Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 10906

 1                           Monday, 31 January 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 2.34 p.m.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Good afternoon, everyone.

 6             Yes, Madam Uertz-Retzlaff.  I understand you have a submission to

 7     make.

 8             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Yes, Your Honour.  And, indeed, it relates

 9     to two issues, one of which is very urgent, and it would need to be in

10     private session.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

12             Let us go into private session briefly.

13            [Private session] [Confidentiality partially lifted by order of Chamber]

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16             Your Honour, the first one is very brief.  It relates to your

17     decision on the site visit.  I just want to mention that the Prosecution

18     nominates Ms. Carolyn Edgerton as a replacement for Mr. Hogan.  That's

19     the first.

20             And the second issue relates to our filing of an amended witness

21     list and to clarify one matter, and I clarify it because of the response

22     of Mr. Robinson.  The filing relates to the replacement of Dr. Zecevic,

23     and Dr. Zecevic was supposed to testify this week and the following week,

24     so we nominated four witnesses to cover the hours that he was supposed to

25     testify.  The last two of these witnesses, Ms. Dzevlan and Mr. Mujkic,

Page 10907

 1     are not available this week, so I recall that Mr. Robinson made a

 2     response that the Defence could deal with Ms. Dzevlan, but Ms. Dzevlan is

 3     not able to travel this week.

 4             In relation to the other two witnesses that we have nominated for

 5     this week --

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Excuse me.  Who is another witness who is not

 7     available this week, in addition to Ms. Dzevlan?

 8             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Ramiz Mujkic.  That's number 147.  He's the

 9     fourth on this list.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

11             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  And in relation to Mr. Music, the

12     Prosecution would like to have an early decision or remark of the

13     Trial Chamber whether we can call him this week, because if we are

14     allowed to call him, the witness would have to travel tomorrow morning to

15     come here in time.  So that's why we urgently need a decision of the

16     Trial Chamber.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Do we need to discuss that in private session,

18     Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, regarding Music?

19             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  He is not a protected witness.  We could --

20             JUDGE KWON:  We could go back to open session?

21             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Yeah, we could go back to open session.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, let us do that.

23                           [Open session]

24             JUDGE KWON:  Separate from inquiry of that part, do you have any

25     observation to make in response to the response of Mr. Robinson in that

Page 10908

 1     regard?

 2             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Yes.

 3             Your Honour, we have tried to find witnesses that are available

 4     on short notice when we became aware that Dr. Zecevic would not be

 5     available, and Mr. Hogan and Mr. Music are the only two that we could

 6     actually find to replace him on short notice.

 7             We are aware that there is a disclosure issue in relation to a

 8     statement of Mr. Music.  We can definitely admit that this statement was

 9     not disclosed.  We will argue why it was not done, but I can say it here

10     also.  It did not come up in a name search for the witness because the

11     witness name could not be read on the first page.  It was only now found

12     in relation to other key words for which we were searching, and this is

13     what I can say to this effect.

14             I can also say that the statement does include new information,

15     because the statement focused on another person in the chain of command

16     that Mr. Music was actually dealing with, so -- on the Serb side.  So

17     that's why there is new information in there, but we would not -- we, the

18     Prosecution, would not lead any information from that statement, because

19     it's not relevant for our case, as we see it.

20             JUDGE KWON:  It is my understanding that Mr. Music appears in the

21     February witness list, and, as such, it was notified to the Defence that

22     he may come in February.

23             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Yes, that's correct.

24             Indeed, all the witnesses that we have mentioned here are listed

25     as one of the early -- now coming in February, so --

Page 10909

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Is it the case in the case of Mr. Hogan?

 2             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Yes, that's correct.  I think he's the sixth

 3     or seventh next witness.  And we have, on purpose, also nominated him.

 4             He is available, definitely, as he is here in The Hague.  And in

 5     addition, he deals with issues that Dr. Karadzic is very familiar with,

 6     because he will deal with the locations and the topography of Sarajevo,

 7     basically, with one side issue, that he also took in materials from the

 8     Banja Luka archives.  But the main topic of Mr. Hogan is basically the

 9     locations where incidents occurred and the visibility, what can be seen

10     from where.  So we thought that -- as Dr. Karadzic has addressed these

11     topics very specifically with many witnesses, we thought that he would be

12     able to deal with Mr. Hogan's evidence.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Do you like to reply, Mr. Robinson, on these issues?

14             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes.  Thank you, Mr. President.

15             We definitely recognise the difficulty that the Prosecution has

16     in bringing witnesses on short notice, and undoubtedly we'll encounter

17     those same difficulties in the course of our case.  So we have that

18     understanding that it's some need to be flexible.

19             Practical problems that are, with respect to Mr. Music, we really

20     haven't prepared any cross-examination of him at this point, even though

21     he's on the list for February.  In an ideal situation, we would be a

22     month ahead, but I think that's completely unrealistic, given the volume

23     of documents in this case and the amount of resources that we have.  So

24     we haven't really begun to really prepare, in all earnestness, his

25     cross-examination.  And we have a statement just disclosed to us only in

Page 10910

 1     B/C/S, I believe on Thursday or Friday.  We intend to file tomorrow a

 2     disclosure violation motion based on the late disclosure of that

 3     statement and ask that the witness's testimony be excluded.  If you

 4     follow your earlier pattern, you won't grant that motion, but you have in

 5     the past, in identical situations, required that the Prosecution delay

 6     for one, two, or even three months the calling of such witnesses, and so

 7     we don't think it would be fair, given that disclosure situation, to call

 8     Mr. Music in any event.

 9             With respect to Mr. Hogan, I suggest that we certainly hear his

10     direct examination on Wednesday.  We have no objection to doing that.

11     It's supposed to take two hours.  We can do our best to be prepared for

12     his cross-examination on Thursday, and it's possible, given the nature of

13     his testimony, that we can achieve that.  On the other hand, if it turns

14     out that there are other issues for him that would assist in the Defence

15     case that we would like to ask him about, we may be disadvantaged by the

16     late notice, and in such instance we could do our best to cross-examine

17     him and try to ask that he be recalled, since he's in The Hague, for some

18     other matters.  But we're willing to do our best to accommodate the

19     Prosecution's desire to call Mr. Hogan and have his testimony heard this

20     week.

21             Thank you.

22             JUDGE KWON:  The Chamber will consider the matter and give its

23     ruling in the next session.

24             Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

25             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Your Honour, I've just seen information from

Page 10911

 1     the Office of the Prosecutor that we did not list Mr. Hogan as one of the

 2     early witnesses this month; indeed, not even this month.  I'm just seeing

 3     this, that we had actually postponed him until we hear the last witnesses

 4     in the Sarajevo component of the case.  So I was wrong in my

 5     understanding.  Sorry.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  He appears as the last one in the

 7     January and February list?

 8             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Yes, that's correct.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

10             That said, let's draw the curtain and bring in the witness.

11             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Yes, Your Honour.  Nothing more.

12             MR. ROBINSON:  Mr. President, while this witness is brought in,

13     perhaps we could profitably use the time to just alert you that, with

14     respect to this particular witness, I'm going to have an objection to

15     portions of his amalgamated statement that deal with unscheduled

16     incidents.  So I don't know if you want to take that up now or after he

17     affirms his amalgamated statement and it's offered, but there's a number

18     of unscheduled incidents that are described in the amalgamated statement

19     and a number of associated exhibits that deal with unscheduled incidents,

20     and we would be objecting to the admission of those portions of the

21     statement and the associated exhibits.

22                           [The witness entered court]

23             JUDGE KWON:  Given our earlier decision, I don't think we have to

24     repeat the rulings again.  You understand that?

25             MR. ROBINSON:  I understand that.  But I think, given your

Page 10912

 1     earlier decisions, that would result in the exclusion of the associated

 2     exhibits.  So you previously have been admitting the statement, but not

 3     admitting the associated exhibits dealing with unscheduled incidents.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  We'll come to that when dealing with the associated

 5     exhibits.  Thank you, Mr. Robinson.

 6             Good afternoon, Mr. Witness.

 7             If you could take the solemn declaration, please.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.

 9             I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth,

10     and nothing but the truth.

11                           WITNESS:  KDZ477

12                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

13             JUDGE KWON:  Please make yourself comfortable.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Good afternoon, Mr. Gaynor.  It's your witness.

16             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. President.

17                           Examination by Mr. Gaynor:

18        Q.   Witness, good afternoon.

19             I understand you've previously testified in the trial of

20     Stanislav Galic and in the trial of Dragomir Milosevic.  Is that right?

21        A.   Correct.

22        Q.   And you've previously provided signed statements for this

23     Tribunal, and you've provided information to the Office of the

24     Prosecutor?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 10913

 1        Q.   You have reviewed an amalgamated statement containing relevant

 2     portions of your previous testimonies and of the information you provided

 3     to the Office of the Prosecutor?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  Could I ask that the first exhibit not be broadcast

 6     and that it be brought up.  It's 22273, please.

 7        Q.   On the screen in front of you, do you see a copy of the first

 8     page of your amalgamated statement?

 9        A.   I can see it.

10        Q.   Do you also see a -- do you see your name and your date of birth?

11        A.   I do.

12        Q.   You've had an opportunity to review that statement yesterday and

13     today?

14        A.   Yes, I have.

15        Q.   I understand there's one clarification you wish to make in

16     respect of that statement and it concerns paragraph 85 of the statement.

17             In your statement, Witness, you describe two air-bomb incidents,

18     both of which took place at Safeta Hadzica Street.  One of them was on

19     the 26th of May, 1995, and the other was on the 28th of June, 1995.  And

20     in your statement, at paragraph 85, you say that you personally saw the

21     modified air-bomb pass over the police station; do you recall that?

22        A.   Yes, I do.

23        Q.   Could you explain to the Court whether you recall exactly whether

24     that relates to the Safeta Hadzica Street incident of the 26th of May,

25     1995, or whether it refers to the incident at the same street of the

Page 10914

 1     28th of June, 1995?

 2        A.   Now, after all this time, it's difficult to remember when exactly

 3     that happened, but it certainly happened in one of these two incidents.

 4     I believe I provided more accurate information in my first statement.

 5             I did not see it in either incident [as interpreted], but it was

 6     one of these two incidents.  I was in the same place when these

 7     projectiles flew over, but whether it was the first case or the second

 8     case, I don't know.  The bottom line is I saw that projectile only in one

 9     of the two incidents.  And probably, since I gave statements several

10     times, there may have occurred a misunderstanding about the date, whether

11     I saw it in the first incident or the second incident.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Your answer reads, in part, "I did not see it in

13     either incident."  Just to clarify the record, the position is you did

14     see it in one of the two incidents, but you can't recall which one?

15        A.   That's right.  I described in detail, in one of my statements,

16     that I saw how that projectile flew over, but I cannot remember exactly

17     now in which of the two incidents.

18        Q.   Subject to that clarification, Mr. Witness, do you adopt that

19     statement as your evidence, and would you provide the same answers if you

20     were asked, under oath, about those topics today?

21        A.   That's correct.

22             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd like to tender that statement under seal,

23     Mr. President.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, that will be admitted.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P2163, under seal, Your Honours.

Page 10915

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Are you planning to produce a public version of

 2     that?

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  We can do, yes.  We shall do so.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Then shall we give the number for that?

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  Very well, Mr. President.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honour, that will be Exhibit P2164.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  And, Mr. President, I propose to read a brief

 9     summary of the statement that's just been admitted.

10             The witness was a crime technician for the Centre for

11     Public Security, CSB, in Sarajevo, of the Ministry of the Interior of the

12     Government of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the RBiH MUP.  He participated in

13     investigations of shelling and sniping incidents occurring in Sarajevo

14     between 1993 and 1995.

15             The witness was involved in the investigation of a shelling

16     incident in which three mortar rounds landed in the area of

17     Alipasino Polje on 22nd January 1994.  Six children were killed and

18     five persons were wounded.  The investigative team concluded that the

19     origin of fire was from the west.  That's Scheduled Incident G6.

