more specific where, when, under what circumstances.
18 A. There were some times when we would get stopped at a check-point
19 and have an opportunity to converse with the soldiers that were manning
20 the check-point and we asked how some of these places, if it was to be
21 done deliberately, how some of these places would be destroyed, and that
22 is how we were told. One of the soldiers in particular, I don't recall
23 the location, but one soldier in particular told us that that was one of
24 the methods, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did you hear this once, you were referring to
1 a particular Croatian soldier, or was it at more occasions that this was
2 explained to you?
3 A. It was a couple of times that I heard that. Other explanations
4 given were that there were electrical problems as well and that's what
5 destroyed the house, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In your testimony we also find that some
7 houses were marked by civilian, soldiers, or police as Croatian
8 households and that those were not touched.
9 Could you tell us whether you observed the markings on the
10 houses, or did you observe the houses being marked?
11 A. It was both, Your Honour. On occasion we would drive by an area
12 and we would see the marking on a house. On other occasions, we would
13 see either the civilian police or the HV putting marks on a house that
14 was not to be touched, sir.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, have you considered when you said that
16 those houses were not touched, have you considered that destroyed and
17 burned houses may have had similar markings but not visible anymore after
18 the destruction?
19 A. That may be true, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Have you seen untouched houses without such markings
21 there, where there was a large-scale destruction of houses?
22 A. On occasion, yes, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Have you observed situations where -- let's say in a
24 village or in a certain area where all the houses, untouched were marked
25 as you explained to us.
1 A. No, I did not, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: There were always non-marked houses not being
4 A. That's correct, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you give us an estimate, an assessment
6 of whether that was then an exception that most of the untouched houses
7 would have been marked and only a few, or the other way around, that only
8 a few were marked and that a majority of the untouched houses were
10 A. It is my -- my assessment that this was an exception. It did
11 happen, though, throughout the sector where that did take place, Your
13 JUDGE ORIE: The exception then being that where most of the
14 untouched houses were marked, that a few were not marked and untouched.
15 A. Yes, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Now, you said that they were marked by civilians,
17 soldiers or police. Did you observe markings by all of these three
19 A. Yes, I did, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And do you remember was this at -- did they do the
21 marking together, civilians with soldiers or civilians and police, or
22 soldiers and police, could you tell us how often you saw it and how you
23 saw it done?
24 A. It was done throughout the sector and I saw it on a regular basis
25 as I travelled the sector, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: And would it always be either civilians or police or
2 soldiers, or would you see police together with civilians or soldiers or
3 all three groups together?
4 A. All three groups together at times, depending where in the sector
5 I was. If there was just civilians in the area, in particular up around
6 the Obrovac-Velebit valley or mountain area, it was just civilian. Other
7 areas, it was all three, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: When you're talking about soldiers we have seen that
9 soldiers are -- can be identified by various means. Were they -- when
10 you saw it, were you always convinced by their uniforms and perhaps
11 insignia that they were soldiers of regular troops or would they be --
12 was there any doubt in your mind? Could they have been paramilitaries,
13 could they have been soldiers that were not in their units anymore?
14 A. That is possible, Your Honour. There were occasions when it was
15 the paramilitaries or partially -- wearing partial uniforms, yes, Your
17 JUDGE ORIE: And also occasions where there were full uniforms?
18 A. Yes, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Would these soldiers have the usual weaponry for
20 ordinary soldiers or were they unarmed?
21 A. They would have the weaponry for ordinary soldiers, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Now, same questions in relation to the
23 identification of police involved in this marking. Could you identify
24 what kind of police it was and on the basis of what?
25 A. The police were either wearing camouflage uniforms, the grey
1 coveralls, or the civilian bluish-grey pants and shirt uniform, Your
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for those answers.
4 One final question, as far as the weaponry of paramilitary forces
5 or the forces or the persons who you thought were acting under the
6 command of warlords.
7 You told us that the weaponry they were using, both in quantity
8 and in quality, was better. Was the heaviest kind of weaponry you saw in
9 the hands of those individuals?
10 A. I saw a hand-held rocket launchers of western make or western
11 fabrication. Also, weapons as high as 50-calibre machine-guns, also
12 western style machine-guns sir, or weapon.
13 JUDGE ORIE: No mortars?
14 A. Mortars, I did notice them being western fabrication. They were
15 Yugoslav or former Yugoslavia
16 JUDGE ORIE: Let me make sure that I understood your last answer.
17 They had mortars?
18 A. They had mortars, yes, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: But they were locally fabricated mortars rather than
20 western type mortars.
21 A. That's correct, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Any idea about the -- what calibre?
23 A. It was approximately the 80-millimetre. They also had the
24 smaller caliber as well, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Not the 120-millimetre?
1 A. I did not physically see any myself, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for those answers.
3 Any further questions?
4 MS. HIGGINS: I have very short three further questions arising
5 from Judge Kinis's questions, if I may.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please.
