Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 28650

 1                           Wednesday, 2 June 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone in and around the

 6     courtroom.

 7             Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning to

 9     everyone in and around the courtroom.  This is case number IT-06-90-T,

10     the Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina, et al.  Thank you.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

12             Before an opportunity will be given to the Prosecution to call

13     its witness in its re-opened case, I'd first like to put something on the

14     record.

15             On the 27th of May, 2010, the Trial Chamber instructed the

16     Prosecution and the Victims and Witness Section informally that both

17     Witness 177 and Witness 178 should be present on the Tribunal premises on

18     Thursday morning - that is, tomorrow morning - and are to be kept

19     separate during the day.  It is in the same context, and reasons will be

20     formally put on the record later, that we'll hear the evidence of the

21     witnesses today and tomorrow, in private session, which doesn't mean that

22     that evidence will be kept confidential, but for those two days it will.

23     The reasons for that will be put in detail on the record soon.  The

24     Chamber verified that the witness who will testify today, he did not ask

25     for any protective measures.  So it's a -- as matters stand now, it is a

Page 28651

 1     temporary measure.

 2             Mr. Kehoe.

 3             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Mr. President, at this point, just simply

 4     because there has been no Rule 79 or 75 basis for this, we just want to

 5     preserve our objection to proceeding in private session.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's clear.  We'll put on the record in full

 7     detail in open session what the reasons.

 8             MR. KEHOE:  I understand, Mr. President.  I just preserve my

 9     objection at this point.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that's clear.

11             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Same here, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Same to you.

13             MR. KAY:  Yes, Your Honour.  We are slightly concerned because

14     there has been so much publicity about this matter as the Court knows and

15     the Court has referred to in earlier proceedings in Croatia and

16     elsewhere.  And this will be the first public opportunity of that

17     evidence to be properly heard, and so we are concerned with the measure.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I do understand that.  And as may be clear to

19     the parties it is not the intention of this Trial Chamber to keep this

20     confidential.  It should be part of the public record.  It's a -- as

21     matters stand now a temporary measure for which the reasons will be given

22     in detail, and it's clear that all parties reserve their positions in

23     relation to this measure.

24             MR. KAY:  Much obliged, Your Honour.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Anything from the Prosecution side in relation to

Page 28652

 1     this?

 2             Then we move into private session.  And we'll most likely stay in

 3     private session for the two days to come.

 4      [Private session] [Confidentiality lifted by later order of the Chamber]

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in private session, Your Honours.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

 7             Is the Prosecution ready to call its next witness.

 8             MR. HEDARALY:  Yes, Mr. President.  The Prosecution would like to

 9     call witness 176, Mr. Jozo Bilobrk.

10                           [The witness entered court]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Good, Mr. Bilobrk.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Before you give evidence, you're required to make a

14     solemn declaration, that you will speak the truth, the whole truth, and

15     nothing but the truth.  The text is now handed out to you.  May I invite

16     you to make that solemn declaration.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

18     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Bilobrk.  Please be seated.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bilobrk, the Chamber understands that you did

22     not seek any -- apparently you do not hear me.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do, actually.  I hear you.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  The Chamber is informed that you're not

25     seeking any protective measures; is that correct?

Page 28653

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that is correct.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bilobrk, nevertheless, the Chamber decided, not

 3     because you're seeking protective measures, that your testimony will be

 4     heard in private session.  That is, that it is no secret that you're

 5     testifying here, but the content of your testimony is not to be disclosed

 6     to the outside world.  And most likely, this is a temporary measure only,

 7     which is related to the integrity of the proceedings rather than anything

 8     else.  Just for you to know, that, at this moment that no one will hear

 9     your testimony.

10             Is that clear?  If you have any questions in relation to that --

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  -- you may ask them.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no questions, I understand

14     fully what you have just said.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Then you will first be examined by Mr. Hedaraly.

16     Mr. Hedaraly is counsel for the Prosecution.

17             Mr. Hedaraly, you may proceed.

18             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. President.

19                           WITNESS:  JOZO BILOBRK

20                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

21                           Examination by Mr. Hedaraly:

22        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Bilobrk.

23        A.   Good morning, Mr. Prosecutor.

24        Q.   Can you please state your full name and date of birth for the

25     record.

Page 28654

 1        A.   Jozo Bilobrk.  I was born on the 13th of September, 1967.

 2        Q.   And can you tell us what is your current occupation?

 3        A.   I'm a police officer.

 4        Q.   What was your occupation in August 1995?

 5        A.   I was a police officer.

 6        Q.   Before coming here to testify today, did you seek any advice from

 7     anyone regarding your testimony?

 8        A.   Yes, I did.  Not about the case or my testimony but about the

 9     arrival in The Hague.  But -- about my coming here.

10        Q.   Who did you talk to?

11        A.   I talked to a judge at the county court.  But not about the case.

12     I spoke to him about the arrival at the The Hague and -- and possibly if

13     somebody wanted to talk to me before I entered the court, how I should

14     talk to them, and how I should react to such a request.

15        Q.   What did this judge tell you?

16        A.   He asked me if I had been interviewed by those who were supposed

17     to receive those interviews, who requested those interviews, if --

18     officially.  I said yes.  And then he told me that his recommendation

19     would be not to talk to anybody again before I entered court.

20        Q.   Can you tell the Court why you sought this advice from this

21     judge?

22        A.   Because I remember that during the investigation there was a lot

23     of pressure, letters were written to replace my statements, although I

24     never provided those statements.  I thought that somebody might want to

25     get in touch with me again, and in order to avoid doing something wrong

Page 28655

 1     or feeling uncomfortable, I got in touch with that judge.

 2        Q.   Since you arrived in The Hague, did you meet with any of the

 3     parties?

 4        A.   No, I didn't.  I only met with the OTP.

 5        Q.   And did you discuss with the OTP any of the substance of your

 6     expected testimony today?

 7        A.   The gentleman from the Prosecution suggested that I should be

 8     prepared for the trial.  We started going over the interview that I had

 9     already provided to them, and when I realized that they wanted to discuss

10     the statement that I'd already had, I said that I would retain the right

11     not to say anything else, if there, indeed, was that right, and if there

12     is anything else that they wanted to ask me, that they were welcome to do

13     so here today in the courtroom.

14        Q.   Was that the end of your interview with the Prosecution?

15        A.   Well, I requested from the Prosecution an official translation of

16     the interview that the OTP had conducted with me, because I had not had

17     that official translation.  Since I don't speak the English language, and

18     I was provided only with the Defence's version of the interview

19     translated into Croatian, and I could not check whether the Defence's

20     translation tallied with what was in the original, that's why I requested

21     from the Prosecution to provide me with the official translation of my

22     statement in English.

23        Q.   Just to clarify:  You requested the English translation of your

24     statement to the Prosecution?

25        A.   No.  What I requested was a translation into Croatian.  I

Page 28656

 1     provided a statement to the OTP, and when I was interviewed by the OTP, I

 2     signed the statement in English, which means that I myself could not read

 3     the statement myself.  There was no statement in -- in Croatian that I

 4     could sign -- sign after reading it.

 5        Q.   I'm sorry, I misspoke.  You requested a Croatian translation of

 6     your statement to the Prosecution, right?

 7        A.   Yes, yes, Croatian.  Croatian.  Croatian translation, yes.

 8        Q.   Did you request any other of the statements that you had made?

 9        A.   Yes.  I also requested the statement that I provided to the

10     county court in Zagreb.  I only had one opportunity to see it, and

11     that's -- that's why I wanted to have another look at it.

12        Q.   Thank you.  I now want to move to August 1995 and your -- and

13     your role in and around Knin.

14             Can you tell the Court --

15             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, if I can just raise a matter at this

16     stage, and I apologise to my learned friend.  It's just a procedural

17     matter.

18             The Court will recall that a 92 ter filing was made by the

19     Defence in respect of interviews with this witness.  That was served on

20     the parties and the Court, and a document was filed by the Prosecution

21     not objecting to that becoming a 92 ter exhibit.

22             It occurs to me, because that contains a great deal of background

23     and information from the witness and was taken in his own language, that,

24     in accordance with the previous procedures that we've adopted during this

25     trial, that it would be appropriate for that to be made an exhibit at

Page 28657

 1     this stage.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly.

 3             MR. HEDARALY:  Your Honour, that is a statement taken by the

 4     Defence, that they wish to tender into evidence.  The Prosecution is

 5     calling this witness viva voce.  It will put the questions to the witness

 6     that it feels is appropriate to get the evidence in front of the Chamber,

 7     and then if the Cermak Defence wants to tender its statement under

 8     Rule 92 ter as it has suggested it would do, if they then meet the

 9     requirements of the rule, then as the Prosecution stated, at that time,

10     it will have no objection.  But at this time it is premature.  This is

11     the Prosecution's examination and it should not be limited or constrained

12     to put into evidence a statement taken by the Defence.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, to put into evidence, I do not know what

14     Mr. -- it may be very practical to deal with certain matters which are

15     not are in dispute and if they are written down in that statement.

16             Another way of dealing with that is to have it marked for

17     identification for the time being, so that reference can be made to it

18     and that it's at least part of the record.  Although not yet admitted

19     into evidence.

20             MR. KAY:  Yes, Your Honour.  My thorough Case Manager has ever

21     reminded me that, in fact, Your Honour introduced the statements during

22     the Prosecution case as a way of dealing with this procedurally.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

24             MR. KAY:  I can't remember the name of the witness now.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  I remember that we once had, instead of

Page 28658

 1     cross-examination we had a 92 ter statement which served as a

 2     cross-examination.  It was one occasion.  That was a French witness.

 3     But --

 4             MR. HEDARALY:  Mr. President, there was -- there is also a

 5     distinction when the Prosecution -- it did happen in the past, but when

 6     the Prosecution also tendered 92 ter statement and then, of course, it

 7     would make sense if there is any contradiction in those statements to

 8     have that resolved before.  But --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me -- I see that there is a bit of a differences

10     in that we find ourselves in a very special situation.

11             Mr. Hedaraly, if I could urge you to, to the extent - and you

12     certainly have looked at all the statements quite carefully, I take it -

13     that we don't waste time by not referring to a document on undisputed

14     matters or to read from it or to refer to it in any other way.  But I do

15     understand that you're not the one who is seeking that document to be

16     admitted into evidence.

17             Let's try to take the practical approach, while, at the same

18     time, fully observing the different positions of the parties.  If I could

19     invite you to do that, then I'll let you go.

20             I also want to inform the parties that we'd like, on the basis of

21     the estimates given, it should be possible to conclude the testimony of

22     Mr. Bilobrk today.  Two hours Prosecution; one hour for one of the

23     Defence teams; one session for another Defence team.  That should do.

24             Please proceed, Mr. Hedaraly.

25             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. President.

Page 28659

 1        Q.   Can you please describe briefly what your role was in and around

 2     Knin in August 1995.

 3        A.   From the police administration of Split -- or, rather, Split and

 4     Dalmatia county, I was referred to the police administration of Zadar to

 5     assist them in the territory of the police station in Knin, with regard

 6     to the humane disposal of the dead bodies that were found there.

 7        Q.   And what would be the general procedure for that?  What would

 8     be -- what would do you on a -- on a given day, generally speaking.

 9        A.   When we receive information that a dead body is found in an area,

10     I and my colleagues would -- will go there with members of the civilian

11     protection and pyrotechnicians.  We carry out our part of the job which

12     is taking photos of the dead body, making a video-clip of the dead body,

13     the inspection of the clothes, the making record of any artifacts that

14     are found by the body, personal artifacts and personal documents, or

15     anything else that might help us identify such a dead body.  Taking

16     finger-prints, if possible, and then when that part of the job is

17     finished, members of the civilian protection, or, rather, before the

18     photos and video-clips are taken, the members of the civilian protection

19     put a number on the body, and once our job was done, that dead body was

20     put in a bag and was transferred for burial at the city cemetery of Knin.

21        Q.   Did ever conduct an on-site investigation when you collected any

22     of these bodies?

23        A.   Never.

24        Q.   I want to talk about the removal of the bodies on the 27th of

25     August, which included the removal of the bodies that were found in

Page 28660

 1     Grubori.

 2             And I first want to focus on your recollection of what happened

 3     as you sit here today, and then we can go through some documents, if that

 4     assists your memory.

 5             First of all, on the 27th of August, who provided you the

 6     information regarding the bodies to be collected that day?

 7        A.   Before I answer that, I would like to say that yesterday you

 8     asked me about what I remembered.  I told you that I don't -- no longer

 9     had -- have recollections.  I have knowledge because Mr. Cermak's Defence

10     showed me all those documents.  So I can no longer speak from

11     recollection.  I can speak about the things that I know now.  That have I

12     full knowledge of.

13        Q.   What I want to do is I'll ask you -- I'll ask you some questions

14     and if you don't -- you answer on the basis of your knowledge, if that

15     knowledge is based on the documents you were showed, you can say so, and

16     if that knowledge is based on something else, we'll explore that.

17             Just listen to my questions and answer them as we go along, and

18     if you want to seek any clarification as to my question, you should feel

19     free to do so.

20        A.   Very well.

21        Q.   So let me ask you again:  Who provided you the information

22     regarding the bodies to be collected that day?

23        A.   We received information at the operations duty center of the Knin

24     police station.

25        Q.   And at that time was any information given to you about the

Page 28661

 1     bodies that you had to collect?  For example, the circumstance in which

 2     they were -- they were killed, how the bodies were found, or any of that

 3     sort of information?

 4        A.   We received information that in the hamlet of Grubori there were

 5     five or six dead bodies of the people who were killed.

 6        Q.   Were you given any additional information about these five or six

 7     bodies?

 8        A.   No.  Before we arrived in the hamlet, we didn't know anything.

 9     Once we saw the bodies, we -- we knew more.

10        Q.   Okay.  Now, at some point, did you meet with General Cermak?

11        A.   Yes, I met General Cermak at Plavno.  It's on the local road

12     nearby a bridge, a little bridge.

13        Q.   Now, what is -- what is the basis for -- let me repeat my

14     question.

15             Now your answer that you met him at Plavno, is that based on your

16     recollection, or is it based on documents that were shown to you by the

17     Cermak Defence?

18        A.   It's based on the documentation.  We went to the field daily and

19     we set off in front of the police station.

20             I gave my statement to the OTP, and I stated that the meeting

21     took place in front of the police station.  But, on that day, I wasn't

22     able to review the documentation showing what I was doing on that day,

23     because there was another field mission.  And once I had given it a

24     thought and reviewed the documents, I concluded that it was physically

25     impossible for us meet in front of the police station at Knin.