20             The witness also investigated a shelling incident on the

21     26th of May, 1995, in which a modified air-bomb struck a building near

22     apartment blocks in Safeta Hadzica Street, destroying the top three

23     floors of an apartment building.  This explosion was followed by several

24     artillery rounds.  Two persons were seriously injured, and

25     fifteen persons were slightly injured.  The air-bomb was determined to

Page 10916

 1     have come from a west-south-west direction.  That's

 2     Scheduled Incident G13.

 3             The witness also describes investigations of five unscheduled

 4     shelling incidents and three unscheduled sniping incidents.  These

 5     incidents included an incident of the 18th of August, 1995, in which a

 6     bus of the Elektroprenos company, which was carrying civilians, was shot

 7     at, killing one girl and injuring fourteen other persons.

 8             That ends the summary, and I'll now begin the

 9     examination-in-chief.

10        Q.   Witness, could you tell us briefly what your role was while you

11     worked for the RBiH MUP between 1993 and the end of the conflict?

12        A.   My job, as a scenes-of-crime officer attached to the

13     Security Services Centre, was to document evidence of a crime in question

14     and, together with the rest of the investigating team, work on

15     investigations.  For certain cases, I took photographs, I sketched the

16     crime scene and collected evidence that the crime really happened.

17        Q.   In respect of shelling incidents, was it specifically your role

18     to determine the direction of fire?

19        A.   No, that was not my role, although I came to the same

20     conclusions, based on the traces, as the rest of the team.  That was more

21     specifically the role of ballistics experts who were either on the scene,

22     or a member of the so-called KDZ, the bomb squad.

23        Q.   Now, notwithstanding that it wasn't specifically your task to

24     determine direction of fire, did you, in fact, receive training in crater

25     analysis in order to determine direction of fire?

Page 10917

 1        A.   Yes, I did undergo training, and I had ballistics experts as my

 2     teachers and instructors.  Based on certain examinations on the scene, I

 3     learned, based on certain traces, to determine the direction of fire so I

 4     was able to come to a conclusion myself as to where the projectile had

 5     come from.

 6        Q.   I want to ask you a couple of questions about cease-fires.  I

 7     would like to know how, generally speaking, you became aware of the

 8     commencement of a cease-fire.

 9        A.   Well, we did not have any notice of cease-fires.  It's just that

10     I lived in that neighbourhood, where I lived and where I worked.  So when

11     there was no shelling, we took it that there was a cease-fire on, though

12     cease-fires were interrupted by surprised shelling, of which, of course,

13     we had not been warned.  So if there was no shelling for a certain time,

14     we called that "cease-fire."  Otherwise, I absolutely didn't know whether

15     there were any agreements as to whether there would or would not be

16     shelling.

17        Q.   You said that cease-fires were interrupted by surprised shelling.

18     Could you clarify if this was typically how a cease-fire would come to an

19     end, or were there occasions where you received warning about the end of

20     the cease-fire?

21        A.   I never received such a warning.  For me, a cease-fire was

22     interrupted when I heard an explosion.  And when such an explosion would

23     occur, we all ran for shelter and waited for a while, until it became

24     relatively quiet, in order to get out, which didn't mean that the

25     shelling would not continue.

Page 10918

 1        Q.   Now, I want to talk about extended periods of cease-fire which

 2     might go on for extended periods.  Would you ever receive warning that an

 3     extended period of cease-fire was about to end?

 4        A.   No, never.

 5        Q.   I understand that you lived in Alipasino Polje for much of the

 6     conflict.  Is that right?

 7        A.   That's right, from 1992 until 1996.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd like to orient the Court to this part of

 9     Sarajevo, and I'd like to call up P1803.  That can be broadcast.

10        Q.   Now, while this is coming up, could you tell us a little bit

11     about the background of Alipasino Polje?  What kind of area is it?

12        A.   That is a strictly residential area.  It has many high-rises.  It

13     was built in three stages, A, B and C.  It is inhabited by several

14     thousand civilian residents, and it was built in end 1970s, early 1980s,

15     mostly for workers, blue-collar workers.  It was a workers'

16     neighbourhood, a civilian neighbourhood.

17             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you.

18             I'd like the Registrar to bring up 65 ter 13564.  I may have

19     given the wrong P number for that, but that's the 65 ter number for it,

20     please.  This is page 11 of the Sarajevo-specific court binder.

21        Q.   Now, Witness, could you take a pen, with the assistance of the

22     Usher, and simply draw a circle around the area which you consider to

23     constitute Alipasino Polje?

24        A.   I can.  [Marks]

25        Q.   Very good.  We see the red marking which you have made around

Page 10919

 1     Alipasino Polje.

 2             Could you give the Court an idea of, approximately, the

 3     population of that area, to the best of your knowledge, during the period

 4     1994 and 1995?

 5        A.   I think it was close to 10.000, because those are mostly

 6     high-rise buildings, a great number of residential units, and all these

 7     residential units were full.  Some were even occupied by more than one

 8     family, because refugees had come to join their families and friends,

 9     just like I did.

10        Q.   Were you aware of the existence of any ABiH barracks in

11     Alipasino Polje?

12        A.   Not that I know, there were no military installations there.  It

13     was a typically civilian neighbourhood, buildings occupied by civilian

14     population.

15        Q.   Did you ever see ABiH artillery, or mortar units, or any

16     ABiH heavy weapons of any description in Alipasino Polje?

17        A.   I did not see any.  I lived in Alipasino Polje, C phase, and I

18     can confirm that throughout that period I had not seen any weapons,

19     absolutely no weapons, no heavy weapons.

20        Q.   I'd like you to mark, for the Court, a number of locations

21     referred to in your indictment [sic] -- excuse me, in your amalgamated

22     statement.

23             First of all, could you mark, with a "1," approximately the

24     centre point of the three shells which landed on the 22nd of January,

25     1994, while the children were playing in the snow, according to your

Page 10920

 1     statement?

 2        A.   [Marks]

 3        Q.   Just mark the figure "1" next to that, if you would.

 4        A.   [Marks]

 5        Q.   All right.  Now, could you mark, with the number 2, the location

 6     of the school at Trg ZAVNOBiHa, referred to at page 7 of your statement?

 7        A.   I'm going to repeat what I've already said.

 8             The transcript says something different.  It should say "Trg

 9     ZAVNOBiHa," and "ZAVNOBiH" has to be written in capital letters at that.

10     That's right.

11             Number 2, what was that?

12        Q.   Yes, number 2, please.

13        A.   [Marks]

14        Q.   Thank you.  Number 2 marks the location of the school where four

15     were killed.

16             Could you mark number 3 for Trg Rade Koncara, referred to at

17     page 7 of your statement, where you say three were killed?

18        A.   [Marks]

19        Q.   Number 4, could you make Geteova Street 12, which was hit on the

20     22nd of June, 1995?

21        A.   [Marks]

22        Q.   Number 5, could you mark Geteova Street 5, which was hit on the

23     28th of June, 1995?

24        A.   It's over here, where the green "6" is.  [Marks]

25        Q.   With the number 6, could you mark the intersection of the two

Page 10921

 1     streets where the Elektroprenos bus was shot on the 18th of August, 1995?

 2        A.   [Marks]

 3        Q.   Could you put down the pseudonym "KDZ477" in the corner of the

 4     map somewhere, and today's date, which is January 31st.

 5        A.   [Marks]

 6             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd like to tender that as a public document,

 7     please.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P2165, Your Honours.

10             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd like to move now to Incident G6.

11        Q.   Witness, for your information, the Court has already received

12     documentation about this, and in that documentation it states -- and in

13     your statement, it states that the direction of fire of the projectiles

14     indicated that they were fired from the direction of Nedzarici.  And I'd

15     like you to clarify for the Court who determined the direction of fire of

16     the projectiles?

17        A.   The team consisted of the investigative judge, myself, the

18     inspector from the Security Services, the inspector for Novi Grad, and

19     ballistic experts.

20             As for the direction of fire, it was the ballistics expert who

21     was in charge of that.  If he were not there, then the KDZ inspector and

22     I were in charge.

23        Q.   And the documentation which the Court has already received, it

24     says that Mirza Sabljica and Borislav Stankov were present.  Could you

25     clarify what you understood their roles to be?

Page 10922

 1        A.   Those two gentlemen were ballistics experts, and that is to say

 2     that they were in charge of the type of grenade that we are talking about

 3     and where it came from.

 4        Q.   They were in charge of what, exactly, in relation to the type of

 5     projectile?

 6        A.   Because they were experts for such things.

 7        Q.   Yes.  If you could just clarify your earlier answer.  It says

 8     "they were in charge of the type of grenade."  That's what we are talking

 9     about, and where it came from.  Just clarify, very briefly, what you

10     meant.

11        A.   Everybody on the team was in charge of a particular type of

12     thing.  I was in charge of taking photographs and carrying out certain

13     measurements that the experts needed so that they could say what kind of

14     shell it had to do with.  That is to say that on the basis of the

15     explosion, itself, it would be the investigative judge who would give

16     them the authority to say what this was all about; what kind of

17     explosion, what kind of shell, and so on.

18        Q.   Now, were the bodies of the victims still at the location when

19     you arrived?

20        A.   No, no, we went out later, when the entire team got together.

21        Q.   Do you happen to know what had become of the bodies of the

22     victims before your arrival?

23        A.   Well, when such incidents occur, we are not the ones who would be

24     out there on the spot, which is only natural, so a citizen who happened

25     to be there would hope that somebody was still alive and then would take

Page 10923

 1     them, by car or in some other way, to the closest medical institution so

 2     that those persons could be assisted.  If they're dead, they're dead, but

 3     perhaps the people who are transporting them were not even aware of that.

 4        Q.   Do you happen to know if this incident took place during a

 5     cease-fire or not?

 6        A.   Well, according to all my reports before that, and I was on duty

 7     at the time, for a number of days there hadn't been any shelling, so I

 8     know this was sudden.  I think that the children went out to play in the

 9     snow because there hadn't been any shelling; not only there, but also in

10     the broader area.  Otherwise, they wouldn't have been outside.

11        Q.   I'd now like to move to Incident G13, which you discuss at

12     page 11 of your statement.

13             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd like to call up the next exhibit, and I ask that

14     it not be broadcast.  And it's 65 ter 16837, please.

15        Q.   Do you recognise the document on the left-hand side of the screen

16     in front of you?

17        A.   Yes.  That is my report, and it's my signature, too.

18        Q.   In this report, you state that a high-impact projectile came from

19     aggressors' positions to the west, shelling the Pavle Goranin suburb.

20     Later on, you say that besides that projectile, 10 more shells of

21     undetermined calibre landed at the same location.

22             First of all, who determined the direction of fire at this

23     incident?

24        A.   In this specific incident, I don't know who it was that

25     determined it.  I think that it is contained in other reports.  However,

Page 10924

 1     on the basis of the traces left by the projectiles, I mean those

 2     10 projectiles, in that residential area, it was established that it had

 3     come from the west, and this is one of the two incidents where I actually

 4     saw the projectile that was flying from the western side.

 5        Q.   How did you know that 10 other shells of undetermined calibre had

 6     arrived?

 7        A.   Those shells exploded in the immediate vicinity of the police

 8     building where I was.  That is to say that I could hear the explosions,

 9     themselves, very well.  Afterwards, when I went out to the scene, and

10     when I actually saw where the explosion had taken place, I saw that these

11     were 10 shells of an unidentified calibre.

12             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd like to tender that document under seal,

13     Mr. President.

14             JUDGE KWON:  And I take it that it would not be that difficult

15     for you to produce a public version.

16             MR. GAYNOR:  That's correct.  We will do so.

17             JUDGE KWON:  So we'll admit those two.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, the original document will be

19     Exhibit P2166, under seal, and the public version will be Exhibit P2167.

20             MR. GAYNOR:  Could I now call up, and this can be broadcast,

21     65 ter 21214.

22        Q.   I want to ask you a few questions about the area of Sarajevo that

23     you've just talked about, the Pavle Goranin area.

