1 Tuesday, 20
2 [Open Session]
3 [The witness entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.24 a.m.
5 [The accused entered court]
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good morning, ladies and
7 gentlemen. Good morning to the technical booth, the interpreters, the
8 registry, the counsel for the Prosecution, the counsel for the Defence.
9 Good morning, General Krstic. We will be resuming our proceedings today.
10 So Mr. Harmon, I see we have a new witness for today.
11 MR. HARMON: That is correct, Mr. President. Good morning, Your
12 Honours. Good morning to my colleagues for the Defence.
13 We have a witness who has appeared previously before this Chamber
14 who provided testimony to the Chamber on the 23rd and the 26th of June
15 using the pseudonym BB. The purpose of him coming back is to examine
16 certain exhibits, specific exhibits. We're not going to repeat his
17 testimony and the procedures and the methodology of intercepting
18 communications that was the subject of his testimony previously.
19 So if I could, Mr. President and Your Honours, if I could have the
20 witness shown Prosecution Exhibit 748 and 788, and I could have copies of
21 those exhibits distributed to Your Honours, then we will proceed with his
23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Allow me to say a few words.
24 Witness BB, you are not going to take the solemn declaration, but
25 I remind you that you are still testifying under oath, and I think you
1 understand what that implies. Thank you.
2 MR. HARMON: While I'm waiting for these to be distributed to my
3 colleagues for the Defence, let me just say, Your Honours, that
4 Prosecutor's Exhibit 748 is a copy of a notebook, the original of which I
5 have. I have shown it to the Defence, they have inspected it, and it is
6 available for Your Honours to inspect as well. I could pass this up, if
7 Your Honours please, through the registrar, and ...
8 WITNESS: WITNESS BB [Resumed]
9 [Witness answered through interpreter]
10 Examined by Mr. Harmon:
11 Q. Now, Witness BB, have you had an opportunity to examine first of
12 all Prosecutor's Exhibit 748, which is a copy of a notebook, and have you
13 compared the copy of the notebook to the original notebook? Did you do
14 that in my office?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And is the Prosecution Exhibit 748 an exact and true copy of the
17 original notebook that you inspected in my office?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. In addition, did you examine Prosecution Exhibit 788, which is an
20 extract from the notebook, and did you compare the extract which is found
21 in 788 with an extract contained in the notebook?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And is the extract found in Prosecutor's Exhibit 788 an exact copy
24 of what is found in the notebook Prosecutor's Exhibit 748?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Now, let me ask you, you've had an opportunity to review the
2 notebook, the original and the copy. After having inspected that
3 notebook, can you tell me where that notebook was maintained; at what
4 site? Where was it kept when you wrote your entries into it?
5 A. It was on the table in the room in which the receivers and
6 recorders were situated, the equipment for monitoring conversations.
7 Q. Was that in Okresanica?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. How were you able to identify that notebook as having come from
11 A. Primarily because I was able to identify my handwriting and I was
12 assigned to Okresanica. Also on the covers.
13 Q. Now, do you recognise the handwriting of your fellow colleagues
14 who were also assigned to Okresanica?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. I would like to return your attention to a specific conversation,
17 and that conversation in the notebook is found at pages -- it starts at
18 00804463. So could you turn in the notebook to that particular page, the
19 last two digits of which are 63. Do you have that in front of you?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And this conversation goes over two pages, ending at page 4465; is
22 that correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And I'm referring specifically to the conversation that starts
25 with a frequency of 255.950, and then the next is, which is the time,
1 0950. And the correspondents in this conversation are General Krstic,
2 Obrenovic and, in parentheses, Jevdjevic. First of all, could you tell me
3 who recorded that conversation, who captured it on tape?
4 A. I recorded this conversation.
5 Q. And the notebook entry about this conversation, is that in your
7 A. It is. This is my handwriting.
8 Q. Now, if you would turn to page -- turn the page over from the
9 start of the conversation, I'm referring to 00804465. Do you see your
10 name at the end of this conversation?
11 A. I do.
12 Q. Now, I'm going to read for the record this conversation, and I'm
13 reading from Prosecutor's Exhibit 788. And I'll start at the top:
14 Frequency 255.950, time 9.50, participants General Krstic
15 (barely audible) - Obrenovic - X (Jevdjevic).
16 O: Obrenovic 02 from Palma.
17 X: Go ahead.
18 X: Good. Very good.
19 O: Very good.
20 X: Yes.
21 O: Where is Zepa?
22 X: (Behind us).
23 O: /laughter/
24 X: It's not yet ours...... (have to) we ...
25 O: What's going on, you gave up Yugoslavia, man.
1 X: Well fuck it, that's the agreement.
2 O: What? Hello? Hey operator, what's happening, did I lose
3 the line?