Page 28662

 1             I know that we were waiting for someone at Plavno and that we met

 2     someone there, so it is there that we met.

 3        Q.   Other than the fact that you were shown documents by the Cermak

 4     Defence that, as you said, led to you conclude that that's where the

 5     meeting took place, do you have any independent recollection of where

 6     that meeting took place, yourself, from your memory, can you picture it,

 7     or is it solely based on the documents you were shown?

 8        A.   No.  Once I was shown the documents that show what you did at the

 9     time, of course, after 15 years you don't remember all the details.  But

10     having seen the documents, regardless of the Defence or anybody else, I

11     remembered meeting General Cermak at Plavno.  And I also remember how we

12     met.

13        Q.   So if I understand correctly, you're saying that when you saw

14     these documents, that triggered your memory that you met him in Plavno,

15     because earlier you said that that was a logical conclusion that you've

16     derived from the documents.  I'm just trying to understand which one it

17     is.  Was it your memory now that you remember meeting him in Plavno, or

18     is it just a conclusion that you are deriving from the documents?

19        A.   I remember us meeting at Plavno after I had reviewed the

20     documents.  So this is not a conclusion; it is not a conjecture.  The

21     documents refreshed my memory.

22        Q.   Let me briefly go through some of these documents that you were

23     shown.

24             MR. HEDARALY:  Let's start with 65 ter 2D00-860, please.

25        Q.   And, Mr. Bilobrk, that was -- do you remember that as being one

Page 28663

 1     of the documents that were shown to you?

 2        A.   I don't know if it's the very document.  But this is one of the

 3     documents - as far as I can tell from the handwriting, which is mine -

 4     that I filled out.

 5             MR. HEDARALY:  If we can go to the third page of this document.

 6        Q.   And this is one of the documents that shows that, on the 27th of

 7     August, you also collected a body in Strmica and in Plavno, in addition

 8     to the ones in Grubori; is that right?

 9        A.   Yes, that's correct.  It follows from this document.

10        Q.   There's also a 65 ter 2D00-62?

11             MR. KAY:  Could we make the previous document an exhibit at this

12     stage, Your Honour?

13             MR. HEDARALY:  It's an attachment to the 92 ter statement, so

14     there's no objection to that.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Then -- but you'd like to have it in evidence now?

16             MR. KAY:  If it assists the Court, because if we refer to it, we

17     then have a live exhibit number.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Registrar.

19                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  I take it, since it was an attachment to the -- that

21     it's the Defence which now that tenders this document, although at a bit

22     of an unusual moment.

23             Please proceed -- Mr. Registrar the number would be.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this document shall be assigned

25     Exhibit D2042, thank you.

Page 28664

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  D2042 is admitted into evidence.  It will be a

 2     public document; although, the content should remain confidential

 3     until -- as long as the confidentiality of this hearing has not been

 4     lifted.

 5             Please proceed.

 6             MR. HEDARALY:  If we can then go to 65 ter 2D862.

 7        Q.   Which are the various -- you will see are the various forms that

 8     were filled out in that time-period.

 9             Do you remember reviewing these documents as well?  They were

10     also shown to you?

11        A.   That's correct.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly, I see in the original 289, whereas in

13     the English translation I see 299.  I further see that --

14             MR. HEDARALY:  There was only a portion translated by the Defence

15     for the relevant day.  The originals included the whole series for a

16     period of five or six days.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  So this is not a translation?

18             MR. HEDARALY:  It's a partial translation of the B/C/S documents.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I see in the original on the first line

20     reference to what seems -- looks very much as civilian, whereas I find in

21     the English, soldier.

22             Now I could make -- I could be --

23             MR. TIEGER:  I'm sorry.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  I see different numbers as well.

25             MR. HEDARALY:  There are a number of these forms, one per page,

Page 28665

 1     and the original spans, I think, 20 or 25 pages.  Only a portion of these

 2     pages were translated, so the first page that we see in the English does

 3     not correspond to the first page in the B/C/S right now.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that's fine.  Just for me to know that usually

 5     we see an English version and a B/C/S version of the same document.

 6     Here, apparently, let's then forget about the English translation of this

 7     B/C/S original.

 8             MR. HEDARALY:  I think --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Because it doesn't correspond.

10             MR. HEDARALY:  I think if we go to page --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Now -- yes, now we have -- yes, now I see the

12     numbers are corresponding.  Yes.

13             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

14        Q.   And you see that is one of the bodies that was collected on the

15     27th of August in Strmica; is that correct?

16        A.   That's correct.

17             MR. HEDARALY:  And if we turn the page in both English and B/C/S.

18        Q.   We will see the first of the bodies that was collected from

19     Grubori; is that right?

20        A.   That's correct.

21        Q.   And if we turn the page, we'll see a second body collected in

22     Grubori.  Can you confirm that that's the case?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   If we turn the page again, we'll have the third victim from

25     Grubori.

Page 28666

 1        A.   That's right.

 2        Q.   And if we again turn the page, we'll have the fourth Grubori

 3     victim.

 4        A.   That's correct.

 5        Q.   And the next page will the fifth and last victim you collected in

 6     Grubori that day?

 7        A.   That's correct.  Yes, that's -- yes, it's all right.

 8        Q.   And if we go to the next page, we will see the last body you

 9     collected on the 27th of August in Plavno.

10        A.   That's correct.

11        Q.   So these documents were also shown to you in your interview with

12     the Defence; is that right?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   And these documents also show that, on that day, you collected

15     bodies not only in Grubori but also in Strmica and in Plavno?

16        A.   That's correct.

17             MR. HEDARALY:  If we can have 2D00 -- we can have this one as

18     a -- if Mr. Kay wants to tender it, we won't object.

19             MR. KAY:  I'm much obliged to my learned friend.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, the number of this series of

21     documents would be?

22             THE REGISTRAR:  This document shall be assigned Exhibit D2043

23     thank you.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  D2043 is admitted into evidence.  And as far as the

25     public character of it, the same applies, as I said before.

Page 28667

 1             Please proceed.

 2             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 3        Q.   Now another document that was shown to you was 65 ter 2D00-859.

 4     And that was a document generally discussing the -- the deployment of

 5     police officers; is that right?

 6        A.   Could you please show me the second page, if there is one, so I

 7     can see the whole document.

 8        Q.   Of course.

 9        A.   This is a document that was shown to me.

10        Q.   Now, this document doesn't discuss anything about what happened

11     in Plavno that day; correct?

12        A.   Correct.

13             MR. HEDARALY:  If my learned friend wants to tender this

14     document.

15             MR. KAY:  Yes, please, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Just for my information, the witness said, "Can I

17     look at page 2 so that I have a look at the whole of the document," it's

18     a five-page document, but I just want to verify that the witness is happy

19     with having seen two pages and not the whole of the document.

20             Mr. Bilobrk, you are satisfied that this is the document you saw,

21     even if it contains more pages?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would like to see all of the

23     pages of this document too.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  It was a bit ambiguous, Mr. Hedaraly, whether he

25     wanted to see just the second page or the whole of the document.

Page 28668

 1             This page 3 is now on your screen.

 2             Perhaps we move on to page 4.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  And page 5 in the English, but there are only four

 5     pages in B/C/S.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All right.  I read it.  I've seen

 7     the document.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Mr. Registrar, the number would be.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit D2044.  Thank you.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  D2044 is admitted into evidence.  The same applies,

11     as far as the public character is concerned.

12             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. President.

13        Q.   Another document you were shown was 65 ter 2D00-861.

14             And if we go to the third page of this document in the original -

15     it's the correct page in the English - now that document, again, shows

16     that on the 27th of August, in addition to the bodies in Grubori, you

17     collected a body in Strmica and in Plavno; is that right?

18        A.   That's right.

19             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, if this may be made an exhibit, please.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, the number would be.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  The number would be Exhibit D2045.  Thank you.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Is admitted into evidence.  Same condition as far as

23     the public character is concerned.

24             Please proceed.

25             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. President.

Page 28669

 1        Q.   You were also shown 65 ter 2D00-863.

 2             And if we move through these documents one page at a time, can

 3     you confirm that this is the information regarding the body that was

 4     collected in Plavno, in addition to the ones in Grubori, on the 27th of

 5     August.

 6        A.   Yes.  By the identification number that we put on the corpse this

 7     is 542, Stevan Vidovic.  If you could turn to page 1, because I can't

 8     really remember all of it.  Yes, in the village of Plavno, that's

 9     correct.

10             MR. HEDARALY:  And this one can be made an exhibit I suspect.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, the number would be.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  This would be Exhibit D2046.  Thank you.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  D2046 is admitted into evidence.  Same applies as to

14     the public character.

15             Please proceed.

16             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you.

17        Q.   And you were also shown 65 ter 1414, which, this time, is the

18     identification form of the victim of the body that you collected in

19     Strmica.  You'll see the name and the number come up as well.

20             MR. HEDARALY:  We can move through the pages slowly so the

21     witness has the time to look at them.  If we can move to the next page,

22     if there is -- okay.

23        Q.   Do you remember that document also being shown to you about the

24     body that you collected in Strmica?

25        A.   This is a document that was shown to me, but I cannot remember by

Page 28670

 1     the number.  I would have to look at the identification form, so only

 2     then I would be able to tell where the body was found.  Merely by looking

 3     at the body, it's hard to say.

 4        Q.   But you remember being shown that -- that picture?

 5        A.   Yes, yes.

 6             MR. HEDARALY:  Can I have that as an exhibit as well, on behalf

 7     of the Defence.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  This document shall be assigned Exhibit D2047.

10     Thank you.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  D2047 is admitted into evidence.  Same applies as to

12     the public character.

13             MR. HEDARALY:

14        Q.   Now the last contemporaneous document that was shown to you was

15     D57, which is the log-book of the Knin police station.

16             MR. HEDARALY:  And if we go to page 59 of the English and page 61

17     of the B/C/S.

18        Q.   Do you remember being shown that document, Mr. Bilobrk?

19        A.   Yes.

20             MR. HEDARALY:  I thought that was page 61 of the original.  Is

21     that ...

22             If we can go one page before, please; entry number 193.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  I think Mr. Hedaraly was -- yes.

24             MR. HEDARALY:

25        Q.   Now you were shown the --

Page 28671

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  No, that's not 193.

 2             MR. HEDARALY:  There we go.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  There we are.  Yes.

 4             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

 5        Q.   And you were shown -- one of the entries you were shown was entry

 6     193, where this is a verbal report that information had been received

 7     that in Plavno village, Grubori hamlet, on 25 August, two male bodies

 8     were found.

 9             And then in the next column, it says that it was agreed with

10     Chief Cedo Romanic that an on-site investigation would be conducted in

11     the morning of 27 August and that civilian protection went to the scene

12     at 1100 on 27 August and removed the bodies.

13             And you were also shown entry number 198, which is two pages

14     later in the English.  And here there's a report of a decomposing body in

15     Strmica village, and it states that civilian protection is informed that

16     Jukic sent his officers to remove the bodies at 1100, and that seems to

17     be also on the 27th of August.

18             So you were shown these two entries as well; is that correct?

19        A.   Yes, that's correct.

20        Q.   Now, can you tell us based -- and these were the contemporaneous

21     documents from the time they were shown to you.  Now, can you tell us,

22     looking at this, what -- what triggered your memory that your meeting

23     with General Cermak was in Plavno?

24        A.   In the log-book of events on these two pages that contain the

25     reports on bodies at Plavno and Grubori, we received reports at 1100

Page 28672

 1     hours at the operational duty center of the Knin police station.  That's

 2     where we received the report.  And the duty officer mentioned that.

 3     He -- he states that both entries were received at 1100.  Because he

 4     always assigns a time to every entry.  If there had been other bodies

 5     elsewhere of which we had knowledge at the same time, we would have had

 6     five such entries, all at the same time, all saying 1100 hours.

 7             So we were sent off to Plavno.  Ours first field mission was to

 8     Strmica.  We assigned numbers to the dead bodies in the sequence that we

 9     processed them during the sanitation.  The first body would be assigned a

10     smaller number, and that's how we would proceed.

11             After processing the body, I remember that, at a distance of

12     about 30 kilometres, because that's a distance -- that's a distance to

13     Strmica.  So we took some time to get there and return to Plavno.  These

14     documents refreshed my memory after 15 years, because that's a long time

15     for anybody to remember some things without reviewing documents.

16        Q.   I understand.  And I also understand that these documents show

17     that on that day you also went to Strmica to collect a body.  I'm not --

18     I'm not questioning that.  I'm simply ask you what refreshed your memory

19     that the meeting with General Cermak took place in Plavno, based on the

20     fact that you collected a body in Strmica and also in Grubori that day.

21     If -- if there -- if both instructions were given to you at 1100 in Knin,

22     isn't it possible that that meeting took place outside the Knin police

23     station before you went off to Strmica or to Plavno, or wherever else?

24        A.   No.  These documents jogged my memory.  When we left for Plavno,

25     a column of vehicles was waiting on the road, and we joined the people

Page 28673

 1     from the civil protection who took to us Plavno because we didn't know

 2     the area.  And we joined their column of vehicles.  I'm certain that

 3     that's where the meeting with General Cermak took place.

 4        Q.   Let's talk about this meeting with General Cermak.

 5             So when you arrived there, who was General Cermak with?

 6        A.   General Cermak was with a group of people, and that group also

 7     involved soldiers, members of special police.  There was some 15 people

 8     perhaps all together.  There were also journalists.  Some 15 to 20 people

 9     all together with their -- me and my colleague joined them.  Four members

10     of civil protection also joined them, and I believe that there were two

11     or three explosives experts who also joined the group, which pushed the

12     number to approximately 25 to 30 people.  I didn't count heads.

13             But, in any case, the group that was there, in the village of

14     Plavno where we joined the column, General Cermak was there with the --

15     that group of people.

16        Q.   And what is the first thing you remember about this encounter?

17     Did you approach this group, or did this group approach you?

18        A.   We joined the group of people.

19        Q.   So you joined the entire group of people?

20        A.   Yes, that's correct.

21        Q.   And what did you hear from the group?

22        A.   We joined the conversation.  At one point, a person in the group

23     mentioned the fact that weapons were left.  They had all -- already been

24     talking before our arrival.  I don't know what they were discussing.

25             In any case, a couple minutes after we joined them, somebody

Page 28674

 1     mentioned weapons and the fact that weapons were left.  And when I heard

 2     that some weapons had been left, I reacted.  I didn't know, first of all,

 3     what we were waiting for, who we were waiting for.  We were told that we

 4     should be there until somebody came, but I didn't know who -- I didn't

 5     know what, I didn't know how many.