24             Now, if you could take your pen and draw a circle around the

25     Pavle Goranin area, and just write "PG."

Page 10925

 1        A.   [Marks]

 2        Q.   Now, I understand your police station, where you worked, is also

 3     visible.  Could you identify that and mark "MUP"?

 4        A.   [Marks].  Yes, that's the building where you can just see the red

 5     roof, and it's at the very beginning there, or, rather, on the western

 6     side of this settlement, as it were.

 7        Q.   Now, is it right that part of Alipasino Polje is also visible in

 8     this photograph?

 9        A.   That's right.  That is to say, between Alipasino Polje and this

10     neighbourhood, there is a parking-lot.  Alipasino Polje are these tall

11     buildings on the western side of the photograph.

12        Q.   Perhaps you could just put "AP" over the buildings you're talking

13     about.

14        A.   [Marks]

15        Q.   Is it right that Alipasino Polje continues to the left side of

16     the photograph and it's not all visible in this photograph?

17        A.   That's right.  We just see part of the C phase here and a part of

18     A phase, but part of B phase cannot be seen at all.

19        Q.   Now, could you mark Safeta Hadzica Street with "SH"?

20        A.   That street cannot be seen here for the buildings, but I can mark

21     where it is actually located.  [Marks].  It runs throughout this

22     photograph from the west to the east.

23        Q.   I'd like to ask you about the 10 shells that you just described a

24     moment ago.  Could you give the Court a picture of where the 10 shells

25     landed and where the modified air-bomb landed?

Page 10926

 1        A.   Shells were falling from this building next-door to the police

 2     building - that's the northern side - and then one, two, three, four,

 3     five, these buildings here, this area that is circled [indicated].  And

 4     where I marked this building "PG," that's where the modified bomb fell on

 5     the roof of that building.

 6        Q.   Perhaps it would be best if you just put small dots where the

 7     10 artillery shells landed, approximately speaking.

 8        A.   Some of them hit the building.  I cannot remember exactly, but

 9     from where it says "MUP" all the way to this last building

10     here [indicates].  So it's this row of buildings in the Pavle Goranin

11     neighbourhood, so they did not go in depth.  It was these exposed

12     buildings from the MUP to Majdanska Street that goes down towards this

13     TV station building.

14        Q.   So, in summary, is it fair to say that the 10 shells -- the

15     10 artillery shells landed over a broad expanse of the Pavle Goranin

16     area?

17        A.   Well, it's about 100 to 150 metres long.  As you can see in this

18     photograph, these buildings are close to each other, and they went down

19     all the way to Majdanska.  Up to 200 metres, maximum.  We cannot really

20     see it on the map.

21        Q.   Perhaps I could ask it this way:  On the basis of the

22     distribution of the shells, did they appear to be aiming at one specific

23     location in Pavle Goranin?

24        A.   Apart from civilian buildings or perhaps the police station,

25     there was nothing specific to be targeted there except for what had been

Page 10927

 1     hit.

 2        Q.   Witness, were you aware of any ABiH barracks in Pavle Goranin?

 3        A.   No.

 4        Q.   Were you aware of the existence of any ABiH mortars, artillery,

 5     or tanks, or any heavy weaponry of any kind in Pavle Goranin?

 6        A.   As far as I know, no.  I probably would have heard firing if

 7     there were such things there, but no.

 8        Q.   In your police station, approximately how many officers were

 9     employed?

10        A.   Well, I'm not sure, but perhaps, including all the technical

11     staff, the Crime Prevention police and the police, perhaps about

12     100 people in all shifts, I think.  I'm not sure, because my centre was

13     actually in town, so I was detached there.  In order to be exposed to

14     less risk, we were working at police stations that were closer to the

15     places where we lived.

16        Q.   Were the police officers armed?

17        A.   Every policeman was armed either with a pistol or -- actually,

18     I think that uniformed policemen at the time had rifles as well,

19     automatic rifles.

20        Q.   Generally speaking, could you describe the nature of the

21     population in Pavle Goranin?

22        A.   It's a civilian neighbourhood, blue-collar, most of it built

23     before Alipasino Polje.  Families lived as they did in all other

24     neighbourhoods in town.  I didn't really know who lived there, but when I

25     worked on break-and-entry cases, I saw that these were ordinary citizens,

Page 10928

 1     blue-collar workers who were employed there or elsewhere.  So it wasn't a

 2     military neighbourhood, as some were in town.  This was a purely civilian

 3     neighbourhood.

 4        Q.   And your answer refers to the period 1993 until the end of the

 5     conflict; is that right?

 6        A.   That's right.

 7             MR. GAYNOR:  Could I ask for D533, please.

 8             Sorry, I should have sought the admission of that.  Thank you,

 9     Mr. Registrar.

10        Q.   Could you sign the very bottom, in the white area, your

11     pseudonym, which is "KDZ477," and write down today's date?

12        A.   [Marks]

13             MR. GAYNOR:  And I'd like to tender that as a public exhibit.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, this will be admitted.

15             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P2168, Your Honours.

16             MR. GAYNOR:  If we could have D533, please.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor, given that we are sitting for a shorter

18     period of time today, we are minded to have two 20-minute breaks today.

19             MR. GAYNOR:  Very well.

20             JUDGE KWON:  So the first break will be at 20 to 4.00.

21             MR. GAYNOR:  That's perfect.  Thank you, Mr. President.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

23             MR. GAYNOR:

24        Q.   The document in front of you, I think, Witness, is a photo file

25     which you prepared in respect of this incident.  Is that correct?  That's

Page 10929

 1     Incident G13.

 2        A.   Correct.  That is the first photograph of my photo documentation

 3     prepared for the case that we are talking about.

 4        Q.   The photograph that we see in front of us doesn't show a

 5     tremendous amount of destruction, I think it's fair to say.  Could you

 6     explain why you took it?

 7        A.   This photograph shows a yard in Safeta Hadzica 102.  It is the

 8     backyard.  One of these projectiles fell there.  I went there just for

 9     the sake of the record, to see in which area these shells fell; not

10     because of the damage caused by the projectile, but simply so that we

11     would see what the sequence of events was as it occurred at the time.

12             You see this wall here [indicates].  These are garages of the

13     police station that can be seen behind with the red roof.  You can barely

14     see the arrow, though.  I marked it at a later stage, once I had pasted

15     the photograph here, and it shows exactly where the projectile fell.

16        Q.   Is the arrow intended to depict the direction of fire?

17        A.   No, no, it is not there to prove any kind of direction of fire.

18     It just shows the place where it exploded.  I could have put an arrow

19     there from anywhere just to show where the explosion took place.

20             MR. GAYNOR:  Could we look at photo 5, the fifth page of this,

21     please.

22        Q.   Could you explain what this is a photograph of?

23        A.   In this photograph, we can see the damage caused by the explosion

24     of the projectile on the western side of the building in Safeta Hadzica

25     number 2 between the third and fourth floor.

Page 10930

 1        Q.   Is this one of the 10 shells that you referred to in your report?

 2        A.   That's right, this is one of the 10 shells.  Underneath the

 3     photograph, it says "the third projectile."  However, not necessarily,

 4     because we went from one point of explosion to another and then we

 5     compiled our own record, as in 1, 2 and 3, and we called this one the

 6     third projectile, although it does not necessarily have to mean that that

 7     is the exact sequence in which they actually exploded.  Perhaps it was

 8     the seventh one or the tenth one.  I had no way of telling.

 9        Q.   From what direction had this projectile travelled prior to

10     impact?

11        A.   Since this is the western side of the building, that is to say it

12     came from the west.

13             MR. GAYNOR:  Could we have photo 11, please.

14        Q.   In this photograph, we see an arrow and a dotted line.  Could you

15     explain what the arrow and the dotted line mean?

16        A.   This is a photograph that I took.  The damage that can be seen on

17     this photograph was caused by one of these 10 projectiles.  Number 8

18     marks the first place, the first point of impact of this shell.  The

19     shell continued along this interrupted line that I marked later on, the

20     dotted line, and it hit the western part of the house in the photograph.

21     And now the arrow and the dotted line show exactly, on the basis of these

22     two points, the direction from which the projectile came from.  You can

23     see that very nicely here.

24        Q.   Just, finally, Mr. Witness, could I ask you a few questions about

25     the start of the war, when you and your family were living in Dobrinja.

Page 10931

 1     Is that right?

 2        A.   That's right.

 3        Q.   Could you describe the circumstances in which you left Dobrinja?

 4        A.   In April 1992, I lived in Dobrinja 4, in an apartment, with my

 5     parents and sister.  Just before the conflict, without any reason

 6     whatsoever, there was gun-fire fired at my neighbourhood.  I claim, with

 7     full responsibility, that there was nothing behind the apartment building

 8     where I lived, and my apartment was hit several times.

 9             One day, I don't know which date it was and I don't really want

10     to remember that at all, I saw a group of armed people walking across a

11     lawn that could be seen from my apartment.  They walked into our

12     entranceway, and there was a lot of panic there because people had no

13     idea why there was gun-fire.  My parents told me that they went up to the

14     fourth floor to stay with our friends, neighbours, who were of Serb

15     ethnicity.

16             Armed soldiers - they were armed with rifles and some even had

17     grenades on their vests - asked for my ID.  Inter alia, when they read my

18     name, they singled me out.  I didn't know why.  Later on, I think it was

19     just because my name is what it is.  I don't know.

20             Later on, I realised that one of their men was injured somehow.

21     But they didn't take me when they left, but my parents said that I had to

22     leave the apartment.

23             I left.  I crossed the Mojmilo Hill and I went to

24     Alipasino Naselje to stay with a relative.  There was shelling further

25     on, but I went back to Alipasino Polje, I found my relative, and I stayed

Page 10932

 1     with him at his apartment.

 2             Later on, without any kind of agreement having been reached

 3     previously, but it seemed that way, it just so happened that my parents

 4     came as well.  So we met up there in Alipasino Polje and stayed there

 5     from 1992 until 1996.

 6        Q.   What was the ethnicity of the group of armed people who you saw

 7     on that day?

 8        A.   I assumed that they were ethnic Serbs, because on their uniforms

 9     they had insignia of the Serb Army.

10        Q.   And were you free to return to your house after that?

11        A.   No.  From then, all the way up to 1996, we could not return, in

12     order for my father to get the apartment in 1996 or 1997, and later on he

13     exchanged that apartment for another apartment in town.

14             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Witness.

15             That ends the examination-in-chief, Mr. President.

16             Perhaps I can address now the associated exhibits.  I believe

17     that Your Honours have previously indicated that you do not wish to

18     receive supporting documentation for unscheduled shelling and sniping

19     incidents.  And if that is the case, we won't tender any of those.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor, I think that has been the case.  As

21     far as I remember, it has been the Chamber's ruling that while we allow

22     the Prosecution to lead evidence going to the specific incidents which

23     are not listed in the indictment or its schedules, on the ground that it

24     may go to establishing the necessary general requirements for crimes

25     against humanity or to the elements of some of the underlying offences.

Page 10933

 1     However, we find it not very helpful to admit detailed evidence regarding

 2     those incidents because we are not ultimately making

 3     beyond-reasonable-doubt findings as to those incidents.

 4             MR. GAYNOR:  Very well.

 5             Mr. President, in that case, the two scheduled incidents which

 6     are dealt with in this statement are G6 and G13, and all of the documents

 7     relating to those incidents are already in evidence.  So I won't tender

 8     any other exhibit at all.  I can provide the exhibit numbers.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Shall we identify one by one?

10             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.

11             JUDGE KWON:  I think the first thing which can be admitted is

12     09604.

13             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.  That's P1696.

14             JUDGE KWON:  That has been already admitted?

15             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.

16             JUDGE KWON:  In my list, P1696 was listed as 65 ter 09605.  I

17     refer to 09604, a MUP report on 22nd January 1994 --

18             MR. GAYNOR:  I'll just consult Mr. Reid for a moment.

19             JUDGE KWON:  -- regarding the shelling in Nedzarici.

20                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

21             JUDGE KWON:  It's admitted.

22             MR. GAYNOR:  In that case, I'd like to tender 09604, please,

23     Mr. President.

24             JUDGE KWON:  So that will be admitted.  Let's give it a number

25     now.