4 K: Hello?
5 O: Yes.
6 K: This is Krstic. Hello!
7 O: Yes.
8 K: Hey Obrenovic, Krstic here.
9 O: How are you, General, Sir?
10 K: I'm great and you?
11 O: Thanks to you, I am too.
12 K: (You can say that?) And how's your health?
13 O: It's fine thank God, it's fine.
14 K: Are you working down there?
15 O: Of course we are working?!
16 K: Good.
17 O: We've managed to catch a few more.
18 K: Uh-huh.
19 O: Either by gunpoint or on mines.
20 K: Kill them all, God damn it.
21 O: Everything is going according to plan.
22 K: Don't leave a single one alive.
23 O: Yes?
24 K: Not a single one must be left alive.
25 O: Everything is going according to plan. Everything.
1 K: Way to go, chief. The Turks are probably listening.
2 Let them listen, the motherfuckers.
3 O: Yeah, let them, let them. They know what they can listen to.
4 K: Right. Where is your boss?
5 O: He went up towards you.
6 K: When, today?
7 O: Yes.
8 K: This morning?
9 O: Yes.
10 K: OK. OK. Go on. We'll be in touch.
11 O: Can I talk to Jevdjevic for a moment?
12 K: Jevdjevic?
13 O: Yes.
14 K: All right. Since we are ...
15 O: All the best, General.
16 K: I'll put him on.
17 X: Hello.
18 O: (Vitoje?)
19 X: Yes.
20 O: Listen.
21 X: Yes.
22 O: Which road should I use to send a truck in your direction
23 to pick up some cattle?
24 X: And where is that?
25 O: Well, I don't know. My boss told me to give you a call
1 because you know where most of them are.
2 X: Well, the others have already grabbed everything.
3 O: And there's nothing left, huh?
4 X: Not really.
5 O: The motherfuckers are worse than termites.
6 X: Even worse. Now their code-names are Cowboy 1 and Cowboy 2.
7 O: /laughter/
8 O: Hey, listen ...
9 X: You'll only get some if your guys have caught some and
10 penned them up, no other way.
11 O: OK, then. Where are they? Someone told me somewhere near
12 Milici, right?
13 X: They're in the place where Legenda often carried out searches,
14 and then further up.
15 O: Should I go to Milici?
16 X: (Podravanje and up to Stublic?)
17 O: Uh-huh, to Stublic.
18 X: You'll find them at Stublic.
19 O: OK.
20 X: You know the frequency and there are lots of soldiers and
21 lots of sets, so you can call.
22 O: Good.
23 X: That's it.
24 O: Good.
25 X: And how are you?
1 O: Well, it's OK.
2 X: So long. Let's get together sometime.
3 O: OK. Take care.
4 X: Bye.
5 And that ends the reading of the intercept, the translation of the
6 intercept. That conversation's reflected in your notes in the notebook.
7 Now, in this conversation, Witness, the parties identified
8 themselves, one as Krstic, who's addressed as a General, and the other
9 identifies himself as Obrenovic. Prior to intercepting this
10 communication, were you familiar with the voices of General Krstic and
12 A. At the time, yes.
13 Q. And did the people who were speaking in this conversation, did you
14 recognise those as the voices of General Krstic and as Obrenovic?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now, in the conversation itself there are a number of places, and
17 I'm referring to 788 where there are brackets, for example, at the time,
18 next to the correspondent X, it says, brackets, "Jevdjevic"; and in other
19 locations there also appear to be brackets, for example, on the 8th line
20 down, the words "have to," and further down in brackets, "You can say
21 that?" Do the brackets signify anything?
22 A. They signify that the intelligibility was low so that I'm not
23 quite certain that what I wrote down is what was said.
24 Q. What about next to the name Jevdjevic; what do those brackets
25 signify in that particular point in this intercept?
1 A. When I intercepted the conversation, the normal procedure was to
2 write down the frequency, the time, and the participants while the
3 conversation is being recorded; and only subsequently, after hearing what
4 was recorded, it is transcribed onto paper. So that during the recording,
5 the participants in most cases were not known from the outset so that in
6 the heading I would mark them as unknown, such as X. And later on, upon
7 listening to the tape, if I established who it was, then I would add the
8 name of that person in brackets.
9 Q. Now, Witness, this conversation took place many years ago. Do you
10 have an independent recollection of this conversation or parts of this
12 A. I remember parts of it.
13 Q. What parts of this conversation do you remember, and could you
14 tell the Judges why?
15 A. I remember the part when there is reference to the cattle for
16 which they need a truck to load them onto, and then mention is made of
17 cowboy or cow herd 1 and 2 which at the time sounded like a good joke to
18 me, and that is why I remember it. It has stuck in my memory.