 6             In any case, what I knew was that there was some bodies in the

 7     village of Grubori and that we were supposed to deal with those.  And

 8     when that person, that somebody mentioned weapons that were left --

 9        Q.   What do you mean by [microphone not activated].

10             MR. KAY:  Can I just -- I'm sorry to do this.  But it is for good

11     reason that the -- I have information that the translation from 24:19

12     down to the end of that answer in the tense that is being used is -- is

13     incorrect.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

15             MR. HEDARALY:  That was my question.

16             MR. KAY:  Yes.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If you are going to clarify that,

18     Mr. Hedaraly, apparently it struck you as well.

19             MR. KAY:  And not being a specialist, but I've just been given

20     information that the sense of what has been said is not correct.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  I do understand that Mr. Hedaraly --

22             MR. KAY:  Yes.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  -- wants to seek clarification.

24             Perhaps you do it by going through the answer and see in what

25     respect it is not correct.

Page 28675

 1             Please proceed.

 2             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you.

 3        Q.   Mr. Bilobrk, your answer was translated to us -- was interpreted

 4     to us as you heard that weapons were left, that you heard that weapons

 5     were left.  Several times you said that in the -- in the past tense.  Can

 6     you tell us what is it that you heard?

 7        A.   That weapons should be left.  That the first thing that should be

 8     done was to leave weapons.

 9        Q.   And was that said loudly or softly?

10        A.   Some people were talking about that behind my back.  Nobody spoke

11     directly to me.  It was just what people were saying.  I don't know who

12     said it to whom.  I didn't pay too much attention.

13        Q.   Was the entire group together at that time?

14        A.   When we're talking about a group of people, such a group of

15     people could be the group that are sitting here in the courtroom.  We are

16     a group of people.  And the same thing was true of Plavno.  Not everybody

17     was standing close together.  They were scattered in smaller groups, two

18     or three people would be talking, standing there and talking to each

19     other, but, in any case, they all formed a large group of people that

20     belong together.

21        Q.   Could you tell who from this group of people made that

22     suggestions [sic], that weapons should be placed?

23             MR. KAY:  No, that was not the word that was used.

24             MR. HEDARALY:  Well, actually, that weapons should be left.

25             MR. KAY:  Please, please.

Page 28676

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but I -- as a matter of fact, I wanted to seek

 2     clarification of that.  I refrained from it but since it now becomes in

 3     dispute.

 4             Weapons should be left suggests that there were weapons, would

 5     then -- should be left is that they should remain where they were.  Was

 6     that it.  Or was it that people had seen weapons and that they wanted to

 7     put those weapons in the same position where they had found them.

 8             What was the gist of the suggestion?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, yesterday I received

10     the translation into Croatian of the statement that I provided to the

11     OTP.  And in that statement, as I read it, I read the statement, and the

12     verb there is to place weapons.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bilobrk, I thought that there was some

14     ambiguity.  Whatever you read yesterday and how it was translated, we

15     might come to that at a later stage.

16             What I would like to know is what you just testified.  Weapons

17     should be left, is that that they were still in the position where they

18     were found or that they had to be put again in the position where they

19     had been found?  Or any other interpretation, such as putting them in a

20     place where they had not been found.

21             What was the gist of what you heard saying?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I rewind to that time, that

23     should have concerned leaving weapons in the vehicles, which meant that

24     we were not supposed to enter the village with long-barrelled rifles.  We

25     as policemen all had long-barrelled rifles, but we left them in the

Page 28677

 1     vehicles.  There was still people living there.  And on reflection I

 2     interpreted that as leaving weapons behind in order to avoid scaring

 3     those who were still living in the village.  But the way I saw it and the

 4     way I interpreted what I heard was leaving our weapons behind in the

 5     vehicles instead of carrying them with us.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly.

 7             MR. HEDARALY:

 8        Q.   So let me understand.  You heard weapons should be left, and you

 9     understood that to mean that weapons should be left in the cars before

10     going to collect the bodies; is that right?

11        A.   Yes, that's right.

12        Q.   And how did you react when you heard that being said?

13        A.   My first -- my initial reaction was to think that we shouldn't be

14     leaving weapons behind.  If there was anybody who should have left

15     weapons behind, they could have done it without me, without me knowing

16     about it.  So if anybody had any intentions, I was not aware of any such

17     intentions.

18        Q.   You didn't interpret the fact that bodies should be -- that

19     weapons should be left as meaning that weapons should be left next to the

20     bodies in Grubori?

21        A.   Well, according to my initial reaction, it turns out that way,

22     that somebody should have left weapons by the dead bodies in Grubori.

23        Q.   Well, what was your reaction when you heard it?  Was it that

24     weapons should be left in the car, or that weapons should be left next to

25     the bodies.

Page 28678

 1        A.   No, no.  My reaction to that was -- actually, my first reaction,

 2     the way I understood it at first was that weapons should be left or

 3     placed by the bodies.  Nobody actually explicitly mentioned that, but

 4     when I heard the words, I remember that that was my initial reaction.

 5     That's the way I reacted initially.  That was my first train of thoughts

 6     when I heard somebody talking about weapons.

 7        Q.   So when you said a few minutes ago:  My first -- my initial

 8     reaction was to think that we shouldn't be leaving weapons behind, if

 9     there was anybody who should have left weapons behind, they could have

10     done it without me, without me know about it.  That, you meant, that that

11     was leaving weapons behind, your first reaction was to understand that as

12     leaving the weapons next to the bodies; is that correct?

13        A.   Yes, that is correct.

14        Q.   And you said earlier that that was part of a -- what you

15     overheard in a conversation.  Was it mentioned more than once, was it a

16     discussion among people?  What was the context of that suggestion being

17     made?

18        A.   That was being said or talked about by some persons within that

19     group of people that we joined.  And that was said behind my back.  I

20     only heard the words.  I turned around and I said what I meant.  I

21     addressed those words at that little group, and that's how it all ended.

22        Q.   And who was in that group at that point?  Was everyone still in

23     the group?  The journalists, the special police members, General Cermak?

24             MR. KAY:  He didn't say everyone was still in a group earlier.

25             MR. HEDARALY:  That's why I'm asking the question.  Who was in

Page 28679

 1     the --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Who was in the group at that point, that was the

 3     question.

 4             MR. KAY:  The question was, was everyone still in the group.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  The first question would have been

 6     [overlapping speakers] --

 7             THE WITNESS:  [No interpretation]

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  -- Mr. Hedaraly, and the second one was suggestive.

 9             Yes, Mr. Bilobrk, would you answer the question, who was still in

10     that group at that time.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Cermak was there.  There were

12     journalists.  At that moment Mr. Cermak was talking to the journalists.

13     And I was looking at him.  I saw him when I joined the group.  He was

14     amidst a conversation with the journalists.  I don't know what they

15     talked about and at that point I herd heard those words about leaving

16     weapons behind, and I offered my comment to those words at that point.

17        Q.   From where you were standing, could Mr. Cermak have heard the

18     comment that was made?

19        A.   I don't know if Mr. Cermak could hear those words or not.

20     Perhaps he could.  I don't know what his state of health is, whether he

21     has a good sense of hearing.  I believe that if he had heard, that he

22     would have reacted in the same way I did, if those words referred to

23     placing weapons by the dead bodies.

24        Q.   And why do you think he would have reacted, if he had heard that?

25        A.   I think at that time I -- I perceived Mr. Cermak as a high state

Page 28680

 1     official.  He was with the journalists, and I don't think he would have

 2     allowed something like that to happen in front of the journalists, in

 3     front of a group of 30 people without intervening -- intervening, without

 4     offering a comment -- a comment of some sorts, without reacting.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly, I may have missed it.  But I'd like to

 6     know exactly what your comment was.  You heard something about weapons to

 7     be left.

 8             What did you say?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will probably not

10     be able to quote my words exactly.  However, my first instinctive

11     reaction was that there would be no leaving weapons behind, if that meant

12     leaving weapons behind or placing them by the dead bodies, and if

13     somebody had intended to do that, they could have done it before my

14     arrival, without me know about it.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So your response was that you opposed to the

16     suggestion of what you'd heard, and you had understood the words spoken

17     behind your back as a suggestion to put weapons next to the bodies.

18             Is that correctly understood?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know if you understood me

20     properly.  However, when I answered the question about leaving weapons, I

21     meant that if leaving weapons behind referred to leaving weapons behind

22     the dead bodies, possibly, because in that group nobody ever mentioned or

23     used the words "dead bodies."  The only words used were about leaving

24     weapons behind.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but the "ifs" and "ands," we should get rid of

Page 28681

 1     that.  What we are interested to hear is what was said behind your back

 2     and what your comment was, and not if this was meant, then my spontaneous

 3     reaction would have been ... what I'm interested in, in what you said.

 4             Now you say you cannot literally quote that, but I do understand

 5     that your comment was opposing to what you heard being suggested.

 6             Is that correct?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we may have

 8     misunderstood each other.  When I said "if," that "if" referred to the

 9     words that I uttered towards that group of people that I turned to.  Not

10     my words in answering the judge's questions.  When I heard a reference

11     being made to leaving weapons behind, I turned towards that group of

12     people --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And what did you then say?  What was the gist of

14     what you said?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I turned around.  I turned towards

16     that group of people and I said, If they meant leaving weapons by the

17     dead bodies, they could have done it before I arrived, without me knowing

18     about it.  They should have done it before unbeknownst to me.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  What happened is you hear someone saying, Should we

20     put weapons next to the bodies.  Then you turn around, and you say, If

21     you mean to put -- well, let me -- [Overlapping speakers] start over

22     again --

23             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, if -- yes.  Thank you.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  You heard someone saying leaving weapons.  You turn

25     around.  You address those who were speaking and say, If you mean, or if

Page 28682

 1     you are suggesting that we should put weapons next to the bodies, then

 2     you should have done that before and without my knowledge, which

 3     implicitly means that you were opposed against putting weapons at that

 4     moment next to the bodies.

 5             Is that well understood?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that would be the gist of it.

 7     Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  What did they then say, in response to what you

 9     said?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That was it.  There was no further

11     reference made to weapons, and I did not speak to any person.  I spoke to

12     the group.  And after my words, there were no further references to

13     weapons or leaving weapons behind.  The discussion stopped there.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  And also no one said, No, that's not at all what we

15     have in mind.  We were talking about leaving our weapons in the car,

16     and -- so no one responded at all to what you said.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were no comments proffered.

18             I don't even know whether they paid any attention to my words.

19     When I turned around towards them, I did not hear anybody commenting in

20     any way.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Hedaraly.

22             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. President.

23        Q.   How far was General Cermak from you when that suggestion was

24     made?

25        A.   4, 5, or 6 metres.  I apologise, the distance would be

Page 28683

 1     approximately as the distance from me and this column in the middle of

 2     the courtroom.  4, 5, 6 metres, I'd say.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  I disagree that it is approximately 5 and a half, 6

 4     metres.  A little bit --

 5             MR. KAY:  Yes, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly.

 7             MR. HEDARALY:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  You have an opportunity during the break to do it

 9     the usual way, big steps.

10             Please proceed.

11             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. President.

12        Q.   When you turned around and -- and told the group that if what

13     they meant was to leave weapons next to the bodies, they should have done

14     it before you came, did you say that in an angry manner?

15        A.   No.  It was a statement more than anything else.

16        Q.   Let me show you 65 ter 7648.

17             Now, in February, you were -- you gave a statement to the county

18     court in Zagreb; is that correct?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   And you were cautioned that you had an obligation to tell the

21     truth and that giving a false statement was a criminal act; is that

22     correct?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   And you also sign a record of the interview?

25        A.   Correct.

Page 28684

 1        Q.   And when you signed it, you were satisfied that it accurately

 2     reflected what you had said?

 3        A.   Correct.

 4             MR. HEDARALY:  If we can go to page 5 of the English; page 3 of

 5     the B/C/S.

 6        Q.   Towards the bottom of the page in English it says -- well, you

 7     say, because it's your statement that you signed:  "Furthermore, I

 8     believe that General Cermak definitely could have heard when someone from

 9     that group of ten-20 soldiers, who had approached me in front of the Knin

10     PU building said that weapons ought to be placed next to the ... bodies.

11     He did not react to that statement at all."

12             Now, I understand that you -- today you are saying that that

13     meeting did not take place in front of the Knin building, based on

14     documents that were shown to you which triggered your memory.  But can

15     you explain the difference a few months ago when you said you

16     definitely -- that General Cermak definitely could have heard when that

17     suggestion was made and today?

18        A.   No, there's no difference, actually.

19             Your questions here today are much more detailed than the

20     questions put to me down there.  He could hear.  He could hear the

21     remark.  Whether he did or not, I don't know.  You should ask Mr. Cermak

22     that.  You should ask him whether he heard anything of the sort.  I

23     cannot speculate about stories and about things that Mr. Cermak could or

24     couldn't hear.  You could perhaps ask Mr. Cermak whether he did hear

25     those words and how far he was.  If he was concentrated and if he was

Page 28685

 1     following what was going on in that group, the conversation in the group,

 2     then, yes, he could hear the words said by that group.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's not speculate on who was focussed or not.

 4     Let's limit ourselves to what distance was, what circumstances were, and

 5     then avoid, He may have been thinking about the weather at that moment,

 6     which may have -- diverted his attention.  That's not for speculation.

 7             At the time, you said, He definitely could have heard, which I

 8     understand to be that to the extent you were aware of the circumstances

 9     such as distance, level of noise, that you would definitely think that he

10     could have heard it, whether he did is a different matter, and that you

11     still stand to that.

12             Is that well understood?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, you understood me very well.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Hedaraly.

15             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you.

16             If we move two pages prior in the English and one page prior in

17     the B/C/S.

18        Q.   When you're relating this -- what happened then to the judge in

19     Zagreb, towards the middle of the page in the English, when you said:

20             "When I heard that, I said that I was not going to place any

21     weapons and that I do not consent to this and that if they wanted to do

22     this, they should have done it earlier so that I wouldn't know about it.

23     I can't remember now who of those people said this.  However, I reacted

24     to this immediately.  I did not know General Cermak earlier, and I assume

25     that he approached me with that group of soldiers ..."

Page 28686

 1             I want to focus on the "I did not know General Cermak earlier."

 2             Now, today, at page 30, line 16, when I asked you why you thought

 3     he would have reacted, if he had heard that suggestion, you said:

 4             "I perceived Mr. Cermak as a high state official at that time."