Page 10934

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, Exhibit P2169.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  And the next one seems to be -- I think we dealt

 3     with everything.  The next one is 16837, but we admitted it during the

 4     course of your examination-in-chief.

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, I think we've dealt with everything,

 6     Mr. President.  Yes.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

 8             We'll have a break.  This time, we're going to have a break for

 9     25 minutes.  The Chamber will have a consultation or deliberation.  So

10     we'll resume at 10 past 4.00.

11                           --- Recess taken at 3.43 p.m.

12                           --- On resuming at 4.13 p.m.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Madam Uertz-Retzlaff, considering the time estimate

14     for the examination-in-chief of the next witness and the time allotted

15     for the cross-examination of this witness and the next witness, it seems

16     to the Chamber -- it seems likely to the Chamber that the evidence of the

17     next witness will be concluded only in the middle of Wednesday, leaving

18     only about a session, i.e., about an hour and a half, for another

19     witness.  So, therefore, as suggested by Mr. Robinson, we decided to hear

20     the examination-in-chief of Mr. Hogan on Wednesday, which may continue on

21     Thursday a bit.  Then we expect Mr. Karadzic to conduct his

22     cross-examination of Mr. Hogan, and I think that will be it for this

23     week.  Therefore, I would advise you not to make arrangements to call

24     Mr. Music.

25             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Thank you very much, Your Honour.

Page 10935

 1             JUDGE KWON:  And taking this opportunity, Mr. Robinson, having

 2     received, from General Van Baal's submission, his diary, I wonder whether

 3     you are minded to withdraw your motion.

 4             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. President, we withdraw that motion at

 5     this time.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  We note that withdrawn.  Thank you.

 7             Now, Mr. Karadzic, it's for you to cross-examine the witness.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 9             Good afternoon, Your Excellencies.  Good afternoon, everyone.

10                           Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic:

11        Q.   [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Witness.

12             In your amalgamated statement, in para 3, you said that your

13     position was that of a forensic technician?

14        A.   We call it "crime technician," "crime scene technician."

15        Q.   You joined the police in January 1993.  From January to October

16     or November, when you moved to the Crime Service, did you go to the

17     front-lines?

18        A.   No, I did not.

19        Q.   Which police officers did go?

20        A.   I don't know.  I didn't.

21        Q.   How come that you didn't?

22        A.   Well, I was not in that category that went to the front-lines.  I

23     believe the uniformed policemen did stints on the front-line, but I don't

24     know who or how.

25        Q.   So you started working on criminal investigations as a

Page 10936

 1     scenes-of-crimes officer from November 1993, and you worked on cases of

 2     theft, breaking and entering, murder, and other serious crimes; is that

 3     correct?

 4        A.   Yes.  I investigated all serious crimes that were within the

 5     purview of the Crime Scenes Service.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm not receiving the witness in my

 7     head-set, but fortunately he's speaking loud enough.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Did your findings always end up before the court?

10        A.   I wouldn't know that.  I did my part of the job, and it was sent

11     by post to the specific police station which was in charge of specific

12     crimes.  Now, whether those police stations sent my findings on to the

13     courts, I don't know.  That's up to them.  My job was to do my part of

14     the work and, by official post, to send my reports to the competent

15     police station, which would then forward them, or not, perhaps, to the

16     courts.  It was not up to me.

17        Q.   According to the procedure that would be sent to the Prosecutor's

18     office that brings an indictment.  Have you ever testified before Bosnian

19     courts about your reports in the cases on which you worked?

20        A.   In the 18 years that I've been working as a policeman, there were

21     only two such cases.

22        Q.   When?

23        A.   I can't recall exactly.  In any case, it was after the war, where

24     I once testified concerning a murder, and once a burglary/theft.

25        Q.   But you have never testified before about incidents from the war?

Page 10937

 1        A.   No, this is the first -- this is the only place where I did.

 2        Q.   On page 26 of today's transcript, you said that when the soldiers

 3     approached, your parents told you to go to your Serb friend who lived on

 4     the fourth floor?

 5        A.   That's correct.

 6        Q.   Why didn't they go too?  Why only you?

 7        A.   Who, the parents or I?

 8        Q.   Why didn't your parents also go to the fourth floor to find

 9     shelter?  Why only you?

10        A.   I don't know.  Parents -- like parents, they sent only me, and

11     they stayed on the ground floor, where our apartment was.

12        Q.   So these people checked ID papers and took some people aside and

13     did not single out others?

14        A.   I know that they checked the ID papers of our Serb neighbours,

15     and mine, too.  And I believe on the same floor there was another Serb

16     family, but only I was taken to one side.  I don't know what happened on

17     the floors above and below.  And at that moment, by the way, I didn't

18     even know what was going on with my parents.

19        Q.   Did your parents later tell you what happened?

20        A.   Exactly as I said.  Since only my apartment was on the ground

21     floor, there were no other apartments there, my parents had to stand

22     outside their apartment, on their own landing, and there was one armed

23     soldier on the ground floor.  The other soldiers, I don't know exactly

24     how many of them, took the stairs to go up.

25        Q.   You described to us that they were looking for someone in

Page 10938

 1     specific; correct?

 2        A.   I don't know what they were up to and what they intended, but

 3     they took me to one side, only me, out of the five people on the floor.

 4     Whether they were looking for someone in specific or what their

 5     intentions were, I don't know.

 6        Q.   Your father wasn't taken away, was he?

 7        A.   Nobody was taken away at that time, because they left the

 8     building for other reasons and they went back the same way they came

 9     from.  There was no abuse at that time, apart from the mental stress,

10     against me or anyone else.

11        Q.   Then in paragraph 14 of your amalgamated statement, you say -

12     sorry, paragraph 15 - that you worked on 350 different cases, and 52 of

13     them were related to genocide.  Who determined that these cases related

14     to genocide, and how was that defined?

15        A.   The cases that I marked as such, those 52, concern investigations

16     of sniping, gun-fire, shelling, and the use of modified air-bombs.  In my

17     service, my superiors said -- qualified these cases as relating to

18     genocide.  There was one department inside the Security Services Centre

19     that was in charge of all cases related to genocide.  They handled all

20     these cases, and through them such cases were later forwarded here.

21        Q.   So anything that happened during the combat operations was

22     classified as genocide?

23        A.   Correct.

24        Q.   You later explained that within those 52 investigations, the

25     number of cases was actually smaller, because sometimes there would be a

Page 10939

 1     number of investigations relating to one-and-the-same case for various

 2     reasons, because victims were found subsequently, et cetera?

 3        A.   In those investigations, there were certain shelling incidents

 4     where there were no human casualties, only material damage, but I went

 5     out on each such case and did my work, like in every other case that is

 6     before this Court, and they are also entered in my diary that I kept in

 7     that period.

 8        Q.   So there were 52 investigations, but not as many cases; there

 9     were repeated investigations?

10        A.   No, there were no repeated investigations.  Those are

11     52 investigations, 52 visits of a crime scene.

12        Q.   How many times did you act as a ballistics man in those 52 cases?

13        A.   I can't remember.

14        Q.   Would it help you to see your reports to see in which cases the

15     ballistics expert was missing and you determined the ballistics elements?

16        A.   The investigating judge should have been present in each

17     investigation, making minutes and indicating how many members of the team

18     there were.  If there was no ballistics expert and no member of the KDZ,

19     then I would, based on the evidence, determine the direction of fire.

20        Q.   How many times was the investigating judge not there?

21        A.   In those cases where I worked, the investigating judge would not

22     come to the scene when there were no human victims and there were no

23     elements of serious incident as determined by the judge, himself.

24        Q.   In your statement from 15 November 1995, on page 3 you say that

25     after all these years, you had acquired a certain experience, so you

Page 10940

 1     conducted investigations routinely.  And you say:

 2             "When I say 'routinely,' I mean to say that as time went on and I

 3     gained more experience, the accuracy of investigations improved, and I

 4     started going out to crime scenes on my own.  I had received enough

 5     training and experience to be able to determine what each trace meant."

 6             That was November 1995.  What point in time would you say marks

 7     the beginning of your independence?

 8        A.   Before I started working as a scenes-of-crime officer, I received

 9     high-quality training in the Security Services Centre, itself, and my

10     instructors were ballistics experts.  They taught me well to handle

11     investigations of crime scenes.  As shellings became more frequent, by

12     coming out to the scene and looking at photographs taken by other

13     colleagues, and with continuing education from other ballistics experts,

14     I can say that it was not difficult to master the investigation of a

15     scene of explosion and to learn to determine where the projectile came

16     from, what kind of damage it created.

17             On the scene, I would learn how to photograph a scene from up

18     close, from a distance, to observe significant details.  And when I said

19     "routinely," that means all that I have described.  I don't mean

20     "routinely" in the sense of hastily.  That would imply mistakes made in a

21     rush.  It means an approach informed by experience.

22        Q.   You say on the same page that the local police was supposed to

23     secure the crime scene, but in some cases, it was very difficult due to

24     continuous shelling, and sometimes, even during the on-site

25     investigation, itself, another shell would come.  Could you name a few

Page 10941

 1     examples?

 2        A.   I can't remember the date, but during an investigation I was

 3     doing, a modified air-bomb exploded on the radio/television building.

 4     There was an investigating judge there and officers from the CSB.  And

 5     another day, I don't know if there was an explosion of a modified

 6     air-bomb in the Geteova Street or was it the radio/television building

 7     first, but we did those two investigations on the same day.  When we came

 8     to the Geteova Street number 5, a certain number of shells had fallen on

 9     Alipasino Polje neighbourhood, Stage A, and you could still see the smoke

10     after the explosion.  I was under so much stress that day that I worked

11     under sedatives that day to be able to work normally.

12        Q.   We'll come back to that incident.

13             You say on the same page that in cases when there was more than a

14     certain number of wounded and dead, the wounded would usually have been

15     taken away, removed, "... even before we arrived.  We had to rely on

16     blood-stains and witness statements to determine the position of the

17     body."

18             Is this the same procedure you followed in investigating murders?

19        A.   In which period, in which murders?

20        Q.   You worked, as you said, on homicide investigations.  Did you

21     proceed the same way on homicide investigations, without a body in place?

22        A.   I can't remember all the murder investigations I did, but there

23     were cases when the body was still there and there were investigations

24     when the body was not there.  Now, of course, when a thing like that

25     happens, human life is the highest priority.  Before I arrived, somebody

Page 10942

 1     must have administered first aid, either medical personnel or passersby,

 2     and they would have first taken the person to the hospital.

 3        Q.   In the same paragraph, you say:

 4             "We would collect fragments of projectiles on the spot, but this

 5     job was soon taken over by members of the KDZ, and these fragments were

 6     sent to ballistics experts to determine the type of projectile."

 7             Did ballistics experts really determine the type of projectiles?

 8        A.   If the reports are there, then they did.

 9        Q.   Weren't ballistics experts supposed to determine something else?

10        A.   I don't know.  It's the job of ballistics experts.  I believe it

11     was also their job to determine the type of round, the type of

12     ammunition.

13        Q.   On page 4, you say:

14             "We also made measurements in order to be able to produce a map

15     of the area."

16             In a previous statement, you said "sketch" -- sorry, you said

17     "map," and then you changed that to "sketch."  Also, in the statement of

18     15 November, you said "map," and then you changed it to "sketch."  But

19     you say:

20             "In some cases we could not do that because of the heavy

21     shelling, and taking measurements takes a lot of time."

22             Do you believe that an investigation without measurements is

23     valid?

24        A.   Yes, it is.

25        Q.   It seems the transcript is not quite correct:

Page 10943

 1             [In English] "In previous statements, you said "sketch" -- sorry,

 2     you said "map."

 3             [Interpretation] No, you said "plan," and then you changed that

 4     to "sketch."