7 Could I try to find out whether there is any need for the other
9 MR. KEHOE: No, Your Honour, nothing from General Gotovina.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.
11 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Nothing, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, what can we except for you, nothing.
13 Then Ms. Gillian has the floor.
14 Further cross-examination by Ms. Higgins:
15 Q. Mr. Berikoff, very briefly. In relation to the point that was
16 raised by His Honour Judge Kinis and the reference to Mr. Cermak it would
17 be right to say that the reference in your statement was based on hearsay
18 that you recount and received from General Forand, as you were not
19 present in any such meeting concerning that matter. Correct?
20 A. I was in one meeting where it was brought up, ma`am. I was not a
21 participant in the meeting. I was only there. Other than that, yes,
22 you're correct, ma`am.
23 Q. And you and I discussed yesterday this particular passage, in
24 fact, where you confirmed to me that you had not identified what you
25 meant by troops. Do you remember?
1 A. Yes, I did, ma`am.
2 Q. And you are, I'm sure, not in a position to do so today?
3 A. That's correct, ma`am.
4 Q. And you confirmed for me yesterday that you had neither seen nor
5 heard of any documents or orders sent by Mr. Cermak to any troops, be
6 they army or police. Correct, Mr. Berikoff?
7 A. In what context, ma`am?
8 Q. In the context of you hadn't seen any orders sent by Mr. Cermak
9 to any police units or army units which we discussed yesterday?
10 A. No, I did not, ma`am. You are correct.
11 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Berikoff.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Higgins. And I will tell the parties
13 that I will not use their first names as by mistake I did a minute ago.
14 I know all your first names, but I could mention all ones and then say
15 that we are now straight on the record, but I'll refrain from doing that.
16 If there are no further questions, then, Mr. Berikoff, this
17 concludes your testimony. At least it didn't take you until Thursday,
18 which nevertheless it was three full days in which you answered the
19 questions of the parties and the Bench. I would like to thank you very
20 much for giving this testimony in this court and I wish you a safe trip
21 home again.
22 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much, Your Honours, Defence, and
23 Prosecution. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please escort Mr. Berikoff
25 out of the courtroom.
1 [The witness stands down]
2 JUDGE ORIE: We have five minutes left. Is there -- if there's
3 any procedural issue you think you could deal with in five minutes and
4 which is urgent, we could use the five minutes because it makes no sense
5 to call the next witness for five minutes.
6 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I would not call this matter urgent.
7 However, I did -- would like to again address the issue of the proofing
8 notes that the Court had raised earlier. I just want to make sure we're
9 getting clear direction from the Court and I clearly understand what the
10 Court wants us to do with those.
11 Of course as the Court knows, there's several reasons why we put
12 together proofing notes so they often include a lot of material that
13 wouldn't fall under the clarification and correction of prior statements.
14 Does the Court want that information as well or should we parse out and
15 have two statements -- or two proofing notes per witness?
16 JUDGE ORIE: No. As matters stand at this moment, I take it that
17 the Prosecution on the basis of the proofing notes will seek the
18 correction, additions, et cetera which it considers most relevant.
19 I can also imagine that in these proofing notes information
20 appears which is mainly there to put the Defence on notice that this is
21 what the witness told you during the proofing sessions and which you
22 consider at that moment not to be very relevant but that you leave it to
23 the Defence to see whether they find any exculpatory elements in it or
24 any matters on which they have a different judgement as far as relevance
25 is concerned.
1 So therefore as you said before, Mr. Russo, you would seek in the
2 oral testimony to deal with all the matters you consider relevant for the
3 Prosecution's case and leave out anything you think would not assist the
4 Chamber in finally making determinations this Chamber will have to make.
5 There are several ways of dealing with it. Of course, you could
6 consult with the Defence and say, I want to raise this and this and this
7 issues, is there another matter you consider of such relevance that I
8 should deal with it, then you of course could consider whether or not to
9 add that. I do not expect you to tender the proofing notes which
10 contains at least some information you might consider not to be relevant
11 and not to be of any probative value. At the same time, it can be as
12 apparently happened today, that the Defence considers matters in there
13 which have not touched upon relevant and therefore they're seeking to
14 rely on these proofing notes.
15 Now, there again several techniques can be used. If it's one
16 line the line could be read by the counsel into the record and we'll hear
17 the answer of the witness. Sometimes if it is more, then of course it
18 might be a practical way of introducing it by tendering the proofing
19 notes. I'm certainly not encouraging the Defence to do that, if
20 relevant, important topics have all been dealt with by Mr. Russo, and if
21 we can do without additional paperwork. However, I can imagine
22 circumstances in which it makes sense to do so.
23 That would be my very practical guidance on this matter.
24 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: If there's any comments on it, then, of course, I
1 would listen to it and see whether we need to adjust the guidance.
2 I hear of no further comments.
3 We adjourn until tomorrow, the 4th of September, 9.00, Courtroom
5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.46 p.m.
6 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 4th day of
7 September, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.