 5             So I'm just trying to clarify, did you know Mr. Cermak, who he

 6     was at that time, or you just perceived him to be a high state official

 7     based on what you saw that day?

 8        A.   No, we had never met in person.  But I recognised him because I

 9     knew him from the media.

10        Q.   And what did you know about him from the media?

11        A.   I didn't follow the media very closely, but whenever

12     General Cermak was mentioned, there would be a picture of him or he would

13     give a statement or something like that, and that's why I knew what

14     General Cermak looked like.

15             MR. HEDARALY:  Mr. President, I note the time, and this is a good

16     time for a break.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  It's time for a break.  And, Mr. Hedaraly, may I

18     take it that you will stay within the time-limits you -- of your

19     estimate.

20             MR. HEDARALY:  I will try, Your Honour.  I may be a little over,

21     but I definitely will done in the next session.  Hopefully in the

22     first --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  The scheduling is that we try to finish the

24     testimony of Mr. Bilobrk in two hours.  Two hours is two hours and is not

25     close to three hours.

Page 28687

 1             MR. HEDARALY:  I understand that, Your Honour, but as you know

 2     those are estimates and sometimes it's hard to keep within those

 3     estimates.  I am trying to do my best.  I'm simply indicating that there

 4     is a possibility that I may go over the two hours, and if that is the

 5     case, then I will ask the Court's indulgence.  I can't give you a

 6     specific time right now, I'm hoping that I will be done within 45 minutes

 7     or an hour after we come back from the break, but I will try very hard to

 8     finish within half an hour, within the two hours that we had estimated.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  We will have a break and resume at five minutes to

10     11.00 sharp.

11                           --- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.

12                           --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly, you may proceed.

14             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. President.

15        Q.   Mr. Bilobrk, we still have your statement to the -- to the judge

16     in front of you on the screen?

17             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, please.

18             You may proceed, Mr. Hedaraly.

19             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you.

20        Q.   We still have in front of us on the screen your statement to the

21     county court in Zagreb.  And there you say on the second page, third page

22     in the English:

23             "General Cermak came then, surrounded by a group of people who

24     were wearing Croatian military uniforms and were armed, and there were

25     also a lot of journalists present.  When that group stopped,

Page 28688

 1     General Cermak and the group of soldiers around him approached me, and I

 2     heard them talking among themselves, and that someone had said that

 3     weapons ought to be placed next to the dead bodies."

 4             And then we discussed the remaining of that portion.

 5             Now, what you said today is a little different.  Here you say

 6     that General Cermak and the group of soldiers approach you and that's

 7     when you heard that comment being made; and today you suggested that that

 8     actually came from behind you and General Cermak was talking to

 9     journalists.

10             Can you clarify for us what exactly happened?

11        A.   I only have half the text on the screen.  Could I see more?

12             In this section of the statement, a word or two were left out.  I

13     said to the county court that in my opinion, the weapons should have been

14     placed next to the dead bodies.

15             Could you please continue?  Ask me another question, so I can

16     reply?

17        Q.   Well, I'll ask you the same question again.  That when that

18     suggestion or that comment was made in this statement to the county

19     court, you said that General Cermak came and that the -- General Cermak

20     and the group of soldiers around him approached you when you heard them

21     talking amongst themselves; whereas, today, you said that that comment

22     came from behind you when General Cermak was in front of you with

23     journalists.

24             I'm asking you to clarify for us which one it is or what actually

25     happened.

Page 28689

 1        A.   This statement was given to the county court without my previous

 2     review of any documentation.  The interview that I gave to you about

 3     meeting General Cermak in Knin is mentioned here also.  Because, as I

 4     said, I didn't have a chance to review the documents.

 5        Q.   I understand that the location of the meeting is now different

 6     and that change is based on the documents you reviewed; however, this is

 7     not about the location.  It's about who approached who when the comment

 8     was made and in what circumstances.

 9             Where in the documents that you were shown does it refresh your

10     memory as to whether General Cermak and the group of soldiers approached

11     you when you heard that comment, or whether it was made behind you?

12             I -- I fail to see how, from the documents, you could derive

13     that, so if you could explain that, I would appreciate it.

14        A.   General Cermak was in front of me; I've said as much already.

15     And that group of people mentioned leaving the weapons.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bilobrk, that was not the question.  When

17     Mr. Hedaraly put to you what you said when you were giving your statement

18     in the district court and has pointed at some inconsistencies with what

19     you told us today, you said, "But at the time I had not reviewed the

20     documents."

21             Now what Mr. Hedaraly is asking you is the following.  Where in

22     the documents do we find anything which would make it understandable that

23     now, having reviewed the documents, you give a different version of the

24     version you gave before the district court.  Is there anything in the

25     documents which says anything about distance, whether he approached you,

Page 28690

 1     what your response was.  That's what Mr. Hedaraly wants to know.  What in

 2     the documents explains that you gave a different version when you gave

 3     your statement before the district court, compared to your more recent

 4     version, or versions.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the documents shown to me, there

 6     is nothing that specifically relates to my meeting General Cermak or how

 7     that meeting came about.  But having reviewed the documents, I remembered

 8     the events, and I'm trying to explain that the meeting took place at

 9     Plavno and that I approached a group of people in the manner described.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Hedaraly.

11             MR. HEDARALY:

12        Q.   So just so I understand, you're saying that -- and we've seen

13     that the documents that you were shown, that documents -- those --

14     reviewing those documents made you remember that you approach, how you

15     approach, where the voices come from, and it all became clear to you all

16     of a sudden.

17             Have I understood that correctly.

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   And, now, as you sit here today, you remember all of this

20     incident very clearly, as opposed to when you gave your previous

21     statements?

22        A.   Never before have I communicated with anybody concerning these

23     events.  For 15 years, that was so.

24             So this event was forgotten.  But as I was reviewing the

25     documents, the memory came back to me.

Page 28691

 1        Q.   Including these details of who approached who, and where the

 2     voices you heard, and all of that; correct?

 3        A.   Yes, you're right.

 4             MR. HEDARALY:  Mr. President, can I have 65 ter 7648, the

 5     statement to the county court, signed by the witness in evidence, please.

 6                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 7             MR. KAY:  No objection.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  No objection.  But not -- the exhibit.

 9             Yes, this is -- will be a P exhibit then.

10             Mr. Registrar, the number would be.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this document shall be assigned

12     Exhibit P2729.  Thank you.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  P2729 is admitted into evidence.  Confidentiality as

14     explained earlier.

15             One additional question.  Mr. Bilobrk, you said it was only by

16     reading these documents that my memory came back.  Why did you tell all

17     kind of details at the time without having a memory on the matter?

18             You gave quite some details at the time.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I gave a general

20     account.  It wasn't all that detailed.  It all related to more or less

21     the same thing.  In this section of the statement given to the county

22     court in Zagreb, the proceedings did not relate to General Cermak but to

23     other persons against whom proceedings are underway in Croatia.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But facts are facts, irrespective, you as a

25     police officer are supposed to know that.  Facts are facts irrespective

Page 28692

 1     in what case these facts are established.  Why didn't you say at the

 2     time, I just don't know; I don't remember?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On several occasions, I did provide

 4     that answer, I don't remember.

 5             But let me go back to this section of the text about leaving

 6     weapons.  I said to the county court that this was opinion, just like I

 7     was explaining to you this story about the weapons, only these two words

 8     were left out of my statement, the words "my opinion."

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And you didn't -- you didn't say, This is

10     wrong.  I reviewed it.  I'm not going sign because you should put it's my

11     opinion.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this statement was not

13     given to me to read under Article 77.  I only -- I heard the judge

14     dictating the court reporter, what she should put in the record.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  There are other differences.  You say, I

16     didn't go that much in details.  You're giving details both today and at

17     the time as what you responded to any suggestion of putting weapons

18     there.

19             Today you told us that your response was, If this is it what you

20     mean, you should have done it earlier.  But before the district court you

21     have other details.  You say:

22             "When I heard that, I said that I was not going to place any

23     weapons and that I do not consent to this and that if they wanted to do

24     this, that they should have done that earlier so that I wouldn't know

25     about it."

Page 28693

 1             Now, I am not going to put weapons there is different from if

 2     this is what you mean, you should have done it earlier, because this --

 3     this suggests that part of the conversation was that you would be

 4     involved in putting the weapons there.  That's what is clearly the

 5     suggestion of your statement and at least the language is different.

 6             Now, if you say, I didn't give details.  It was just my opinion.

 7     I think what you responded or the gist of your response was is not

 8     primarily a matter of opinion but a matter of facts, which you either do

 9     remember or do not remember.  And, therefore, it comes a bit as a -- your

10     explanation is -- yes.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is possible that I wrongly

12     presented the facts to the county court.  I can see here, though, that

13     the court itself wrongly presented some facts.  I may have said this

14     verbatim, but I cannot describe this statement in detail now.  Or,

15     rather, I can't explain it, because it is unclear to me even now whether

16     I really said these words or if somebody misunderstood or misinterpreted

17     my words.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, at the end of this statement, it reads:

19             "Cautioned in terms of Article 77 of the Code of Criminal

20     Procedure, I think it is ZKP, he does not request that the record be read

21     out as he had followed the judge's dictation out loud, and he signs it."

22             Which, in some way, is committing yourself to the statement.

23     Isn't it?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, yes.  This says that it was,

25     indeed, like that.

Page 28694

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Hedaraly.

 2             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 3        Q.   Now, Mr. Bilobrk, you were interviewed about the events on that

 4     day on a number of times previously; correct?

 5        A.   Correct.

 6        Q.   And I'll just, for the sake of time, run through all the

 7     interviews and ask you to confirm that you were interviewed by these

 8     people.

 9             So you were first interviewed by Mr. Franjo and some others on

10     behalf of the Defence, one of the Defence teams for the generals;

11     correct?

12        A.   That's correct.

13        Q.   Do you remember when that was?

14        A.   I think it was last year, in August maybe.

15        Q.   And did you sign a statement at that time?

16        A.   No.

17        Q.   Then you were also interviewed twice by Mr. Badzim from the MUP.

18     The first time in the presence of a colleague of yours, Mr. Vrticevic,

19     and a few days again later, by yourself.

20             Do you remember those interviews?

21        A.   I don't remember.

22        Q.   You don't remember, or you do remember?

23        A.   I do.

24        Q.   It was just an interpretation error.  And there were two Official

25     Notes produced after these interviews; correct?

Page 28695

 1        A.   I think so.  You showed them to me and so did the Defence, before

 2     interviewing me.

 3        Q.   And you were also interviewed then again by two other MUP

 4     officers, Mr. Gerovac and Mr. Mikulic in November; do you remember that?

 5        A.   That's correct, yes, I do.

 6        Q.   And then we discussed that you were interviewed also by the

 7     county court in Zagreb in February of this year, right?

 8        A.   That's correct.

 9        Q.   And then you were interviewed by members of the Office of the

10     Prosecutor in March of this year, and you signed a statement?

11        A.   That's correct.

12        Q.   And, finally, you were interviewed by the Defence team of

13     General Cermak in April and May of this year, and you also signed a

14     statement?

15        A.   That's correct.

16        Q.   So by my count, that is seven interviews where you discussed the

17     events that happened on the 27th of August, 1995.

18             Now, can you tell us in which of these interviews did you, for

19     the first time, talk about that suggestion that was made to leave

20     weapons?

21        A.   I mentioned it for the first time in the statement given to

22     Mr. Gerovac and Mr. Mikulic.

23        Q.   So you did not discuss this either in your first interview with

24     Mr. Franjo or in any of the two further intensives with Mr. Badzim?

25        A.   No.

Page 28696

 1        Q.   Can you explain why you had not discussed that in your prior

 2     interviews?

 3        A.   Because I simply answered their questions.

 4        Q.   So do I have to understand that Mr. Gerovac and Mikulic

 5     specifically asked you about that suggestion and that's why you mentioned

 6     it to them for the first time?

 7        A.   Could you please show me the statement that I gave to Mr. Gerovac

 8     and Mr. Mikulic.

 9        Q.   I will show it to you.  But first I just want to understand your

10     answer because your answer was why you didn't discuss it before.  And you

11     said because those questions were not asked.

12             So I'm asking you, does that mean that if you mentioned it to

13     Mr. Gerovac and Mikulic that would mean that they've discussed it with

14     you?

15             We'll go through it later, but I first want to clarify that.  And

16     that's the reason why it appeared for the first time in any of your

17     statements?

18        A.   They were asking me questions.  And if I remember that statement

19     well, they asked me who of the high-ranking Croatian officials had

20     ordered, or something like that, to place the weapons there.  But I don't

21     remember the exact words because it's been a long time since I read that

22     statement or made the statement.

23        Q.   I'll show it to you.  I just want to get the right sequence first

24     and we'll get to it very soon.

25             But I want to first show you the Official Note you gave to

Page 28697

 1     Mr. Badzim, the second one, when you were by yourself.  And that is 65

 2     ter 7623.

 3             And that's an Official Note that you had reviewed previously and

 4     that was generally accurate; is that correct?

 5        A.   Yes.  As far as I can tell, by simply casting a glance at it,

 6     yes, this is it.

 7        Q.   Now, in the last paragraph in the English, the first

 8     paragraph after your details in the Croatian, you say:  "As far as the

 9     clearing of corpses in the village of Grubori is concerned, he described

10     how General Cermak came to the stairway outside the present day Knin

11     police station and requested an on-site investigation in Grubori.  The

12     General was accompanied by a news reporter, but he asked them to move

13     away while he spoke to him."

14             And it goes on.  But my question for you at this stage is -- of

15     course, we don't have the question that Mr. Badzim asked you, but this is

16     exactly the same -- part of the same story that happened and where that

17     comment was made.  So can you tell us why you didn't include that in your

18     answer, when you were questioned about what happened on the 27th of

19     August and you discussed General Cermak and journalists and people

20     approaching you?

21        A.   Mr. Badzim didn't ask such questions at all.  This is the text

22     that he drafted, his Official Note.  But he didn't take notes while

23     interviewing me.  Probably, he drafted it based on his memory alone, this

24     Official Note about an interview with me.

25        Q.   So are you saying that you told him about the comment made to

Page 28698

 1     leave weapons and he just didn't include it, or did you not mention that?

 2     Because that's what you said earlier.  I'm getting a little confused.

 3        A.   I didn't provide that comment because he didn't ask me about

 4     that.  So I never made that comment.