 5             [In English] "In some cases, we couldn't do it -- we didn't do

 6     it -- we couldn't do it because of the shelling, because the

 7     measurement --"

 8        A.   I had no interpretation just now.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  He read in English, and you didn't get the

10     interpretation.

11             Mr. Karadzic, try to read out your statement again.  So what is

12     your question?  Where were we, Mr. Karadzic?

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's page 4 of the 1995 statement.

14     It says:

15             "We also made measurements in order to be able to produce the map

16     of the area.  In some cases, we were unable to do that because of the

17     heavy shelling, because taking measurements takes a long time."

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   How did you then conclude that investigation if you had no

20     measurements?

21        A.   I've already said that I was supposed to take photographs, to

22     make a drawing, not a plan, of the crime scene, and in some cases I would

23     do that as the investigating judge instructed.  He decided whether I

24     should make a drawing or not.  I was not alone in that team that

25     investigated.  There were also other people, and their names are

Page 10944

 1     indicated in the crime scene investigation report.

 2        Q.   But if I understood correctly, you made sketches.

 3        A.   In some investigations, I did, but not all.

 4        Q.   And who would have made a sketch in those cases when there were

 5     no measurements?

 6        A.   I believe in some cases, the ballistics expert made a sketch that

 7     he needed for his own expertise.

 8        Q.   On the basis of what did he make a sketch if he had no

 9     measurements?

10        A.   There were no measurements that I made, but he probably did.

11        Q.   But a sketch indicates all spatial relations, distances.  How can

12     you make a sketch without measurements?  You are supposed to take

13     measurements, not the ballistics expert.

14        A.   In some cases, the ballistics experts did.  I believe the

15     ballistics man did the sketch and the measurements in the case of the

16     22nd January 1994.

17        Q.   On the same page 4, last paragraph, you say:

18             "I am familiar with the fundamental elements of ballistics,

19     enough to determine the type of weapon and the direction of fire.

20     Further analysis is the work of a ballistics expert.  With experience, we

21     all became experts.  Sometimes I would be able to determine nearly the

22     precise place where the projectile was fired, as well as its trajectory,

23     especially when it landed at an angle of almost 90 degrees."

24             Well, the first question is:  On the 22nd January, Mr. Sabljica

25     testified here and said that he only gave instructions, what kind of

Page 10945

 1     measurements should be taken, and that the scenes-of-crime officer did

 2     the measurements; he didn't.  Did you participate in that investigation?

 3        A.   In some cases, I make the photographs.  I'm not sure, but if you

 4     show me my report, I think it will say photographs were taken, but I

 5     didn't take the measurements.  As for what he said, it's fine.  After all

 6     this time, maybe he got it wrong.  I would like to see the report of the

 7     ballistics expert, because it should also indicate whether he made

 8     measurements or not.  My photo file alone is not the whole case file.

 9     The case file contains all the witness statements, and the reports of the

10     inspectors, the report of the ballistic expert, as well as my findings.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Please take into account that I have to wait for

12     interpretation.  That's why I'm making this pause.

13             Now, here is the question:  Is it true, what it says here, that

14     you knew the basics of ballistics science, that with experience you all

15     became experts, and sometimes you were perfectly able to determine the

16     exact place?

17        A.   All I can say is that I was able to distinguish a mortar shell

18     from a gun shell, from a rifle round, a pistol round, et cetera.  When I

19     see the tail-fin of a mortar shell, I was able to say that it was

20     a mortar shell, not a gun shell.  Those are the basics, to be able to

21     distinguish heavy weaponry from lighter weaponry.  That's what I meant.

22        Q.   Thank you.  On page 5, you say that when a shell would fall into

23     a river, it would be difficult to establish the direction.  Is it

24     difficult or impossible, Witness?

25        A.   Well, I'm not a ballistics expert.  It was impossible for me, but

Page 10946

 1     perhaps it was possible for a ballistics expert.  It was impossible for

 2     me.

 3        Q.   In the next -- third paragraph on that page, you say:

 4             "It was not our task to establish the exact place where the

 5     projectile had been fired from.  Other experts dealt with the origin, and

 6     I can ascertain the position where fire was opened.  They dealt with the

 7     characteristics of the projectile ..."

 8             Et cetera, et cetera.

 9             In every one of your investigations, did you have these experts

10     who would actually establish that?

11        A.   Believe me, I cannot recall right now.

12        Q.   Can you remember a case where you certainly did have this kind of

13     an expert; you established the direction and he establishes the distance?

14        A.   For example, there was a ballistics expert with me on the

15     22nd of January, 1994; two of them, as a matter of fact.  And they were

16     doing it, or they would send it to their colleagues who were of the same

17     profession.  I really don't know what their findings said.

18        Q.   It says that they established the distance -- or, rather, the

19     direction, and that they were never in a position to establish the

20     distance.  That's what they say.  Did you know that?

21        A.   I did not.  All of these findings of ballistics experts did not

22     reach me, actually.  Together with all the documents that were compiled,

23     they were sent probably to the investigative judge.

24        Q.   In your amalgamated statement, you say, in paragraph 28, that as

25     crime technicians, you had to attend autopsies, take photos of the

Page 10947

 1     autopsy involved.  You say:

 2             "It is also during the autopsy that an expert determines the

 3     exact canal between the entry and exit wound.  We have to write down all

 4     the relevant information the expert finds during the autopsy."

 5             Did you attend these autopsies?

 6        A.   Yes, the job of a crime technician is to attend autopsies.  That

 7     is done to this day, except that in war, I was not present during all

 8     autopsies in the case of all the victims in the cases that I dealt with.

 9     During some of these examinations of corpses in mortuaries, perhaps there

10     were some of my colleagues who were closer to the mortuary concerned,

11     because the police is closer to the hospital and the superior officers

12     agreed that a forensic doctor would carry out the post-mortem and a

13     different crime technician could do his job, so that we would not be

14     exposed to additional risks in a]the time of war.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Is there really a risk in an autopsy room?  What, if

16     any?

17        A.   Well, not in the room, itself, but the risk is en route.  I could

18     be in a shelled area as I would be coming to the autopsy room.

19        Q.   You say:

20             "We have to attend ..."

21             I'm quoting you verbatim.  So we would have to expect these

22     autopsy findings in every case, and that would include photographs and

23     also a described trajectory of the projectile through the body, itself,

24     the canal that you're referring to.  Witness, does that exist in all of

25     your investigations?  That would be of great assistance to us.  Can you

Page 10948

 1     indicate where it actually is?

 2        A.   I don't have that.

 3             Now, who decides on these autopsies?  Just like for on-site

 4     investigations, we received information from the duty officer, and then a

 5     forensic officer would ask for a crime technician to take photographs of

 6     the autopsy, itself.  In cases when an autopsy was not carried out, only

 7     photographs were taken of corpses in the mortuary, that is.

 8             Now, as for attending all of these post-mortems, I don't know

 9     whether that kind of thing was scheduled, whether it was done all the

10     time, and whether there are such findings or not, because I was not

11     really in charge of that.

12        Q.   But you did attend autopsies, didn't you?

13        A.   I do not remember specifically which ones I did attend.  There

14     were a few autopsies -- or, rather -- well, yes, there were a few

15     autopsies that were carried out at the morgue in Dobrinja.  I don't know

16     exactly in which cases.  To this day, my job is to attend autopsies when

17     the forensic doctor asks me to attend, and he does so on behalf of the

18     Office of the Prosecutor.

19        Q.   Would your diary be of assistance?  Do you have such entries in

20     your diary?

21        A.   I don't think that I recorded that kind of attendance in my

22     diary, because if I were to attend an autopsy, I wouldn't really write

23     that down in my diary as something special.  I only recorded visits to

24     scenes, but not autopsies that were related to those crimes.

25        Q.   Thank you.  Were these proper autopsies or was it -- excuse me

Page 10949

 1     for using this kind of language, but sort of autopsies that were slapped

 2     together?

 3        A.   Well, you cannot really say it was just slapped together.

 4     Although it was wartime, we tried to do our work properly, and to do the

 5     technical things as they should be done, and to record all of it.  Now,

 6     I'm not competent to speak on behalf of a forensic pathologist or doctor.

 7     I cannot say that he would slap that kind of thing together.  First of

 8     all, I'm too well brought up for that kind of thing, and, secondly, I

 9     wouldn't like to go into that.

10        Q.   Thank you.  I'm not saying anything.  I would just like us to

11     establish how long a proper autopsy takes, how much time, an autopsy that

12     you would attend, one that would be admissible before a court of law.

13        A.   Well, that really has to do with forensic medicine again, and I'm

14     not competent to speak about that, how long it should take.  I attended

15     autopsies that lasted longer than half an hour, an hour, and so on.  It

16     is really a forensic doctor who should say when an autopsy is over.

17        Q.   So then we can say that your experience with autopsies ranges

18     between half an hour and an hour?

19        A.   No, some lasted even three hours.

20        Q.   Thank you.  In paragraph 30, you say that a modified air-bomb

21     does not fall apart into too much shrapnel.  What is your knowledge?

22        A.   As opposed to mortar shells that are made to kill personnel, so

23     it falls apart into thousands of pieces.  This was the first time in my

24     life that I came across this kind of thing, modified air-bombs.  I did

25     not find the kind of shrapnel left by a mortar shell.  Concrete walls

Page 10950

 1     were torn apart by these modified air-bombs, but the traces, if I can put

 2     it that way, were not the same like in the case of a mortar shell, where

 3     there are thousands of particles involved.

 4        Q.   Did you gather any fragments of this modified air-bomb?

 5        A.   In most cases, as far as modified air-bombs are concerned, I took

 6     photographs, again, in accordance with the technical capabilities I had.

 7     As for the on-site investigations, ballistics experts were there, and on

 8     the very spot they would take these -- collect these fragments and take

 9     them away for further analysis.  The entire team worked together on

10     collecting all of this evidence, but at the explosion site, itself, we

11     would find what we would find on the tarmac, but I did not take any of

12     this, because what had been agreed upon was that the ballistics experts

13     would take these particles to the MUP, to the Centre of the

14     Security Services, and so on.

15        Q.   Thank you.  You are obviously familiar with the fact that an

16     air-bomb has to collide head on with an obstacle in order to explode.

17     And then you mentioned that ricochet in the same paragraph.  You first

18     said that in your transcript in the Milosevic case 1909 --

19             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter did not catch the date.

20             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Then in your statement on the 12th of February this year [as

22     interpreted], you say what you mean by ricochet, and you say:

23             "By 'ricochet,' I mean that if the bomb hit various surfaces

24     before coming to its final resting place, we would be able, by

25     examining --"

Page 10951

 1             I'm doing a sight translation from the English:

 2             "Examining the impact points to establish the path of the

 3     projectile."

 4             How many ricochet bombs did you investigate and how many such

 5     places did you see?

 6        A.   As far as this is concerned, like in the case of all other

 7     projectiles, the projectile has a contact with a surface before it

 8     explodes, and then there is that ricochet trace.  I remember that I was

 9     working on an investigation at the RTV centre, and then part of this

10     bomb, some part of that projectile, left a trace on the roof before it

11     actually exploded at the point of explosion at the RTV centre.

12        Q.   I see.  Do you know, roughly, what the velocity is of a modified

13     air-bomb?  It flies at which speed?

14        A.   Well, I'm not an expert to establish its exact speed.  However,

15     at the moment when I would see it flying over the police building --

16     well, I'm not saying that it's exactly above the police building, but

17     near the police building.  It was visible, at any rate, as opposed to

18     rifle shots that cannot be seen.  This could be seen.  However, I am not

19     competent to say what its speed was.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Further on, you say, in 34, that a mortar can be

21     adjusted that the shell lands in an area that is normally about

22     10 square metres large.  When you use a modified air-bomb, such precise

23     targeting is not possible.  And then further on, you say that it means

24     that they weren't serially produced.

25             What about these engines?  Were they improvised, or were they

Page 10952

 1     manufactured in a factory, and did they have proper plates and so on?