19 Q. Now, in the course of this interception and the capture of this
20 conversation, you previously described writing, the procedure of writing
21 these conversations down into notebooks. You also described a procedure
22 of sending these by teletype, the content of these conversations, to
23 Superior Command. Do you remember that testimony?
24 A. More or less, yes.
25 MR. HARMON: Could I have the next exhibit, which is Prosecutor's
1 Exhibit 786, distributed.
2 Q. Now, Witness BB, do you recognise Prosecutor's Exhibit 786?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. What is Prosecutor's Exhibit 786?
5 A. This document is in the form in which it was sent from Okresanica
6 to the 2nd Corps command.
7 Q. And could you turn to the conversation we've been discussing,
8 which is on the second page of the B/C/S, and it starts again with the
9 frequency of 255.950 and 0950 hours, and could you then turn -- follow
10 that conversation through to the last page, and you'll see two initials,
11 two sets of initials that appear at the end of that conversation. Is one
12 of the sets of initials your initials?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now, let me go to the header on this document, and this document
15 indicates, does it not, the location where this conversation was captured?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And that is the word "Okresanica"; is that correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And there's a date that appears on there, August the 2nd, 1995.
20 What does that date represent?
21 A. The date represents the day when the conversation was intercepted
22 and recorded and forwarded to the Superior Command.
23 Q. Now, if we could turn back to the Prosecutor exhibit which is 788
24 which is the excerpt of the conversation, at the top of the intercept,
25 next to Participants and next to General Krstic's name, there's a bracket
1 that says "barely audible." Can you explain what that notation means?
2 A. It means that the participant who was introduced as General
3 Krstic, that he was barely audible. The audibility was far poorer than
4 that of the other participant.
5 Q. Can you explain to the Judges why in radio communications one
6 speaker's voice may appear louder than another's?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Do you need a piece of paper?
9 A. Yes.
10 MR. HARMON: You can put that on the ELMO, Mr. Usher, please.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrusic.
12 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Defence would
13 like to object because, as far as I can see, Mr. Harmon intends to ask the
14 witness about some expert opinion. We have heard an expert opinion on
15 these issues, and if this is going to be an expert opinion that is going
16 to be solicited, then we need to see his report first and then hear him,
17 because this is obviously an expert opinion that Mr. Harmon is going to
18 ask the witness about.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon, your response.
20 MR. HARMON: I agree with my colleague that Dr. French did give an
21 explanation as to different frequencies causing different volumes in
22 voices. This witness has worked with radios since he was a ham operator
23 in his youth. He has worked extensively for many years with radios,
24 intercepting communications. I think he is in a position to provide an
25 explanation to the Chamber based on his experience.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrusic, if the witness
2 speaks only about his own experience, I don't think he can be considered
3 an expert witness. He simply is telling us what his own experience is.
4 We're going to hear the witness, Mr. Petrusic, and after that you will
5 have a chance to cross-examine. Thank you very much.
6 You may continue, Mr. Harmon, but limit it to the actual knowledge
7 and experience of the witness, please.
8 MR. HARMON: That's correct.
9 Q. Based on your experience alone, could you explain to the Trial
10 Chamber why there are speakers with different volumes, one speaker being
11 more audible than another. And if you need to make a diagram on the ELMO,
12 please proceed.
13 A. For instance, we have a participant A and a participant B. The
14 principle of communications was such that participant A is at one
15 location, participant B at another location. Number 1 is the frequency of
16 the signal emitted from position A, and number 2 is the frequency from the
17 location where participant B is situated.
18 I, when monitoring, when I guide my antenna towards participant B,
19 I adjust it to frequency 1, and then I hear -- I can hear quite well
20 participant A. As for participant B, I can hear much less well. Also
21 vice versa; if I were to direct my antenna towards participant B and
22 adjust the receiver to frequency number 2, then the audibility of
23 participant B would be good and that of participant A much poorer.
24 MR. HARMON: Perhaps this could be marked as an exhibit. This
25 could be Prosecutor's Exhibit 858.
1 Thank you for your explanation, Witness BB.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon, excuse me for
4 Witness BB, does that mean that you could choose the participant
5 that you wanted to hear better by adjusting your antenna?
6 A. In most cases, yes.
7 Q. But you could always only choose one of the two; is that right?
8 A. Yes. If I had one receiver, only one participant.
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please continue, Mr. Harmon.
10 Thank you.
11 MR. HARMON:
12 Q. Now, I'm going to play two tape recordings for you. You had an
13 opportunity to listen to these in my office, but I'd like you to listen to
14 them again in Court.