 5        Q.   And you didn't think that in the context of discussing the

 6     sanitation of the bodies in Grubori such a comment being made would be

 7     relevant or important to know for a police investigator investigating

 8     what had happened in Grubori?

 9        A.   You're right, but when the interview began, there had been

10     pressures after the first interview provided to Mr. Badzim, and then he

11     said, You just answer my questions.  And that's what I did.

12             After the first interview, there were pressures, and we had to

13     conduct a second interview.  He said that I should merely answer the

14     questions that he would put me.

15        Q.   And -- and what were the pressures that you -- that you had after

16     that first interview?

17        A.   After the first interview I gave to Mr. Badzim, he made a remark

18     that I had some information that could detrimentally affect the Defence

19     of the generals in The Hague, which I never said to him.  This may have

20     been his opinion, but I don't know why he stated that.

21             Anyway, my chief was called up from the directorate of the

22     police, that unless there is another interview that I gave to Mr. Badzim

23     there would be -- that Internal Affairs would investigate and that

24     proceedings would be launched against us and we would be suspended,

25     unless there is another interview with Mr. Badzim.

Page 28699

 1             MR. HEDARALY:  Mr. President, can I have 65 ter 7623 admitted

 2     into evidence.

 3             MR. KAY:  No objection.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this document shall be assigned

 6     Exhibit P2730.  Thank you.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  P2730 is admitted into evidence.  Confidentiality as

 8     set out before.

 9             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you.

10        Q.   And let me just show you - because you've now mentioned it - so

11     let's -- let me show you also that first statement -- that first Official

12     Note of interview with Mr. Badzim.

13             MR. HEDARALY:  And that's 65 ter 7567.

14             Thank you.

15        Q.   And just so I want to clear about what you said earlier.  What

16     you are referring to is at the bottom of the English in page 1, the first

17     full paragraph after the identifying information where it says that --

18             "After meeting some of the members of the Defence, including

19     Mr. Franjo Djurica, Vrticevic and Bilobrk emphasised how they had given a

20     detailed statement on the clearing of terrain in the village of Grubori

21     and on other events from that period.  They also would like to emphasise

22     that the Defence team asked to be notified of any subsequent requests for

23     information regarding the talk that they had."

24             Is that what you were referring to about what was the source of

25     the pressure that you -- that that statement is the one that triggered

Page 28700

 1     the pressure for you to have a second interview?

 2        A.   Well, let me put it this way.  As for the Defence team who first

 3     interviewed me, there were no -- there was no talk about the event

 4     itself.  We only spoke -- spoke about our arrival to Grubori.  The

 5     Defence team showed me photographs of two dead bodies.  One was burnt;

 6     and another that had an injury to the neck.  We spent some ten to 15

 7     minutes together.  We didn't speak so much.  They were only interested in

 8     hearing whether those people had been massacred or not.

 9             Mr. Vrticevic was not present during that interview, although

10     Mr. Badzim mentions it here.  And about the sanitation of the terrain in

11     the village of Grubori and what is said here, that we -- that I didn't

12     want to go into details, that is something he never heard from me.  That

13     is his opinion.  That is something he stated of his own accord.

14             I spoke very briefly with the Defence team.  They didn't take

15     notes, and I signed no statement.  We mostly spoke about the dead bodies

16     found there and their condition.

17        Q.   Is it true that they asked you to be notified -- is it true that

18     they asked to be notified of any subsequent requests for information

19     regarding anyone talking to you?

20        A.   Yes.  Franjo Djurica told me that.  He told me that should

21     anybody want to talk to me about that case that I should come back to

22     him.

23        Q.   In any of your subsequent interviews that you had, did you in

24     fact tell Mr. Franjo?

25        A.   No.  I did not think it would be necessary for me to inform him

Page 28701

 1     about that.

 2        Q.   Okay.  If I can have 65 ter 7567 admitted into evidence.

 3             MR. KAY:  No objection.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this document shall be assigned

 6     Exhibit P2731.  Thank you.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  P2731 is admitted into evidence.  Confidentiality as

 8     set out before.

 9             MR. HEDARALY:

10        Q.   Let me now show you, as I had -- as I'd indicated to you that I

11     would, the statement you -- the Official Note of interview recorded by

12     Mr. Gerovac and Mikulic.

13             MR. HEDARALY:  And that's 65 ter 7568.

14        Q.   And on the first page in the middle of the page in English, it

15     says:

16             "The above was asked if it had been suggested to him and to his

17     colleague, Ivica Vrticevic, who was working with him as a crime

18     technician on the humane clearing up of the dead bodies of civilians

19     killed in the village of Grubori, by somebody from the then-senior

20     commanding structures of the MUP ... or the Ministry of Defence, that

21     they should have conducted an on-site investigation in the village of

22     Grubori, but that before that they should have placed guns next to the

23     dead bodies of civilians who had been killed in order to make it appear

24     as if they had put up resistance to members of special police.  The above

25     stated that the day when they went to Grubori in order to carry out the

Page 28702

 1     humane clearing up process, some time in the morning General Cermak came

 2     in front of the Knin police administration building, escorted by a few

 3     soldiers from his security."

 4             MR. HEDARALY:  Turn the page in the English.

 5        Q.   "He remembers that when Cermak arrived, he was sitting on the

 6     stairs with several colleagues whose names he does not ... remember

 7     anymore, but he allows for the possibility that among them there was, on

 8     that occasion, his colleague ... Vrticevic, when Cermak came to them, he

 9     said that an on-site investigation had to be conducted in Grubori, but

10     that before the on-site investigation guns had to be placed next to the

11     dead bodies in order to make it appear as if the persons killed had put

12     resistance.  He remembers he got angry at Cermak's suggestion and told

13     him he did want to know anything about it, nor did he want to participate

14     in it."

15             Now, Mr. Bilobrk, I understand from your testimony today that

16     what are you saying today is that that suggestion was made by someone

17     behind you.  My question for you is:  In November 2009, did you tell

18     Croatian investigators that that suggestion, to place guns next to the

19     bodies, had been made by General Cermak?

20        A.   No.

21        Q.   Do you have any explanation or any idea why that's how they

22     recorded this?

23        A.   I don't know.  Can you see in the part of the passage where

24     Messrs. Mikulic and Gerovac, who perused statements I provided to

25     Mr. Badzim, where no reference to weapons is made, they came with a story

Page 28703

 1     prepared in advance and with questions that they prepared in advance.

 2     Upon their arrival, they put a question to me regarding the high

 3     structures of MUP and the Republic of Croatia as to who proposed -- had

 4     proposed that.  In other words, before that, they already had information

 5     which was conveyed to them - I don't know where from - and that's how

 6     they came to me, directly with that question.

 7             And as for the passage at the bottom, I never stated anything of

 8     the kind before them.

 9             If I may?

10        Q.   please.

11        A.   And if I may provide another piece of explanation with regard to

12     my last conversation with Mr. Mikulic and Mr. Gerovac.  The two

13     gentlemen, Mr. Mikulic and Mr. Gerovac, were waiting for me one day when

14     I came back from the field.  I didn't know who they were.  In any case, a

15     colleague of mine who had called me, he called me and told me that there

16     will be gentlemen colleagues from Zagreb waiting for me.  When I saw

17     him -- when I met up with them, they told me that they were just passing

18     by and that they wanted to have an informal conversation with me about

19     some details, about some things with regard to Grubori.

20        Q.   Now when they put that question to you about the high structures

21     of the MUP and the Ministry of Defence, do you remember what you actually

22     answered, what you told them?

23        A.   I asked them where that piece of information had come from.

24        Q.   And what did they tell you?

25        A.   They wouldn't answer.  I told them, You are asking me to tell you

Page 28704

 1     something that I don't know, that I don't have a clue about.  You are

 2     putting a question to me, but could you please first explain where that

 3     information came from?  Because I had never mentioned weapons before.

 4     There was no reference to weapons, and now you're here and the first

 5     thing you mention is weapons.  Like a fact.

 6        Q.   I understand that, but you have testified today that there was,

 7     in fact, a comment made by someone about weapons being placed there, or

 8     being left there.  You've testified to this.

 9             So I'm trying to understand you wanted to know the source of the

10     information.  But did you tell them what you've told us today, that there

11     was -- that someone did in a group make a suggestion to leave weapons and

12     how you reacted to it and how you responded and everything you've told us

13     today.  Did you tell them this?

14        A.   Yes.  The explanation I provided to them was exactly the same as

15     the one I provided here.  But they did not take that into account.

16        Q.   How can you have given them the same information, if part of the

17     information that you gave us today was based on the documents that the

18     Defence showed you that triggered your memory about all the details that

19     that happened?

20        A.   No, not in the same statement as earlier today in the court.  In

21     any case, I explained to them that there was reference made to the

22     weapons.  I explained to them that there was reference made to the

23     weapons.  But they did not embark on any details.  They did not continue

24     that conversation.  They did not make any notes.  They did not make any

25     record.  We were standing by the window of the building of the police

Page 28705

 1     administration.  We lit cigarettes, and that's how we conversed.

 2        Q.   Did you mention to them that General Cermak was -- was there as

 3     part of a group and ...

 4        A.   I did.

 5             MR. HEDARALY:  Your Honour, I'd like to have 65 ter 7568 in

 6     evidence.  I don't know if it makes more sense to have it MFI'd for now

 7     or have it admitted right now --

 8             MR. KAY:  No objection, for the record.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, the number would be.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P2732.  Thank you.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  P2732 is admitted into evidence and remains

12     confidential until further order.

13             Please proceed.

14             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr. President.

15             Just a moment.

16        Q.   Let me, just for the record, briefly show you the statement you

17     gave to the -- to the OTP.

18             MR. HEDARALY:  Which is 65 ter 7621.

19             And if we go to paragraph 7.

20        Q.   There you say:

21             "A group of around 15 people in uniform, including who I now know

22     to be General Cermak, came towards me.  One soldier from the group asked

23     me if we were the people doing the sanitation.  I answered yes."

24             I'll just skip the next sentence for the sake of time.

25             "Before any conversation started between the group and me, I

Page 28706

 1     heard that someone from the group proposed to someone else something

 2     like:  Weapons should be placed first.  I don't think that [sic] comment

 3     was addressed to me but, rather, to another member of the group.  It was

 4     clear to me that the suggestion I heard was to place guns next to the

 5     bodies to make it look as if they put up resistance.  I immediately

 6     turned and angrily said that there would be no such placing of weapons.

 7     I added that if they wanted to do this, they would have done it before

 8     coming to me and without my knowledge.  My comment stopped any further

 9     discussion of placing weapons."

10             So I just want to -- to set out all your interviews now that

11     we've been through almost all of them.  So the first three interviews

12     there was no mention made of any suggestion of leaving weapons, right?

13        A.   I see that in your official translation the word used is placing

14     weapons; whereas, in my statement I used the verb leaving weapons.

15        Q.   I understand that.  Thank you for the clarification.  So the

16     first three interviews, the one with Mr. Franjo and the two, one with

17     Mr. Badzim, there was no mention of any suggestion made; correct?

18        A.   Correct.

19        Q.   That in the Official Note regarding the interview with

20     Mr. Gerovac and Mikulic, that note says that General Cermak made that

21     statement, although are you saying that that is not correct, right?

22        A.   Correct.

23        Q.   And then to the -- to the judge in -- in Zagreb and to the Office

24     of the Prosecutor, we went through the one with the judge earlier, if you

25     remember.  There you say that it was made by the group that approached

Page 28707

 1     you, that suggestion.  And now today, you're telling us that it came from

 2     behind you.

 3             Have I -- have I correctly outlined all the -- all the interviews

 4     and what you had said about that suggestion?

 5        A.   This definitely happened behind my back.  Perhaps nobody asked

 6     for any detailed explanations.

 7             In any case, somebody in the group behind my back mentioned

 8     leaving weapons.

 9        Q.   Just very briefly now, because I've already run out of time.

10             I just want to very briefly go through the two other arguments

11     you had with General Cermak that day.  The one about the on-site

12     investigation; and the one about the journalists being present when you

13     carried out your tasks.

14             Can you tell us where the argument about the on-site

15     investigation took place?

16        A.   In Plavno, after my first encounter with General Cermak.

17        Q.   Was it right after that -- what you discussed today, the comment

18     was made, your reaction, was it right after?

19        A.   That was after the comments and discussions about weapons.

20        Q.   And what did Mr. Cermak tell you?

21        A.   Mr. Cermak asked me to carry out an inspection in Grubori, in the

22     place where those dead bodies were found.  I refused.  And I explained to

23     Mr. Cermak that I was not equipped to carry out any investigations or

24     inspections and that there were no legal provisions in place that would

25     make such an investigation or inspection legal, that legal conditions

Page 28708

 1     were not met.

 2             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I'm told that line 57, 19 has word a not

 3     used by the witness.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's verify that.

 5             You said, Mr. Bilobrk:  "I refused."

 6             That is, to carry out an inspection in Grubori.

 7             "And I explained to Mr. Cermak ..."

 8             What did you explain to him because it may have been

 9     mistranslated.

10        A.   I refused General Cermak's request to carry out an on-site

11     investigation in Grubori.  He persisted.  On several occasions, he

12     insisted that I would carry out an on-sight investigation, and I --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm just first of all seeking clarification of what

14     you said, not a further explanation.

15             Could it be where it was translated that you were not equipped to

16     carry out an investigation that you were not competent to carry out an

17     investigation; or did you say, We were not equipped?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We did not have the equipment which

19     was necessary to carry out an on-site investigation, which meant that we

20     did not have all the necessary equipment that would be required by a task

21     to carry out an on-site investigation.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, I apparently, on that line, did not spot

23     what was the problem.

24             MR. KAY:  Yes.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  If could you assist me.

Page 28709

 1             MR. KAY:  The word instead of "inspection" being used at that

 2     passage was "on-site investigation," Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  I think that -- Mr. Hedaraly, any need to further

 4     clarify this?

 5             MR. HEDARALY:  No, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  You spoke not about an inspection but about an

 7     on-site investigation.

 8             Please proceed.

 9             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  The problem is that the line numbering is not always

11     the same, so I was focussing on the wrong line.  Yes.

12             Please proceed.

13             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you.

14        Q.   You just said there, Mr. Bilobrk, in clarifying this last passage

15     that you refused to follow General Cermak's request that he persisted on

16     certain occasions.