 2        A.   These were rocket-launchers.  If we are talking about air-bombs,

 3     they are ejected from aircraft.  And at the top of this rocket-launcher,

 4     there would be these bombs as well, and then we would call them modified

 5     air-bombs.  As opposed to mortar and rifle barrels, these were launched

 6     from a different place.  According to what the ballistics expert says,

 7     they were not fired from artillery pieces, but from certain ramps that

 8     could be adjusted, going higher up or lower down, or left or right.

 9     However, it was not the kind of precision that one has in case of mortars

10     and guns.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Since you have quite a bit of experience in

12     ballistics, do you agree that all rockets are fired from

13     rocket-launchers?

14        A.   Well, probably from certain launchers.  Again, as I said, this is

15     what ballistics experts said.

16        Q.   Do you agree that these engines were engines that originally had

17     a different kind of warhead, but that they were manufactured in a

18     factory, that they had their plates and so on?

19        A.   Probably.  I saw these engines at different scenes.  In a

20     particular -- in the case of a particular incident in Geteova Street

21     number 4, they were found in this building, the four barrels, and the

22     ballistics experts took them away.  So I saw these rockets.  I did not

23     write that down, though.  I agree that most probably they were

24     manufactured in a factory and had serial numbers.  However -- they would

25     have to be found by ballistics experts in case they were not destroyed in

Page 10953

 1     the first place.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  You saw these engines, and you say that they were

 3     four metres long; right?

 4        A.   That's right.  I am shocked by the size of these engines.  I

 5     remember that in Geteova Street number 5, I remember that there were the

 6     remains of this rocket-launcher.

 7        Q.   In paragraph 36, you say:

 8             "If the victim was hit indoors, the first thing to establish is

 9     the place where the bullet pierced the window or the door."

10             And you say you can never rule out the possibility that the

11     bullet was fired inside; is that right?

12        A.   Well, when I gave this statement, since it was an extensive one

13     and it involves a great many cases, when one comes to a particular site

14     and if a corpse is found in an apartment, for instance, we establish that

15     the said person was killed by a bullet, and we have to establish how that

16     happened.

17             Between 1992 and 1995, when people were being killed by rifle

18     bullets, when we would find corpses, when witnesses would report that, or

19     somebody else, we'd see traces on windows and walls and so on.

20     Photographs would be taken.  And then on the basis of the actual bullet,

21     we would determine whether that was it.

22        Q.   Thank you.  You rightly conclude that only one straight line can

23     be drawn through two points and that in order to establish the direction,

24     you need two points for the line of the projectile to be established?

25        A.   Yes, that's right, only one straight line can be drawn between

Page 10954

 1     two points.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  In paragraph 38, you say:

 3             "In most of these cases, the bodies or the injured were taken

 4     away before I arrived on site.  It is necessary to examine the injuries

 5     on a body to establish the direction and distance of fire, and that job

 6     was done by the Forensic Department."

 7             Is that right?  Or see what it says further on:

 8             "In order to be able to establish the origin of fire, you need at

 9     least two points for bullets coming in ..."

10             You used a kind of string, right, to establish the direction of

11     fire; right?

12        A.   That's right, a string would be used.  Things are a bit more

13     modern today, but we would use a string, when there would be two or

14     three different points through which a string could be drawn, in order to

15     have the exact direction of fire established.

16        Q.   Thank you.  In 39, you say:

17             "A bullet can ricochet and change direction in a room.  A

18     forensic expert can say if the bullet entered the body directly or after

19     a ricochet -- whether it entered the body before or after ricochet."

20             And then in paragraph 40, then you say that:

21             "In sniping incidents that happened outside, we had to talk to

22     witnesses, in order to find out the position of the victim, or to the

23     victim if he or she was still alive."

24             So your task and your duty was to establish whether the bullet

25     had ricochetted before entering a body, and if that happened outdoors,

Page 10955

 1     you had to ask the witnesses how the body was positioned in order to

 2     determine the direction; is that correct?

 3        A.   Well, yes, in the cases -- and I'm talking about criminal

 4     investigation technicians.  I don't know of any case of someone being hit

 5     outdoors.  But, in any case, the on-site investigation had to be carried

 6     out.  If there was only a blood-stain, then it would be only a

 7     blood-stain.  The inspectors would have to interview witnesses and ask

 8     them about where the projectile came.  If we had a situation where the

 9     bullet ricochetted against a surface, it might have happened that as a

10     result of ricochetting, it hit a victim.  Now, my task indoors was to

11     collect all the clothes relating to the points of entry of the bullet,

12     whether it came through the window, through the window-pane, and also to

13     detect all the traces left inside the flat.  If there was no possibility

14     for me to connect these two points, it might have been a bullet, but if

15     it didn't have enough impact, it could have ricochetted.

16        Q.   Thank you.  In order to make it clear to me:  If a bullet passes

17     through a body, did you take into account the fact that that can also

18     affect the trajectory and the ricochetting?

19        A.   Of course, we took that into account.  But then, again, it

20     depended on the power of the bullet passing through a body.

21        Q.   Thank you.  You pointed out the importance of interviews of

22     witnesses in the cases of outdoor sniping incidents?

23        A.   I think that was referred to in my first statement given to this

24     Tribunal.  And I would like to underline, once again, that I did not

25     conduct this on-site investigation on my own.  At least one inspector

Page 10956

 1     from the CSB would accompany me, and he would be in charge of examining

 2     witnesses and interviewing people related to the incident in whatever

 3     way.  But it was never my job to do that.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Now I am a bit perplexed by paragraph 41, where you

 5     say that:

 6             "On the basis of the entry and exit wound on the body, it was

 7     possible to establish if the victim was directly targeted or was just hit

 8     at random, for if a victim is directly targeted, the line between the

 9     entry and exit wound is straight, but if the bullet just is losing its

10     power and falling, there is a parabolic line."

11             How is it possible to establish a parabolic line inside a body,

12     between the entry and exit wounds?

13        A.   Only a forensic medical doctor can give you an answer to this

14     question.

15        Q.   All right, but this is what is said in your statement.  So you

16     believe that if they are at the same level, I mean, these two wounds,

17     with respect to what, the ground or whatever, then the bullet must have

18     gone straight -- in a straight line and that the victim was intentionally

19     hit.  However, if the entry and exit wounds are not at the same level, we

20     have the case of random shooting?

21        A.   Well, you see, during an investigation, if a pathologist

22     conducted an autopsy, it was his duty and job to establish what kind of

23     wounds were in question, whether it was a big or small wound, or what

24     kind of damage it caused to the tissue, et cetera.  So all these findings

25     are contained in their reports.

Page 10957

 1             As I said, I gave a general statement, but I touched upon some of

 2     the investigations and instances in which I attended autopsies.  However,

 3     the official findings is provided by a forensic medical doctor.  He can

 4     say that the damage that a bullet causes to the body is not the result of

 5     a direct hit, but rather of a ricochet.  Based on such findings is the

 6     fact that I made this kind of statement.  So it was not up to me to

 7     decide whether the line was straight or parabolic; it is up to the

 8     forensic doctor to say that.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  As a young doctor, I also had to conduct autopsies,

10     and I remember them quite clearly, but I cannot remember seeing anywhere,

11     in any findings, the opinion of the pathologist performing the

12     post-mortem that the line in the body was parabolic or otherwise.  Can

13     you help us locate any such report in which the pathologist had

14     determined that the victim was intentionally targeted, due to the fact

15     that the line was straight, or that it was shot randomly because the line

16     was parabolic?

17        A.   No, I don't have a single such forensic report.  We can talk

18     about this.  I may be wrong, but, as I said, it's up to the forensic

19     expert to say that.  The fact that I gave this statement doesn't mean

20     that I conducted post-mortem.  If we are going to determine whether a hit

21     was random or intentional, we can base that on the ricochet.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, I note the time.  If it is convenient,

23     shall we take a break now for 20 minutes?

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So we are working in one-hour

25     sessions?

Page 10958

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, only for today we will be sitting until 6.30.

 2             We'll break for 20 minutes.

 3             But before that, yes, Mr. Robinson.

 4             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes.  Excuse me, Mr. President.

 5             In connection with the testimony of Mr. Hogan, would we have --

 6     I'd like to make an oral motion that Dr. Subotic be allowed to be in the

 7     courtroom during his testimony and participate to the extent she does

 8     with other witnesses.  He's going to be testifying about locations in

 9     Sarajevo and incidents -- the shelling and sniping incidents, and she's

10     worked on those more than anyone on our team, and it would be useful for

11     her to assist Dr. Karadzic with his cross-examination of Mr. Hogan, if

12     the Court would allow it.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Is it also due to the absence of Mr. Sladojevic?

14             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, that's also another consideration.

15             JUDGE KWON:  We'll consider that.

16             MR. ROBINSON:  Thank you.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

18             We'll resume at half past 5.00.

19                           --- Recess taken at 5.11 p.m.

20                           --- On resuming at 5.35 p.m.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Robinson or Mr. Karadzic, regarding your request

22     made at the end of the last session:  At this moment, considering the

23     nature of Mr. Hogan's expected evidence, and along with financial issues,

24     the Chamber is not in a position to make that decision.  If you are

25     minded to tender a detailed submission in writing, the Chamber will

Page 10959

 1     consider it.  Thank you.

 2             Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 4        Q.   Witness, we'll go back to your statements to look at specific

 5     incidents, but now I'd like to ask you:  Do you know Dobrinja and its

 6     residents very well?

 7        A.   I know Dobrinja, as a neighbourhood, very well, but I don't know

 8     the residents.  It's just too broad a concept.

 9        Q.   Do you agree that Dobrinja is not really very large, it's about a

10     kilometre in length and 500 metres in width, about half a kilometre

11     square?

12        A.   I didn't measure, but I know it's divided into Dobrinja 1, 2, 3,

13     4, and 5, and maybe if you include the airport settlement in Dobrinja.

14        Q.   Do you know which ABiH army forces were located in Dobrinja?

15        A.   I don't know exactly up to what line, but I believe the

16     5th Motorised Brigade was there --

17        Q.   That's the one that was later renamed 155th.  But do you know a

18     MUP unit called Bosna that was located in Dobrinja?

19        A.   I heard of it, this Bosna unit.  I believe it's a unit of the

20     federal police, but where in Dobrinja they were, I don't know.

21        Q.   Did you know Kenan Ademovic, or perhaps Kemal, their commander?

22        A.   I heard the name, but I didn't know him.

23        Q.   Sejo Saric?

24        A.   No.

25        Q.   Sime Sevabic [phoen], Muhamed Gafic [phoen], Delalic, Halilovic,

Page 10960

 1     Ibro Krakonja, did you know these people?

 2        A.   No.

 3        Q.   Commander of the 1st Company, Mustafa Tabak; 2nd Company, Musan;

 4     and the 4th Company, Jusanovic was the commander?

 5        A.   I didn't know them.

 6        Q.   You worked on that sniping incident in Dobrinja where

 7     Jasmina Tabakovic was the victim?

 8        A.   I believe so.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We had another witness here from

10     the list referring to that incident, so could we see 65 ter 09766 without

11     broadcasting.  09766, broadcast, please?

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Could you tell us if these four persons really did this on-site

14     investigation?

15             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.

16             Shall we go into private session briefly?

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We don't have to if it's not

18     broadcast, I believe.

19                           [Private session]

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10961

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5                           [Open session]

 6             JUDGE KWON:  And let us continue, Mr. Karadzic.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 8        Q.   Witness, what was your job in this investigation?

 9        A.   My task, as a scenes-of-crime officer, was to photograph.

10     Standard procedure in such investigations; to find traces left by the

11     bullet in this case, to find the bullet, if possible, to be sent for

12     further examination by experts.

13        Q.   Thank you.  You came to the scene on the following day?  The

14     entire team came on the following day?

15        A.   If that's written here.  And it is written, that we came to the

16     scene on the following day.  The event happened on the 14th of May,

17     around 2345 hours, and we came the next morning, because it was

18     impossible to do so immediately.

19        Q.   Who was the ballistics expert on this team?  In other words, who

20     determined the trajectory?

21        A.   All I can see here is the investigating judge, the operations

22     officer from the Homicide Department, an operations officer from the

23     Novi Grad SJB, and myself, as forensic technician.  I found the bullet,

24     and I made the report about the investigation once it was completed.

25        Q.   You don't mention in this report that you made any measurements.

Page 10962

 1     You just say that the projectile was fired from a fire-arm from

 2     Bosnian Serb positions and that such and such a woman found her death in

 3     the apartment of her parents.  Why did you not mention those elements and

 4     the method of measurement in the report?

 5        A.   First of all, nobody ever asked me whether I drafted this report.

 6     I didn't.  You can see, on the next page, who the author is.  And in my

 7     own report, I noted the measurements I made in that apartment.  You see

 8     who drafted the report.  This man was part of the team.  He was with me.

 9        Q.   So in this case, you were the ballistics man?

10        A.   I was the crime of -- crime scene technician who found the

11     traces, who noted them properly, who made the measurements and

12     established the facts.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now see 1D3045.  This

14     document may be removed.  It's in evidence, I believe.  Thank you.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   May I please ask you to identify on this map the

17     Hamdije Kapidzica Street, Miroslava Krleze Street as well?

18     Miroslava Krleze is under number 297, and I can show you a list that

19     confirms that.  Use the pen, please.

20        A.   I can only put a circle around the area where it happened,

21     because there are no street names here, just numbers, 297 and 463.  It's

22     normal in such maps.  But whether the position of the streets is correct,

23     I don't know.  I can only put a circle around the area where these two

24     streets are.

25        Q.   Hamdije Kapidzica Street used to be the Nehru Street before?

Page 10963

 1        A.   I don't remember anymore, and it's very difficult to determine

 2     the location because the buildings are not drawn here.  This a very

 3     imprecise map.

 4        Q.   Just mark it, and then we'll look for it on Google.

 5        A.   [Marks]

 6        Q.   What is this?

 7        A.   That's the location where this complex of buildings, this block

 8     of buildings was, including the apartment building where this woman,

 9     Jasmina Tabakovic, was killed.  I believe it was across the street from

10     this 297, in this street marked "463," but I'm not sure without a more

11     precise map.

12        Q.   Is this apartment in Hamdije Kapidzica Street, which at the time

13     was called the Nehru Street?

14        A.   I see the Hamdije Kapidzica Street on the map.  What it was

15     called before, I don't know.  These are things that are easily

16     verifiable.  What is certain is that this was a residential block divided

17     in two.  One side belonged to the Army of Republika Srpska and the other

18     side belonged to the ABiH army, and the residents were from both sides.

19        Q.   Well, Serbs are also Bosnia and Herzegovina citizens, aren't

20     they?

21        A.   I suppose so.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [No interpretation]

23             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, because of overlapping questions and

24     answers, I think you need to pause and start again for your last

25     question.

Page 10964

 1             Mr. Witness, given that you are -- both Mr. Karadzic and you are

 2     speaking the same language, the interpreters have difficult times

 3     interpreting your words, so please put a pause between the question and

 4     answer.

 5             Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  My mistake.  I have

 7     experience with this already, so I'll try harder.

 8             On a split screen, can we see 1D3046 and leave 3045 on the other

 9     half.

10             JUDGE KWON:  If you would like to use this marking, it's

11     impossible.  So if you'd like to ask the witness to mark it again, then

12     we can move, but I don't -- if you'd like to keep this marking by the

13     witness.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think we'll need new markings

15     after the witness determines which street is which.  We can do without

16     this.  I believe the witness will correct himself when he sees the street

17     names.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  Let us see 1D3046.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.  Can we then see the

20     Nehru Street, Nehruova, and Hamdije Kapidzica Street.

21             Just a moment.  We lost it now.  Can we see the previous view.

22     No, no, not the picture; the list.  A bit larger.  Can we scroll up a

23     bit, please.

24             JUDGE KWON:  So you would like to see number 297?

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but let's see the Nehru Street

Page 10965

 1     first.  Now it's called Hamdije Kapidzica Street.  It must be there

 2     under "N."

 3             This is Nedzarici.  We need Dobrinja.

 4             Here is Miroslava Krleze Street, 297.  It's underlined.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Do you agree?

 7        A.   Yes.  I see it on the list, and the number is 297.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we scroll down again to see

 9     Nehru Street underlined as well.  No, up again, please.

10             Please bear with me just a moment.

11             Let's have a look at Hamdije Kapidzica Street and what its

12     previous name was.  It should be under "H."

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   Do you agree that in your report, it is stated as

15     "Nehruova Street 10"?

16        A.   If that's what the report states, it must be, and if that's what

17     the rest of the reports say, that must have been the name of the street

18     at the moment of the on-site investigation.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20             Could we go back to the map, please, in order to locate it.  I

21     hope you will take my word for it, that what used to be Nehru's Street is

22     now called Hamdije Kapidzica Street.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Could I ask you not to mark such a large circle, but to mark

25     Miroslava Krleze Street, 297.  The other part must have been in the

Page 10966

 1     Muslim hands, but Miroslava Krleze, 297, was under Serb control, as you

 2     say?

 3        A.   Well, the map is now gone, and I can see that the pen is on.

 4             So Miroslava Krleze, 297 [marks].  And 463, that street used to

 5     be Armija Bosnia-Herzegovina Street, I'm circling that [marks], and the

 6     street in between was no-man's land.

 7        Q.   In Hamdije Kapidzica Street, can you mark the incident location

 8     where the building was?

 9        A.   I am a bit confused, because on the map I see

10     Hamdije Kapidzica Street in a different place, and 463 that I circled,

11     this is where the building is where Jasmina Tabakovic was killed in the

12     street.  Hamdije Kapidzica is to the north of 463, somewhere around the

13     middle of the map.  I cannot mark Hamdije Kapidzica here; I can only mark

14     297 and 463.

15        Q.   And you believe that the shooting was in between those

16     two numbers?

17        A.   It's not what I think; I'm positive, I know.

18        Q.   Very well.  But then in the report, there is no "463."  We'll try

19     to see what the name of that street used to be and what it is now, and it

20     is certainly not Nehru's Street.  463, it is Trg Sabora Bosanskog, the

21     Bosanskog Sabora Square, so it is not Nehru's Street.

22             Could we find Nehru's Street in order to ascertain where it was

23     you carried out the on-site investigation and where the incident took

24     place?

25        A.   According to the map, this is where the street of the on-site

Page 10967

 1     investigation was.  This is not a detailed map.  We would have to come up

 2     with a detailed map, with all of the streets and buildings, so as to make

 3     it possible for me to locate the exact building.  I know very well this

 4     part of the town.  I told you I lived and grew up in Dobrinja, in

 5     Sarajevo, and I still carry out on-site investigations there.

 6             It is true that Sabora Bosanskog Square is there, as well as

 7     Miroslava Krleze Street, and this is the Kurta Sorta [phoen] Street

 8     taking you to Vojkovici.  I know that area well.

 9             As for Hamdije Kapidzica Street, it is to the north of "463" on

10     this map.

11        Q.   Can you mark Miroslava Krleze Street with a "1" and the place of

12     the incident with a "2"?

13        A.   [Marks]

14             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

15             That will be admitted as a Defence exhibit.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit D893.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

18             Could we please have 1D3047.  It's a Google photograph of the

19     area.  I hope it will be easier to get your bearings on it so as to find

20     the locations.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Can you see everything you need to see now?

23        A.   If I may have a moment to find my bearings.

24        Q.   We see a roundabout in one of the squares?

25        A.   Yes.  The roundabout is used by the town buses or the bus

Page 10968

 1     terminal, to turn around.  I'm trying to find Kurta Sorta Street.  Yes,

 2     it's fine now.

 3             Kurta Sorta Street, that was on the previous map, links the

 4     airport and Vojkovici, and the street perpendicular to it, in between the

 5     buildings, is Miroslava Krleze Street, and that's where the apartment is

 6     where Jasmina Tabakovic was killed.

 7        Q.   Could you please use a red or a blue pen now to mark

 8     Kurta Sorta Street, as well as Miroslava Krleze Street, Nehru's Street,

 9     and the building where the incident took place?

10        A.   The Kurta Sorta Street links the airport -- well, it's here

11     [marks].  What I'm circling now is the building in

12     Miroslava Krleze Street [marks].  And this building across the street, on

13     both sides has -- has streets, but the street next to it should be

14     Nehru's Street, as it was called at the time.  The incident took place in

15     an apartment, but it's difficult for me to pin-point its precise location

16     now.

17             In any case, in the buildings across the street, there was

18     Jasmina Tabakovic's apartment.  I can circle both buildings, and then

19     later on you can use the exact address to find the exact location of the

20     apartment.  So it's between the two blocks.  That's where the street is

21     that we have been trying to locate so far. [Marks]

22        Q.   Witness, I'm afraid that you marked what used to be

23     Lukavicka Street instead of Kurta Sorta Street.  It is adjacent to the

24     airport.  In any case, could you mark with "1" and "2" -- the places from

25     which the fire came and, with a "2," the place that was targeted?

Page 10969

 1        A.   [Marks]

 2        Q.   Place today's date and the number.

 3        A.   [Marks]

 4        Q.   For your convenience or information, Witness, we believe that

 5     Miroslava Krleze Street is the one you marked and Hamdije Kapidzica

 6     Street is the third street parallel to it, it is longitudinal to the

 7     first street, and that the building is just next to the roundabout to the

 8     north-east, I believe.  So you missed by far, it seems.

 9        A.   I don't know what you believe, but I noticed the roundabout.  I

10     know that mention was made of Hamdije Kapidzica Street.  I do know,

11     however, that I went to the apartment which was in the location I marked,

12     and I wasn't alone.  The whole team was there.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please have this admitted.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   And can you tell us whether an on-site investigation took place

16     on Nehru's Street number 10?

17        A.   If the report states that it is "Nehru's Street 10," then it is,

18     and that's what the name was at the time.  Whether there were any name

19     changes later on, that's something I don't know.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I seek to tender this,

21     Your Honours.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we'll keep it as the next Defence exhibit.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit D970.

24             JUDGE KWON:  And, Mr. Karadzic, I couldn't follow your previous

25     question, that -- forgive my pronunciation, but Hamdije Kapidzica Street

Page 10970

 1     was parallel to this street.  Can we take a look at the map, 1D3046, or

 2     we can up-load Exhibit D893.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, could we please

 4     have the name list again, which is 1D02182, just so as to be certain what

 5     the name of the street is.  So I would need the list of street names

 6     again, 1D02182.

 7             Here is the list.  This is the list that accompanies the map.

 8     The third from the bottom, Dzevaharlal Nehrua Street is now called

 9     Hamdije Kapidzica Street.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

11             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.

12             Mr. Karadzic, when he says this is the list that accompanies the

13     map, which map is he referring to?  Because I don't think it's the list

14     that accompanies the map he's been using so far.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, can you clarify it?

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It says:

17             "All the streets in Sarajevo, PDF secured, Adobe Reader."

18             MR. GAYNOR:  The position is this:  This a list of street names

19     produced by the Karadzic Defence, I think, and we have previously

20     indicated our reservations about this list.  The list which accompanies

21     the map that Mr. Karadzic has been using does not, as far as I can see,

22     contain Nehru Street.  So when Mr. Karadzic says that this list

23     accompanies the map, that's actually inaccurate.  That's -- that's the

24     only point.

25             JUDGE KWON:  I think that is the case.  I think it's a photocopy

Page 10971

 1     of some part of the bigger map.

 2             Mr. Witness, you are not in position to confirm whether

 3     Hamdije Kapidzica Street is a name of old Dzevaharlal Nehrua?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am certain that if, in our

 5     reports, we mentioned that it was Nehru's Street, then it -- that it was

 6     so.  However, the maps that were shown to me, as well as this list, is

 7     something that I don't know whether it tallies with the facts, but I'm

 8     certain that I was in that part of the neighbourhood and that I carried

 9     out that on-site investigation.  What the name of the street was, Nehru's

10     or Hamdije Kapidzica, that I don't know any longer.  The name must have

11     been on the signs there, but we would not have written down "Nehru's

12     Street" if it weren't so.  I am not privy to any street names changes,

13     and I don't know what the date of the map is.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, this is an

15     official web site of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  This is an official

16     document of the state, in which they publish street names changes; in

17     particular, in the case of the municipality of Novi Grad in Sarajevo.