17             Can you explain to us how he persisted, or what happened?

18        A.   Mr. Cermak -- I don't know how much he knew about the way an

19     on-site investigation is carried out.  That's why he persisted and on

20     several occasions he repeated that we would doing the on-site

21     investigation, and I explained to him that that was not possible.  We

22     were there on a special task which was humane sanitation, that we did not

23     have the equipment required for an on-site investigation, which means

24     that no legal requirements were in place for an on-site investigation,

25     including the fact that an investigating judge was not informed, the

Page 28710

 1     prosecutor, the county prosecutor was not informed, that we did not have

 2     the professional personnel that was necessary for an on-site

 3     investigation.  However, he did not understand or he seemed to not

 4     understand what I was talking about.  He kept on insisting until the

 5     moment Mr. Sacic interfered and got involved in that exchange.

 6        Q.   Was Mr. Cermak angry at your refusal to carry out an on-site

 7     investigation?

 8        A.   He appeared angry.  He appeared angry.  I was not under the

 9     authority of the Ministry of Defence, and I believe that I was not

10     duty-bound to carry out his orders.  I had my own superiors, who were in

11     a position to issue orders to me.  And as far as Mr. Cermak is concerned,

12     none of my superiors ever told me that I should act upon his orders as

13     well.

14        Q.   Did Mr. Cermak tell you anything about his authority in Knin?

15        A.   He did mention that he was in Knin, that he was the main person

16     in Knin, that they were in power in Knin.  But I did not pay much heed at

17     that.  I didn't know what his tasks were, what his function in Knin was.

18        Q.   Do you know why Mr. Cermak wanted to carry [sic] an on-site

19     investigation in Grubori?

20        A.   Well, since he insisted so much on that on-site investigation, I

21     suppose that the idea behind that was to establish properly what had

22     happened, in a proper way.

23        Q.   Now, you mentioned earlier that by the 27th of August, you were

24     already familiar with Mr. Cermak because you had seen him give statements

25     on -- on -- in the media.  By that time, were you familiar with any

Page 28711

 1     statements given by Mr. Cermak to the media or to the public regarding

 2     what had happened in Grubori?

 3        A.   No.  I mentioned his figure from some previous appearances in the

 4     media, and those had nothing whatsoever to do with Grubori.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  And then, finally, you also had another argument with

 6     General Cermak later on in Grubori regarding the presence of journalists;

 7     is that correct?

 8        A.   Correct.

 9        Q.   Can you -- well, first of all, how did you get to Grubori from

10     Plavno?  Who did you go with?

11        A.   We took an asphalt road to a slope leading towards the hamlet our

12     vehicle could not go any further and that agencies we transferred our

13     equipment to Mr. Sacic's four-wheel drive, and we proceeded further to

14     the point which was the last accessible, and that's where we all met,

15     Mr. Cermak, myself, the journalist, we were there.  And at that moment we

16     went -- we proceeded with our part of the job and Mr. Cermak told us that

17     the journalists would accompany us and that they would observe the way we

18     worked, and that was not provided for by law.  And I refused that.  I did

19     not allow the journalists to come with us.  He kept on insisting on that.

20     He wanted the journalists to come with us.  Mr. Sacic again intervened,

21     and he said that journalists could not be part of the police procedure,

22     that a journalist could not go to the site with the police, and as a

23     result, the journalists did not accompany us, did not come with us.

24        Q.   Do you know why Mr. Cermak wanted the journalists to be present?

25        A.   I suppose that Mr. Cermak, having invited the journalists, or

Page 28712

 1     maybe the journalists had come themselves.  I don't know how they had

 2     found out about the events.  That he wanted the journalists to be able to

 3     inform the public of what had happened at Grubori.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly, usually I say I'm looking at the

 5     clock, but I saw that you were looking at the clock.

 6             MR. HEDARALY:  Only a few more questions, and I'll be done Your

 7     Honour.  Two or three more questions.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Really, in one or two minutes, yes.

 9             MR. HEDARALY:

10        Q.   When you went with Mr. Sacic to Grubori in his -- in his vehicle,

11     did you have any -- any discussion with Mr. Sacic?

12        A.   We spoke about my brother, who was a member of the police special

13     unit.  It was a short trip only, and Mr. Sacic asked me about my family

14     name and, Is Frane any relative of yours.  And I said, He's my brother.

15     And he said, When you see him, give him my regards.  And that was all the

16     conversation I had in the vehicle with Mr. Sacic.

17             MR. HEDARALY:  Just one moment.

18                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

19             MR. HEDARALY:

20        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Bilobrk.

21             MR. HEDARALY:  Mr. President, that concludes my examination.  And

22     I thank you for the extra half-hour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  One question seeking clarification.

24             Mr. Bilobrk, earlier, Mr. Hedaraly read to you part of your

25     statement you gave to the Office of the Prosecution, the 4th of March of

Page 28713

 1     this year.  And then he left out one line.  And then soon after that you

 2     said, "Well, the translation is -- I see that in your official

 3     translation the word used is 'placing weapons,' whereas in my statement I

 4     use the verb 'leaving weapons.'"

 5             That's the only comment I heard which came spontaneously.  You

 6     were not asked about any other comments.

 7             Were there --

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  -- other matters in the portion that was read to you

10     which you say is not consistent with what you said, what you told them

11     during the interview?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I signed the statement

13     in English.  The people from the OTP said that the procedure was such

14     that a translation of the statement has yet to be -- had yet to be made.

15     And this is the first time I had the chance to review the statement in

16     Croatian.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  I had a very simple question for you.  My question

18     was:  You commented on that word, which, in your view, was not reflecting

19     what you said; "leaving" instead of "putting."

20             My simple question is:  Is in any other respect what was read to

21     you and what you apparently have had an opportunity to review yesterday,

22     is in any other respect this text reflecting something different from

23     what you said on the 4th of March or whether it reflects, apart from that

24     one correction, what you said?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, this should be it.

Page 28714

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  For example, one of the elements I didn't find

 2     in other statements is that you were asked whether you were the people

 3     who do the sanitation.  And that, for example, is -- is one of the other

 4     elements read to you.  And that's what you said, on the 4th of March.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's correct.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  So I can rely on the other matters which you have

 7     not commented on, that reflects what you stated on the 4th of March of

 8     2010.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, talking about this text, yes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Yes, I'm exclusively dealing with the portion

11     which was read to you, and, as I understand, you had an opportunity

12     yesterday to read in your own language.

13             Mr. Kay, will you be the first one to cross-examine the witness?

14             MR. KAY:  Thank you, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bilobrk, you will now be cross-examined by

16     Mr. Kay.  Mr. Kay is counsel for the Prosecution [sic].

17                           Cross-examination by Mr. Kay:

18        Q.   Two words that have been used that I want to clarify with you as

19     to their meaning.  "Ostaviti," in Croatian, what does that mean?

20        A.   In the Croatian translation, it means leave something where it

21     belongings, where it should be, or some similar context.  This glass here

22     has its place in a cupboard, so you're supposed to leave it in the

23     cupboard, where it belongs.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Another word:  "Postaviti," with a P in front.  What

25     does that mean?

Page 28715

 1        A.   That word in translation should mean putting something where it

 2     doesn't belong, where it cannot usually be found, where it isn't part of

 3     a whole.

 4        Q.   Are we talking about, then, on the 27th of August, when you were

 5     in Plavno, and you heard someone behind you mention something about

 6     weapons, either of these words, "ostaviti" or "postaviti"?

 7        A.   It was "ostaviti," leave.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  And I want to ask you questions now, following up

 9     what Mr. Hedaraly was talking about, the investigating -- on-site

10     investigation.

11             I'd like you to see a document.

12             MR. KAY:  Can we have Exhibit P503, which is under seal.  Can we

13     go to the Croatian original, page 56.  And, for the English, it's the

14     second translation of this exhibit at page 29.

15        Q.   You can see it in a moment on your screen, Mr. Bilobrk.  Second

16     translation, page 29, and the original page, 56.

17             Don't look at the English one but look at the Croatian.  It's not

18     up yet.

19        A.   There's a handwritten text.

20        Q.   Yes.

21        A.   I can't really read it.

22        Q.   Just while we're waiting for the right page to come up, can you

23     comment whether you've ever seen this document before?  Do you recognise

24     it at all?  Have you ever seen it before?

25        A.   I don't remember seeing this document.

Page 28716

 1        Q.   In the Croatian, the date is the 27th of August, 1995.

 2             MR. KAY:  The English text needs a correction, Your Honour, it

 3     has the 28th of August, 1995.  Thank you.

 4        Q.   If we could just go down to the fourth cross where you see the

 5     name Begonja.  If that could be looked at by you.  Can we have all the

 6     text, please.  Thank you.

 7             If you could just read that out, as you understand that

 8     handwritten text to be, what it says.

 9        A.   I have difficulty reading this handwriting.  It isn't easily

10     legible.

11        Q.   Let put it up for you in a bigger form.  Thank you.  But we've

12     lost the bit -- there we are.

13             Can you see where it says:  Begonja.  Does that make it easier

14     for you to read that?

15        A.   Well, I can make out Prosecutor Begonja, that the team will be

16     late, up to one hour late.  Since there is a case of death, that he - he,

17     or somebody - is engaged in an on-site investigation.  That's how I

18     interpret this section of the text.

19        Q.   Thank you.  And if you could confirm whether you've seen or not

20     this document before.  Have you ever seen it?

21        A.   I don't remember this document.  I don't remember the

22     handwriting.

23        Q.   No.  There's no suggestion that you have seen it.  I'm just

24     confirming that matter.

25             Just looking at that -- that entry there, though, were you aware

Page 28717

 1     on the 27th of August, 1995 that a public prosecutor had been contacted

 2     by the Knin duty officer to go and make an on-site investigation in

 3     Grubori?

 4        A.   No, nobody informed us of that.

 5        Q.   Were you aware --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly.

 7             MR. HEDARALY:  Nothing in that document said it was Grubori, an

 8     investigation there.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay.

10             MR. KAY:  I'm putting my case.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12             MR. KAY:  This has been misattributed in date in the translation,

13     and this is a -- a pertinent matter to events on the 27th of August,

14     which I'm entitled to ask this witness about.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But you should not suggest implicitly what it

16     was about.  You should verify with the witness whether he knows that, and

17     we should verify that on another basis as well.

18             Just looking at that, it should be clear what is in the text and

19     what is not in the text, because what is in the text we could easily seek

20     confirmation of that.  What is not in the text would require a different

21     approach to establish any of such thing.

22             Please proceed.

23             MR. KAY:

24        Q.   Were you aware that there had been a delay in an investigating

25     judge coming to investigate that morning, on the 27th of August?  Did

Page 28718

 1     that message get communicated to you?

 2        A.   No.

 3        Q.   Thank you very much.  And that's all I ask on that matter.

 4             I want to now go through a statement that you gave to the

 5     Defence, which is a document signed by you.

 6             MR. KAY:  If we could have 2D00-864, please.

 7             And if the Croatian language version may be put on the screen for

 8     the witness.

 9        Q.   Mr. Bilobrk, do you identify this as a statement that you gave to

10     the Defence and signed?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And is that your signature at the bottom of the first page?

13     Thank you.

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   If we could turn to the last page, please.

16             Do you confirm your signature on -- on that page, on the 12th of

17     May, 2010?

18        A.   Yes.

19             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, the all-in-between pages are signed by the

20     witness as well, so if I may just proceed.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And there's a written submission that the

22     Prosecution does not oppose against admission into evidence.

23             MR. KAY:  Yes.  If I could confirm the matters within it.

24        Q.   Mr. Bilobrk, when you gave that statement to the Defence, was

25     everything that was stated within there, to the best of your knowledge

Page 28719

 1     and belief, true and correct?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Were you given an opportunity to check that statement, to make

 4     sure that it was true and correct?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   And if you were asked the same questions today, would you give

 7     the same answers that were given in the making of -- of that statement,

 8     in court today?

 9        A.   Yes.

10             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, might that statement be made an exhibit,

11     please.

12             MR. HEDARALY:  No objection.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar the number would be.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this document shall be assigned

15     Exhibit D2048.  Thank you.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  D2048 is admitted into evidence.  Confidentiality as

17     set out before.

18             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, within that statement there are two

19     documents that remain to be made exhibits.  At paragraph 30, there is a

20     document referred to as JB 1, a photograph, 2D00-855, might that

21     photograph be made an exhibit, please.

22             MR. HEDARALY:  No objection.  And if the second one is a second

23     photograph, there will be no objection to that either.

24             MR. KAY:  I'm much obliged.  That's 2D00-856.  May they be given

25     exhibit numbers, Your Honour.

Page 28720

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, two numbers please.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, first document 2D00-855 shall be

 3     assigned Exhibit D2049.  Second document, 2D00-856 shall be assigned

 4     Exhibit D2050.  Thank you.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Both admitted into evidence, confidentiality as set

 6     out before.

 7             Please proceed.

 8             MR. KAY:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 9        Q.   Mr. Bilobrk, that's various formalities that I've done there in

10     relation to your statement.  I now want to ask you some questions.

11             You have been referred to a large number of statements that you

12     made before you gave this witness statement to the Defence, and you told

13     the Court that, having seen documents, you were able to recollect better

14     what happened on the 27th of August, 1995; is that right?

15        A.   That's right.

16        Q.   When you were first asked questions in 1999 by the other people

17     who came to see you, Mr. Badzim, Mr. Gerovac -- 2009, sorry.  2009.

18     Mr. Gerovac, Mr. Mikulic, and in 2010 the Office of the Prosecutor and

19     also in 2009, the investigating judge.  You were being asked questions of

20     events that had happened 14 years previously.

21             How easy was it for you to remember accurately what had happened

22     when those bodies asked you those questions?

23        A.   It's impossible to remember some things after 14 or 15 years.

24     That's a mighty long time.  I mean, without documents.

25        Q.   When the Defence came to see you in Split in this year and

Page 28721

 1     produced documents originating from the 27th of August, 1995, did that

 2     assist you in your recollection?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   What effect did looking at those documents have upon what you

 5     could recollect?

 6        A.   I remembered situations that I was faced with on that day, and it

 7     jogged my memory of some things that are not contained in those

 8     documents.

 9        Q.   Now, the earlier statements all refer to events on the 27th of

10     August, when you came across Mr. Cermak outside Knin police station and

11     there was exchange of words between you and him.  That description of

12     that place and what happened and the background to that description,

13     where did you get that from?  How did that arise, that you referred to

14     being on the steps at Knin police station?

15        A.   Sir, we were in front of the Knin police station daily, and we

16     set off to the field daily from that place.  It's there that we received

17     information about such bodies.  And I remember from those times that I

18     met Mr. Cermak there, because we always left from there to go to the

19     field.