18     This Defence is 100 certain [as interpreted] that it is what it purports

19     to be.  We are simply looking for a way to produce it in the courtroom.

20     It was confirmed that the old name was Nehru's Street and the new is

21     Hamdije Kapidzica Street, and another witness marked a completely

22     different building.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think this is an older map and

24     that perhaps it is Hamdije Kapidzica Street.  There are far more precise

25     maps, which is also something I use in my work.  They are far better,

Page 10972

 1     compared to this one, and there is no problem in producing those.  You

 2     can even use the internet.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Well, this is taken off the internet, from a web site of

 5     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  Hamdije Kapidzica Street used to be called

 6     Nehru's Street.  You agree, therefore, that on the report, it says

 7     "Nehru's Street 10"?

 8        A.   If that's what the report says, and I believe I saw a moment ago

 9     that it is Nehru's Street 10, although I wasn't shown the report

10     itself - perhaps you could - if it says it is Nehru's Street 10, that is

11     where the on-site investigation was performed.  It was at the location I

12     marked previously.

13             JUDGE KWON:  So, Mr. Witness, having seen the map, you are

14     confident as to the location of the incident that took place, whatever

15     the name of the street was?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's what I said.

17             JUDGE KWON:  So you do not exclude the possibility that you were

18     mistaken -- might have been mistaken with the street name at the time

19     when producing the report?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's why I said that I would like

21     to read this.  I think that the very same address is on all reports.

22     I think that -- this incident took place 15 or 16 years ago, but I think

23     I do remember that I went to the scene with some trepidation, so I think

24     it is where I marked it.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

Page 10973

 1             Shall we up-load Exhibit D893.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  So my question for you, Mr. Karadzic, that I posed

 4     earlier on.  So my question was how the Hamdije Kapidzica Street could be

 5     parallel to Miroslava Krleze Street, which is 293 on this map.  And you

 6     see Hamdije Kapidzica is perpendicular to that street to the north.  So I

 7     didn't understand your question, that Hamdije Kapidzica Street is the

 8     third street parallel to this one.  What did you mean at the time?

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, not Miroslava

10     Krleze, but Mimar Sinana and Kurta Sorta.  It is parallel to Kurta Sorta,

11     as marked by this witness.  However, we have Mr. Sabljica's testimony on

12     the map, on an exhibit that was admitted, he marked with precision this

13     building in Hamdije Kapidzica Street.  If you remember, we established

14     that it is not from the south to the east, but from the south to the

15     west.  And the report says that the apartment was oriented north-east,

16     but it was established here, beyond any doubt, that the building, as a

17     whole, was oriented towards the south-west and the north-east; the other

18     side, that is.

19             JUDGE KWON:  On transcript page 63, line 24 onward, you said:

20             "Miroslava Krleze is the one you marked, and Hamdije Kapidzica is

21     the third street parallel to it, it is longitudinal to the first street."

22             Probably there may have been a mistake in the translation, but

23     let us move on.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am sorry.  I thought that

25     "longitudinal" is sufficient, but transversal is perpendicular, so the

Page 10974

 1     third longitudinal is parallel.

 2             Oh, I see.  This was confirmed by one of the witnesses from this

 3     list.

 4             Can we have the report once again, because the witness asked for

 5     it.  Can we cast a glance again at 65 ter 09766.  We don't want to have

 6     it broadcast, because we'll be referring to names.

 7             Please focus on number 2.  Number 2 testified as a protected

 8     witness, and he marked, with precision, the location of the building, and

 9     he established that the report misstates that it is oriented towards the

10     south-west, rather than the south-east, as the report says.

11             Let me just remind you, Excellencies, that playing with cardinal

12     points is the main element of wrong conclusions.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14    (redacted)

15    (redacted)  A few moments ago,

16     you mentioned the ballistics expert, Mirza Sabljica.  I don't see him

17     here.  And it says in the report, itself, "Nehruova number 10," that this

18     is an official report that was compiled by the inspector whose name is

19     listed under number 2.  However, my report is not there.  There should be

20     the proper photo file of this same investigation that would explain

21     certain things.

22        Q.   Can we have that?

23        A.   All of that had been sent.  It should be before this Court.  I do

24     not see my own report.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.

Page 10975

 1             Shall we go back to private session briefly.

 2                           [Private session]

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20                           [Open session]

21             THE REGISTRAR:  We're back in open session, Your Honours.

22             JUDGE KWON:  We'll have five minutes for today, Mr. Karadzic.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

24        Q.   In your official note, Witness, it says that everything is as

25     stated in the official report, and this is the only official report from

Page 10976

 1     this incident; right?

 2        A.   This is the official report that was compiled by the witness who

 3     had already appeared here.  But my report should be there as well, the

 4     report of the crime technician, and together with this, it would

 5     constitute a single file.  But I don't see my own report at all.  I keep

 6     looking at the official report that was compiled by the member of the

 7     team who was together with me.

 8        Q.   Sorry, I don't quite understand what you are saying.  Are you

 9     making a parallel report or an official note that is incorporated into

10     this?

11        A.   I work on a parallel report, on a crime technician's report, and

12     I work on the photo file.  And perhaps I even draw the actual scene if

13     the judge asks me to do so.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Since a general was found guilty

15     of this incident, although it was not included in the indictment, could

16     we please have everything we need by tomorrow; the report of this

17     witness, the photographs, so that we fully elucidate the matter.  We're

18     going to find the exhibit as well, I mean, the testimony of number 2 and

19     the map that he marked.

20             Please, Excellencies, could you support this?  Can we have all of

21     this by tomorrow, everything that is relevant in terms of ruling on this

22     case?

23             JUDGE KWON:  Please move on, Mr. Karadzic.

24             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25        Q.   Witness, you changed something here in these statements, didn't

Page 10977

 1     you?

 2        A.   I don't understand.  Which statements?

 3        Q.   Subsequently, you said that you remembered that you used a string

 4     to establish the direction of fire?

 5        A.   If I said so, that should be recorded in my report.  As far as

 6     I can remember, and this is even in my diary, which is accessible, it

 7     says exactly what I did.  I even mentioned the height, and also I said

 8     that all the measurements were done at the scene, itself.  As far as

 9     I can see in the report that is before me, these measurements are there.

10     So I did the measuring in the presence of the entire team that was there

11     with me on the scene.

12        Q.   In your amalgamated statement, paragraph 81, you say that on the

13     15th of May, you carried out an investigation of the incident that

14     happened on the 14th of May, 15 minutes before midnight, and you say that

15     the on-site investigation was supposed to be a typical one.  On the

16     following day -- et cetera.  The bullet arrived -- came through a window,

17     and then you say how the victim's body was hit - if you have the report,

18     please look at it - and:

19             [In English] "We took a piece of string and connected these

20     two points, and we were able to establish the exact trajectory of the

21     bullet.  The bullet came from Dobrinja 1.  That means from apartment

22     buildings in Dobrinja 1 neighbourhood.  That was -- that area was under

23     the Army of Republika Srpska."

24             [Interpretation] In the previous statements, you did not mention

25     this, also not in the reports, you did not say that you used a string.

Page 10978

 1     But you did say that your diary actually reminded you of what had

 2     happened; right?

 3        A.   I cannot remember what it was that jogged my memory.  Everything

 4     is contained in my report.  This is one of the cases where this string is

 5     produced, where we have several points involved in the damage caused by

 6     the bullet.  I remember another case that I worked on.  And on the basis

 7     of these points, I could establish where the bullet had come from.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  How can we see part of your statement -- or, rather,

 9     your report, the page that refers to that?  Can we place it on the ELMO?

10     Can we put it on the ELMO, that page from your diary?  Can we see what it

11     says there?

12        A.   You mean the photocopy?

13        Q.   Yes, yes.

14        A.   Well, go ahead.

15             I would like to ask whether something could be done.  Could I

16     have a look at something?

17             In my diary, in addition to this, there are some other things

18     that are not relevant to this trial.  Can we just show the part that is

19     relevant to this trial?

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It doesn't have to be broadcast.

21     We can cover it.

22             JUDGE KWON:  It's not broadcast.

23             Yes, Mr. Gaynor.  If the witness is -- yes.

24             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.  I have the original of the witness's diary.

25     Perhaps I could return it to him.

Page 10979

 1             JUDGE KWON:  I think that would be more convenient.

 2             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We're in closed session, aren't we?

 4             JUDGE KWON:  No, we are in public session.  But if necessary --

 5     we do not broadcast the content of that diary, so nothing is broadcast.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All right.  I see the photocopy of

 7     part of my diary here.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  And what is your question, Mr. Karadzic?  That will

 9     be your last one for today.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   What is written here?  Does it say that you used a string to

12     measure this?  You can read all of it to the Trial Chamber, if you wish,

13     or you can indicate what it was that jogged your memory to the effect

14     that you forgot to write this in your first report.

15        A.   First I'm going to clarify what this diary is.  It contains all

16     my on-site investigations from November 1993, I think, until 1996,

17     I think.  Inter alia, there is this particular case as well.  My diary

18     was used for note-taking, to remind me how I'm going to type up the

19     report ultimately.  It does not reflect everything I did at the scene,

20     itself.  These were specific notes that I used to type up the official

21     report.

22             Actually, I can read this to you:

23             "The 15th of May, 1995 ..."

24             "Murder, Nehruova 10/4."

25             And then it says "Tabakovic, Jasmina," so it has to do with that

Page 10980

 1     young girl.  And then it says:

 2             "On the 24th of May, 1995, at 2345 hours, from the direction of

 3     Dobrinja 1, a gunshot that came from a rifle killed Jasmina Tabakovic in

 4     an apartment on Jawaharlal Nehru 10/4 (1969)," which is the year of her

 5     birth:

 6             "The bullet passed through the window at a height of

 7     116 centimetres.  Then the curtain was at 116.5 centimetres and hit

 8     Jasmina in the area of the left breast.  The bullet went out through

 9     the -- exited through the area of the right shoulder blade and went

10     through the wardrobe and -- at a height of 124 centimetres, and exited

11     from it at a height of 131 centimetres, and stopped at the level of

12     132 centimetres.  The body was transferred to the morgue."

13             And then the names are registered there, the members of the team.

14             I don't know whether I was working at Novi Grad Station at the

15     time or whether I was at the other Security Services Centre.  On the

16     basis of this reminder, I wrote up the crime technician's report that I

17     don't have on the screen here, and all of this should be in it.

18             When I was saying that I was measuring the height on the sheet,

19     on the window, and everywhere else, in such a situation you always use a

20     string in order to carry out that measurement.  However, I didn't have to

21     write that in my diary, that a string was used for it.  It simply had to

22     be done in order to establish where the bullet had come from.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

24             So let us try to finish this.  Excellencies, let us try to finish

25     this so we don't wait until tomorrow.  I just have two extra questions.

Page 10981

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Very well, five minutes.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Witness, on the basis of what you wrote here, does it seem

 4     obvious that the bullet is ascending?  It entering at 116 centimetres,

 5     and then goes to 116.5 centimetres, and then goes to 124, and then 131,

 6     and then 132.  Is the bullet going up?

 7        A.   Logically, it would seem so.  From 116 to 132 on the wall, it

 8     means an ascending trajectory.

 9        Q.   Did you establish the angle at which the bullet arrived?

10        A.   I didn't.

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now see 1D3044.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Why don't we do that tomorrow, Mr. Karadzic.

13             THE ACCUSED:  Okay, okay.

14             [Interpretation] All right.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

16             We'll be resuming tomorrow morning at 9.00.

17                           [The witness stands down]

18                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.36 p.m.,

19                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 1st day of

20                           February, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.