20             I was not aware about Strmica before that.  I didn't remember any

21     of these field missions.  Everybody mentioned -- was mentioning Grubori

22     to me, and I thought that on that day, we left to Grubori from that

23     place.

24        Q.   So is the statements that had been made earlier of any meeting

25     between you and Mr. Cermak outside Knin police station, is that wrong?

Page 28722

 1        A.   Now that I remember the details, yes, they are wrong.

 2        Q.   So what was described about what took place in the street outside

 3     Knin police station - who was there, the number of people, the scene -

 4     was that description, as well, wrong?

 5        A.   Indeed.  It all happened differently.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, I'm looking at the clock and I would have

 7     let you continue for another couple of minutes if LiveNote had not

 8     collapsed and when we tried to reconnect, that's -- even the results were

 9     worse than before, so therefore I suggest that we have a break first and

10     resume at quarter to 1.00.

11                           --- Recess taken at 12.28 p.m.

12                           --- On resuming at 12.48 p.m.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, before you continue, when I said before the

14     break, that you were counsel for the Prosecution, that was a slip of the

15     tongue.  And Freud has got nothing to do with that.

16             Please proceed.

17             MR. KAY:  Thank you, Your Honour.  No, I didn't get the job.

18        Q.   I'm going to ask you some questions now about the statement taken

19     by Mr. Gerovac and Mr. Mikulic.  And I want you to describe, first of

20     all, how they approached you, in order to discuss with you what had

21     happened on the 27th of August.

22             How were you approached by them?

23        A.   On that day, I was in the field.  I think that I wasn't to Ploce

24     and Makarska around 4.00 p.m. I left Makarska.  A colleague phoned me and

25     said that some colleagues from Zagreb were waiting for me, that they

Page 28723

 1     wanted to see me.  I asked which colleagues.  And he replied, well, you

 2     will see once you arrive.  I expected a -- a colleague with whom I

 3     co-operated.

 4             When I arrived at the police administration, Mr. Vrticevic said

 5     that they were waiting for me upstairs at the general crime department

 6     and that they were interested in the Grubori incident.  And so I went

 7     upstairs to the Department of General Crime, and the colleague took me to

 8     the office where these people were.

 9             I had known one of them by sight.  There was a case of murder in

10     our police administration and he also worked on it.  I said hello, and we

11     spoke about that incident a little.  We spoke about ten minutes about

12     that case.  It was a specific case.  And then he said to me that they

13     were passing by and that they wanted to talk to me about Grubori, and I

14     asked what -- how do you want us to talk?  Formally or informally?  And

15     he said no, just like that, to see whether you remember some things.

16             This is how we established contact.

17        Q.   Was it formally or informally that they were -- that they had

18     represented to you they were going to speak to you?

19        A.   Informally.

20        Q.   And how long did they speak to you about Grubori?

21        A.   We spoke for some ten minutes or so.  We little a cigarette.  We

22     opened a -- the window, and after ten minutes, we went our own separate

23     ways.

24        Q.   Did they take any notes of that discussion at the time?

25        A.   No.  We were all standing.  One of the colleagues was a

Page 28724

 1     non-smoker and the other was a smoker, but I don't really remember which

 2     one lit a cigarette with me.  So we were standing by the window while we

 3     were talking about Grubori.

 4        Q.   Did they say they were going to compile an Official Note of what

 5     you had discussed with them?

 6        A.   No.

 7        Q.   Did they record the interview in any other way, with a tape

 8     recorder, for instance, or a video recorder?

 9        A.   I wasn't warned of that and I didn't observe any recording

10     device.  They never said that they would record anything.

11        Q.   When did you first see their Official Note recording what was

12     discussed between you and them?

13        A.   I saw it first time when you gentlemen from the Defence came to

14     interview me, or, rather, no -- sorry.  I saw it for the first time when

15     the gentlemen from the OTP came to interview me.

16        Q.   And did you keep a record of that interview after the OTP had

17     shown it to you?

18        A.   No.  I didn't receive any copy of the interview I gave to either

19     Mr. Badzim or to Mr. Gerovac.

20        Q.   And what was your reaction when you saw the Official Note, as

21     recorded by Gerovac and Mikulic?

22        A.   Well, I must tell you that I was angry.  This may be the most

23     convenient term to use now.  Because they had written down things that I

24     had never told them.

25        Q.   Had you ever said to them that General Cermak had suggested

Page 28725

 1     placing guns next to the dead bodies at Grubori?

 2        A.   No.  They came to me with that information.  That's what they

 3     suggested.

 4        Q.   And how did they suggest that to you?  Describe what happened in

 5     the time that you spent with them.  How did they suggest it?

 6        A.   During that conversation, or while we conversed, rather, I can't

 7     remember which one of them mentioned that first.  I can't repeat the

 8     words verbatim.

 9             In any case, what they said was this.  We came by information

10     that General Cermak offered, or suggested, that you should place weapons

11     by the dead bodies.

12        Q.   And what did you say to that, when that was stated by one of

13     them?

14        A.   I told them that Mr. Cermak never said that to me, and it would

15     have been strange if a person whom I saw for the first time among a group

16     of people to say that to me.  It would have been totally strange and

17     didn't make much sense to imagine that somebody I saw for the first time

18     came up to me and said, Take weapons and place them by the dead bodies.

19        Q.   I wonder whether you can help us with this.  An Official Note,

20     such as this, taken by Gerovac and Mikulic, is that a document you would

21     normally ever see?

22        A.   I think that this document could have reached him through some

23     other channels.  Otherwise, I would not have seen him -- seen it.

24        Q.   So the procedure, is it this in Croatia, that when a Official

25     Note is taken from a witness, he doesn't get to see the document because

Page 28726

 1     it's not recorded at the time, if it's not recorded at the time; is that

 2     right?

 3        A.   Yes, absolutely right.

 4        Q.   If the document, then, is made up later, several days afterwards,

 5     in the normal procedure in the Croatian investigating system, again,

 6     would that witness not be given a copy of that document and not see what

 7     was written?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   Was there any truth in the document written by him where it is

10     stated that Cermak said that:  "... an on-site investigation had to be

11     conducted in Grubori but before that on-site investigation, guns had to

12     be placed next to the dead bodies in order to make it appears as if the

13     persons killed had put up resistance."

14             Was there any truth that that was said by you?

15        A.   The only truth is in the part that Mr. Cermak asked me to carry

16     out an on-site investigation.

17             As far as placing weapons there, before the on-site investigation

18     started, there is not an iota of truth in that, and I never stated that.

19        Q.   As a policeman who investigates crimes some of the background

20     detail, such as you were sitting on stairs with several colleagues, if

21     you had been sitting on stairs with several colleagues, would the

22     identities of those colleagues be discoverable even today by going to the

23     records at Zadar-Knin police station, police administration?

24        A.   One might do that.  Because those men were employed there.

25        Q.   In your statement that you gave to the Defence, you refer to

Page 28727

 1     civilian protection officers also involved on the 27th of August; is that

 2     correct?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Are those the sorts of colleagues, if you had been sitting on the

 5     stairs waiting for a job at Knin police station, are those the sort of

 6     colleagues who could have been questioned to find out if what you said

 7     was true, if you said it?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   And how many civilian protection officers did you work with?

10        A.   I believe that there were four.

11        Q.   How many fire officers did you work with?  Explosives officers.

12        A.   There were no fire officers involved.  There were only two or

13     three explosives officers.  It depended on the mission.  There were some

14     situations when only two were sent; and if they were not too busy, then

15     sometimes even three or four would accompany us on on-site

16     investigations.

17        Q.   So to find out if you were telling the truth, would you agree,

18     others could have been questioned to find out if this story is true?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   When the investigating judge at the county court in Zagreb spoke

21     to you in 2010, did you just give him an account that we see on this page

22     and which you looked at this morning with Mr. Hedaraly?  Did you just

23     state this as an entire statement?

24        A.   I explained to the judge about an event, and then the judge

25     dictated to the secretary and the secretary recorded my statement.  In

Page 28728

 1     this part of the statement, as I've already stated in answering the

 2     Prosecutor's questions, two words were left out from what I said, from

 3     what I opined.  I said that two words were missing from the statement, as

 4     it was recorded.

 5        Q.   I just want to ask you some questions about the taking of this

 6     statement in Zagreb --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, since the e-court system is causing a lot

 8     of problems, could you remind me of the exhibit number which was assigned

 9     to this statement?

10             MR. KAY:  Yes.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  I would have looked it up under normal

12     circumstances.

13             MR. KAY:  P --

14             MR. HEDARALY:  2729, the judge's --

15             MR. KAY:  Yes.

16             MR. HEDARALY:  The record of interview to the county court.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

18             MR. KAY:  I'm grateful to my learned friend.

19             My LiveNote's gone down here, but I will remind myself again as

20     to what I was asking.

21        Q.   And that was -- I'm going to ask you about how this statement was

22     taken in Zagreb which was compiled on 16th of February, 2010.

23             How long were you questioned for in the courtroom?

24        A.   I believe that the whole interview lasted for some 15 or 20

25     minutes.  But I can't be sure of that, I can't remember.

Page 28729

 1        Q.   I've just seen on the document it commenced at 12.05 and it

 2     completed at 12.50.  How long did it take to write the statement during

 3     that 45 minutes?

 4        A.   That's the total time.  I first provided my statement to the

 5     judge, explaining what happened.  Then the judge would dictate that part

 6     to the secretary, and then the secretary would record what the judge was

 7     dictating to her.  That's how the interview proceeded.

 8        Q.   And, again, if I can ask you this:  Did the judge in Zagreb, does

 9     he have a copy of the Official Notes taken by the police officers?

10        A.   I don't know.  I was never shown any Official Notes.

11        Q.   And I know you weren't shown, but it's just a procedural matter,

12     whether you know for a fact, as a policeman, whether the investigating

13     judge has information that -- that you don't have or -- but he has a file

14     with it in.

15        A.   As a rule, he should have had them.

16        Q.   Again, this statement is set in Knin, where you are alleged to

17     have spoken to General Cermak.  Did you have any access to any sort of

18     documents to refresh your memory as to what was said or what happened at

19     that time for these proceedings?

20        A.   No.

21        Q.   This is recorded as you having said that you were approached by

22     General Cermak and a group of soldiers surrounding him.

23             Now, in all that took place, when you saw General Cermak on the

24     27th of August, was he ever surrounded by a group of soldiers?

25        A.   General Cermak was, indeed, with a group of soldiers.  We were

Page 28730

 1     all within that group.  There were journalists.  All of us were there in

 2     that group.

 3        Q.   The word I'm interested in is "surrounding him."  So that he's in

 4     a middle of a group, that he's surrounded by a group.  Was that ever a

 5     picture that happened on the 27th of August?

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly.

 7             MR. HEDARALY:  I'm sorry, but if -- maybe it would be, if we're

 8     going to quote from the document, I think it's not "surrounded," now it's

 9     "around."  Surrounding was before --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  If there is any dispute about what was said, then a

11     literal quote is to be given to the witness.

12             MR. KAY:  Yes, I'll ask him to do it -- well, it may be that I've

13     got an earlier version of a translation here, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  If you'd read it literally --

15             MR. KAY:  Yes.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  -- what you have in your version --

17             MR. KAY:  [Overlapping speakers]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  -- then if Mr. Hedaraly has newer one than you.

19             MR. KAY:  Yes, if Mr. Hedaraly could read it out that would

20     indeed assist me, as I think I've got an earlier version, then, of the

21     translation, if it's been updated.

22             MR. HEDARALY:  It's just that there's two mentions.  There's the

23     group surrounding General Cermak and then later on the group around him

24     approached me.

25             I just don't know which quote that Mr. Kay was referring to.

Page 28731

 1     Maybe it's just to put it on the screen, it could just be much easier.

 2             MR. KAY:  Well, I'll just stay with my original question.

 3        Q.   Was he ever surrounded, in the understanding of that word, by

 4     soldiers?

 5        A.   Not surrounded in the classical sense of that word, but he was

 6     within the group, among -- among soldiers.

 7        Q.   So what I would like to go to now is the questions that you were

 8     asked by the Office of the Prosecutor, when they interviewed you.

 9             Did you ever tell them that General Cermak never mentioned

10     anything about placing guns or leaving guns or putting guns?

11        A.   Yes.  I said that on no occasion had General Cermak referred to

12     either leaving or placing weapons by the dead bodies.  General Cermak

13     spoke to me only on one occasion and on that occasion he mentioned the

14     on-site investigation.

15        Q.   Thank you.  I now want to go to Plavno.  And you said that you

16     arrived there from Strmica.  How many vehicles travelled from Strmica to

17     Plavno?

18        A.   I believe that there were three.  The civilian protection in

19     their own vehicle; we in our own vehicle, myself and my colleague,

20     Vrticevic; and explosives experts travelled in their own vehicle.

21        Q.   I'd like you to look at that photograph, JB/1, that you produced

22     in your statement.

23             MR. KAY:  Exhibit 2049.

24        Q.   And if you could just look at that photograph.

25             This is identified in your statement as being the place near a

Page 28732

 1     creek or bridge where cars had stopped.

 2             Are you able to describe to us where your vehicles parked, having

 3     travelled from Strmica?

 4        A.   We were supposed to be even further behind these vehicles, and

 5     you can't see them in this part of the photo.

 6             I remember this well.  This is a very short section and there

 7     were quite a few vehicles double-parked on the road.

 8        Q.   We have facilities where you can mark on -- on the screen for us,

 9     if that will assist the Court.  Firstly, how many vehicles were parked

10     here.

11             You've just indicated on the screen -- if you could indicate on

12     the screen where your vehicle stopped?

13        A.   Our vehicle should be somewhere here, behind this part at the

14     very far end of the photo, as you can see.

15        Q.   And how wide is this road?

16        A.   About 3 metres wide.  Actually, it is a village road and village

17     roads are normally 3 metres wide, although it is a double circulation

18     road.  The traffic goes in both directions.

19        Q.   And can you tell us how many vehicles were stopped at this place?

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly.

21             MR. HEDARALY:  I just want to -- if we could just get information

22     from Mr. Kay whether this is a recent photograph or a contemporaneous

23     photograph, whether -- you know, was it shown to the witness before -- I

24     mean, just to have some background on the photograph just so we know what

25     we're looking at.

Page 28733

 1             MR. KAY:  It's a recent photograph.

 2        Q.   Is there anything about this photograph that is different from

 3     the 27th of August, 1995?

 4        A.   It was not as green as I can see it in this photo.  In any case,

 5     I recognise this little bridge in this part here.

 6        Q.   Thank you.

 7        A.   And there was a dry creek here, where we found a skeleton while

 8     we were standing there.

 9        Q.   And how many cars had stopped here in this place?

10        A.   I really don't know.  I don't know how many.  Probably a dozen or

11     so.  There were journalists, there were our three vehicles, the army

12     vehicles, the special police vehicles.  I'm sure that there were around

13     ten or so vehicle there.

14        Q.   And whereabouts were -- were those vehicles parked?

15        A.   All the vehicles pulled over on the road in this part, and that's

16     where they were all parked.

17        Q.   And were people just standing around generally in this area, as

18     a -- as a random group of people?

19        A.   Most of the group were here by the bridge, in this part here.

20     And that's where we met up with General Cermak as well.

21        Q.   You said you saw General Cermak with journalists.

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Whereabouts were those journalists and he?

24        A.   If my memory serves me properly, in this part here.  The vehicles

25     were parked by this side, and in this part here, there was a larger group

Page 28734

 1     of people.  General Cermak was somewhere around here, in front of us,

 2     with a group of journalists.

 3        Q.   You described hearing someone behind you saying about leaving the

 4     weapons, or putting the weapons.  Whereabouts did that statement come

 5     from?  Are you able to mark on this photograph for us?

 6        A.   When we joined that group of people, and I don't know whether it

 7     was in this part exactly or maybe a couple of metres further.

 8             In any case, behind me while we were all talking, behind me I

 9     heard a voice referring to the leaving of weapons.

10        Q.   If you could just mark the general whereabouts of where that was

11     said with -- with an X for me, please.

12        A.   Well, if I was here, then that voice came from somewhere around

13     here, from that part here.

14        Q.   If you could just mark for me a square where you were, please.

15        A.   [Marks]

16        Q.   And if you could mark for me a C, where Mr. Cermak was, please.

17        A.   Here, or thereabouts.

18        Q.   And were there people standing in between you and Mr. Cermak?

19        A.   The vehicles were parked here.  We met up here on this side of

20     the road.  We could not gather around the vehicles.  That was the group

21     of people, there, in this part.  We were standing in -- in a line, not

22     exactly in a very neat line like troops would be in a lineup, but we were

23     standing in a sort of a -- a line.  We were not in a circle.  We were not

24     just randomly standing there.  We were kind of lined up.

25        Q.   But so we get this clear, at that time when a remark is made

Page 28735

 1     about leaving weapons, were a number of people chatting, talking in a

 2     random fashion?

 3        A.   Yes.  People were talking or -- they were conversing.  There were

 4     groups of two or three talking amongst each other.  People all --

 5     everybody was saying something.

 6        Q.   And so the 30 or so people that you stated in your statement,

 7     were they in this general area that you've marked out on the photograph

 8     at that time?

 9             MR. HEDARALY:  I'm sorry, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Hedaraly.

11             MR. HEDARALY:  I know Mr. Kay mentioned 30 people.  I think that

12     may be in the statement, but I think today the witness stated an

13     approximate number that was much less and it seems that that's what we

14     should go with if we ask questions to him not based on some earlier

15     statement.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  At least it should be clear what we're doing,

17     whether you try to refer to the one or to the other version is -- but it

18     should be clear.

19             Mr. Kay, apart from that, you referred to the marking.  To say

20     that without a further description on the record that it would be

21     immediately clear to everyone what we referred to, is, on the basis of

22     the markings, not very clear.

23             But I do understand that the marking on the far right is where

24     the witness's car was.  That what is -- seems to an interrupted

25     horizontal line is a dry creek where two lines at where there are some

Page 28736

 1     small poles is said to be a bridge.  And that where the people gathered

 2     or where they were seems to be on the part of the road marked which goes

 3     from left under to a bit more right up.

 4             MR. KAY:  I'm much obliged Your Honour.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 6             MR. KAY:

 7        Q.   Just so that it's clear, how many people were at this location

 8     when you heard the remark that we've been discussing?  How many people?

 9        A.   I heard the Prosecutor's -- the Prosecutor's remark about some 15

10     to 20 or maybe there were -- and you were saying about 30 or so.  I can

11     try and clarify, if necessary.

12        Q.   Forget what we've said.  You just tell us what you say is the

13     number of people who were here at this location at that time when you

14     heard this remark.

15        A.   Here, in this area, there were some 20 people or so.

16        Q.   And by "this area," so that it's clear to us, could you mark a

17     line across this picture, when you say "this area, about 20 people."

18             Can you mark where --

19        A.   Here, in this area, where there was large group of people, well,

20     they were about 20 or so.

21        Q.   And --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  And we have the traditional problem that marking in

23     colours means something.  This red marking is done at the request of the

24     Defence.

25             MR. KAY:  Yes.

Page 28737

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  I don't think that it needs to be corrected.  It is

 2     now on the record.  Please proceed.

 3             MR. KAY:  Yes.  Thank you, Your Honour.  I was going describe it

 4     as being a red mark now on the photograph.  Don't worry about that.

 5        Q.   And then the number of people entirely in this location, is that

 6     a different number?

 7        A.   Yes.  We found a group of some 15 to 20 people there, and seven

 8     or eight of us joined them.  So that would make a total of about 30

 9     people, once we had joined them.

10        Q.   Thank you.  And just so it's clear, you're being asked what

11     Mr. Cermak could have heard on your description of the events, is it

12     right that Mr. Cermak was on the other side of you to where the remark

13     was made.

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   You are being asked to say whether he could have heard that

16     remark.  Now, based upon everything you've told us - the number of

17     people, where Mr. Cermak was, where you were, where the person who made

18     the remark, given the scene that was happening - can you say if

19     Mr. Cermak heard that remark?

20        A.   I couldn't say whether he heard it or not.

21        Q.   Looking -- looking back now and having looked and analysed this

22     15 years later, do you agree that it's highly unlikely, given those

23     circumstances, that he could have heard the remark to which you reacted?

24        A.   Given the distance between him and me, he might have heard it.

25     But, of course, I don't know whether he was in another conversation or

Page 28738

 1     whether he was focussed on other conversations around him, whether he was

 2     paying attention.  That's something I cannot comment upon.

 3        Q.   So let us now look at that remark that he might have heard and to

 4     which you reacted.

 5             If you could just repeat to the Court the words that you heard.

 6        A.   First, weapons should be left.

 7        Q.   Do you know who said that?

 8        A.   No.  Somebody behind my back said those words.  I've already

 9     explained that.

10        Q.   Do you know if that person was speaking to anyone in particular?

11        A.   When I turned around and made my comment, I couldn't identify the

12     person who had said that.  I couldn't tell.  But they were talking to

13     each other, so who said those words to who, I really couldn't say.

14        Q.   When you reacted, did anyone reply to you?

15        A.   No, nobody.

16        Q.   Did anyone respond in any physical way to what you said?

17        A.   No.  They continued talking as if nothing had happened.  In fact,

18     I don't know what that -- what they were referring to, or they may

19     have -- they may not have heard my remark that I uttered when I turned

20     around and faced them.

21        Q.   Yes.  I was going to ask that you, whether you know if anyone

22     heard what you said.

23        A.   No.  I don't know, because nobody reacted to my words.

24        Q.   Do you know -- you don't know whether, in fact, the context of

25     what you heard was connected with how you reacted; isn't that right?

Page 28739

 1        A.   That is right.

 2        Q.   You were asked questions earlier this morning about what you

 3     understood.  Would you agree with me, having looked at this evidence,

 4     that you were not in a position to be sure about the context of this

 5     remark?

 6        A.   That is correct.

 7        Q.   So when you were asked what you understood it to mean, you don't

 8     know what the maker of the statement or remark was talking about.

 9        A.   That is correct.

10        Q.   And is it right that no weapons were placed next to bodies when

11     you went to Grubori to perform your tasks?

12        A.   That is right.  And the photographs that we took and the video

13     footage we made shows that, indeed, no weapons were placed there.

14        Q.   So other than that moment here, did anyone at any other time on

15     that afternoon suggest that you, in some way, fabricate the crime scene?

16        A.   No.  It is my duty as a forensic technician to preserve the crime

17     scene the way it was when I found it.

18        Q.   And as far as you know, were any of your colleagues who you were

19     working with on that day requested to manufacture a crime scene?

20        A.   No.  My colleagues, to the extent I know them, would not agree to

21     that.  They would -- they wouldn't do such a thing.

22        Q.   And -- and this remark you heard and your reaction, did you

23     report it to anyone that day as being a matter that should be

24     investigated?

25        A.   No, I didn't consider it necessary.

Page 28740

 1        Q.   Or at any other stage in the subsequent weeks or months, did you

 2     report it to anyone so that they could investigate it to discover the

 3     significance?

 4        A.   No.  I'm telling you, once we arrived at Grubori, I interpreted

 5     this leaving of weapons differently, that word.  Because we all had

 6     long-barrelled weapons.  We entered the village with only personal

 7     weapons on us, me and my colleagues anyway.

 8             The reason was that there was still some people alive there.  A

 9     crime had been committed, and a group of people armed with long-barrelled

10     and short-barrelled weapons was entering the village again, and I

11     interpreted this leaving of weapons the way I did.  And then it

12     completely slipped my memory, and I considered it unnecessary to report

13     anything to anybody.

14        Q.   Thank you.  So looking back at it now - because it's your

15     reaction that people are analysing about this - would you agree that you

16     could have misinterpreted that remark at the time.

17        A.   Most probably.

18        Q.   There was nothing else happening on that day that -- that

19     involved falsifying the crime scene with weapons.

20        A.   No, nothing else happened.  We did our job the usual way as on

21     any other day.

22        Q.   The sort of people in that area who were standing around there,

23     can you recollect what types of people they were, where they came from,

24     if they were official people or civilians?  Can you recollect the type of

25     people who were there in that general area?

Page 28741

 1        A.   There was soldiers, there were members of the special police

 2     force, then me and my colleague, Mr. Vrticevic.  There were journalists.

 3     And there were several protection people; they were also civilians.  And

 4     there were also bomb techs, but they were also with the civil protection.

 5             So it was a mixed group of civilians, soldiers, police and

 6     journalists.

 7        Q.   Looking back at all this, then, Mr. Bilobrk, and the numbers of

 8     statements that you've given, whom you've spoken to, and then, more

 9     latterly, to the Defence, people when they've been speaking to you about

10     this, have any of them being trying to get you to say something that you

11     didn't want to say?  Have they -- have people at all tried to put words

12     into your mouth, force you into a position to say something about this

13     for them to hold a position?

14        A.   Yes, my colleagues Mr. Mikulic and Mr. Gerovac after those

15     questions they put it me, we have mentioned their statement, who --

16     who -- or, rather, which high-ranking official had --

17             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat these last two

18     or three sentences.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, could you please repeat the last few

20     sentences.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In replying to this question put to

22     me by the Defence, Mr. Gerovac and Mr. Mikulic, who had interviewed me,

23     came with this information and their first question was who -- or,

24     rather, which high-ranking official had told me to put weapons beside the

25     dead bodies.  And in -- that's what they mentioned in this statement, and

Page 28742

 1     they meant Mr. Cermak, because they mentioned his name in their question,

 2     General Cermak.

 3             MR. KAY:

 4        Q.   And when you were seen by the Defence and interviewed and shown

 5     documents that form the basis of the statement that's an exhibit, did the

 6     Defence try and put any words into your mouth, get you to say something

 7     you didn't want to say, make suggestions to you, turn your words around

 8     in any way when you made your statement?

 9        A.   No.

10        Q.   And -- and were you given as long as you like to look at the

11     documents, your previous statements, the record of your interview with

12     the Defence in your own language, without any pressure and free to speak?

13        A.   Yes.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, you used the words as "long as you like,"

15     "without any pressure."  I'm looking at the clock.

16             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, before I do anything else, can I make the

17     photograph with the markings an exhibit.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, the marked photograph.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Shall be assigned Exhibit D2051.  Thank you.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

21             MR. HEDARALY:  We can admit it into evidence.  I'm not sure how

22     helpful it is, but there are some indications so that we don't have any

23     objection.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  I tried to do my utmost best [Overlapping

25     speakers] ...

Page 28743

 1             MR. KAY:  I found it very helpful for my part, Your Honour, if

 2     Mr. Hedaraly is concerned.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, it's in evidence and let's --

 4             MR. KAY:  Yes.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, we'll have to conclude for the day.  Could

 6     you give us an indication as to where you are in terms of time?

 7             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, if I could just review notes overnight I

 8     will not be very long.  I've got a feeling here, but I'd like to talk to

 9     those I work with just to see if I should have covered something today.

10     I tried to keep it.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Either nothing or as relatively short.

12             MR. KAY:  Yes, it will be relatively short.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kuzmanovic.

14             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, I'd say about half an hour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  About half an hour.  Which means that most likely

16     we'll conclude - I'm also looking at you, Mr. Hedaraly - during the first

17     session tomorrow morning.

18             Then before we continue, let me first instruct the witness.

19     Mr. Bilobrk, we'll adjourn for the day.  We'll start again tomorrow

20     morning at 9.00.  You should not speak with anyone or communicate in any

21     other way with anyone, whomever that is, about your testimony, whether

22     that is testimony given today, or testimony still to be given tomorrow.

23             So total silence in your communication with others.  Is that

24     clear to you?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

Page 28744

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Then could the usher escort the witness out of the

 2     courtroom.

 3                           [The witness stands down]

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  For tomorrow, the proposed schedule is the

 5     following.  From 9.00 to 10.45 first session; then a short break, 11.10

 6     until 1.00, second session; from 2.00 to quarter to 4.00, third session.

 7     From ten minutes past 4.00 until 5.30 the fourth session.  And, if need

 8     be, the last fifth session between 6.00 p.m. and 7.00 p.m.

 9             That will be our schedule for tomorrow.

10             We'll adjourn for the day and will resume tomorrow, Thursday, the

11     3rd of June, 9.00 in this same Courtroom III.

12             But perhaps we should have returned to open session -- but --

13     perhaps that's better to do that, so that I apologise for the

14     inconvenience, everyone rising.

15             Mr. Registrar, could we just return into open session.

16                           [Open session]

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

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

19             We adjourn for the day.  We'll resume tomorrow, the 3rd of June,

20     9.00 in the morning, but will turn into private session immediately and

21     most likely for the remainder of that day.

22             We stand adjourned.

23                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.51 p.m.,

24                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 3rd day of June,

25                           2010, at 9.00 a.m.