15 MR. HARMON: And if we could have -- these are two tape recordings
16 of the same conversation, and if we could start, and we'll play these
17 successively. We'll play the first conversation, which is already an
18 exhibit. It has already been played in this Chamber. It is Exhibit 789.
19 And for reference, this is tape 48 that was referred to in Dr. French's
20 report on page 5. So if we could play Prosecutor's Exhibit 789. There
21 should be a transcript of that already available. It is 789/A and B. But
22 the purpose of this exercise is just to listen to the volume. So if we
23 could play, please, 789.
24 THE INTERPRETER: Do the interpreters interpret? Because we don't
25 have the transcript.
1 MR. HARMON: No, it's not necessary to interpret. This is only to
2 listen to the volume of the speakers. So it's just to listen to the
4 [Audiotape played]
5 MR. HARMON: It's very soft. I'm not hearing it at all.
6 JUDGE WALD: I'm not hearing it at all either.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Excuse me. The director just informed me that he
8 can hear it, but obviously we can't, and he's adjusting that immediately.
9 MR. HARMON: All right.
10 THE REGISTRAR: The director just informed me that the engineer is
11 on his way and it will be less than one minute before it begins to play.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon, can you leave that
13 part of the testimony for the time being and we can come back to it
15 MR. HARMON: Well, at the conclusion of this --
16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Harmon.
17 MR. HARMON: At the conclusion of this exercise, Mr. President, I
18 was going to move to an entirely different conversation which will take me
19 out of the area of this --
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Perhaps we can act differently.
21 We have been working for almost 45 minutes, so perhaps we can have a
22 15-minute break now and come back. I see positive signs from the
23 technical booth, so let's have a 15-minute break and then we'll come
25 --- Break taken at 10.01 a.m.
1 --- On resuming at 10.17 a.m.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon, I think that we are
3 now able to hear the recording.
4 MR. HARMON: Yes. We'll play two recordings back to back. The
5 first one will be Prosecutor's Exhibit 789, and if we could play that.
6 [Audiotape played]
7 MR. HARMON:
8 Q. Witness BB, whose voice was louder in that tape, Obrenovic's or
10 A. On this tape, the voice of Obrenovic was louder.
11 MR. HARMON: Now if we could play the next exhibit, a new exhibit,
12 Prosecutor's Exhibit 835.
13 [Audiotape played]
14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think we ought to interrupt at
15 this point because the question that is being asked here is -- let me say
16 that the Judges aren't able to know whether the -- it is distortion from
17 the technical booth or whether the distortion is on the original, so we're
18 hearing this badly. And it's up to Mr. Harmon to tell us, was the
19 distortion due to the technical facilities here or on the original?
20 MR. HARMON: Quality, we have the original. We'll bring the
21 quality -- the original down here, and we'll put it on the machine and
22 we'll play the original, but that will take just a few minutes. I could
23 continue with my examination, but in the meantime if I can get a message
24 upstairs, we will get the original down here.
25 I apologise, Mr. President. This was supposed to be a fairly
1 short exercise. It looks like it's going to be a longer exercise, but we
2 will bring the original down; we'll put it on. The witness -- let me ask
3 the witness this question.
4 Q. Witness BB, have you heard the tape recordings, the two tape
5 recordings in my office?
6 A. Yes, I have heard them.
7 Q. And have you heard the originals as well as the copies?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Was one of the tapes that you heard of a different -- I'm sorry.
10 Were there differences between the two tapes?
11 A. Yes, there were.
12 Q. And were there differences in the volume of the voice of General
13 Krstic in those two tapes?
14 A. Yes, there was.
15 Q. Now, the tape where General Krstic had -- I'm sorry, let me
16 rephrase that question. Could you identify which of the two tapes was
17 more likely to have come from Okresanica, after having listened to both
18 the original version and the copy of the same conversation from two
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Which of the tapes were you able to identify as likely having come
22 from Okresanica?
23 A. The tape on which General Krstic's voice is less audible.
24 MR. HARMON: That would be, Your Honours, Prosecution Exhibit 789,
25 which is again referred to in Dr. French's report at page 5.
1 Q. Now, did anybody else at Okresanica copy -- record this particular
2 conversation, to your knowledge?
3 A. Not to my knowledge.
4 Q. Now, let me put to you a question. General Krstic has heard this
5 tape. He has asserted that this tape is 100 per cent montage. I'd like
6 your comments on that proposition.
7 A. At that point in time, in 1995, I heard that conversation and
8 recorded it. Now, whether this concrete tape here is the tape that I
9 actually recorded on, I can't say for sure.
10 Q. Now, are there factors that led you to conclude that it may be the
11 tape that you actually heard and recorded?
12 A. Yes, because the recording on this tape completely corresponds to
13 my notes in my notebook.
14 Q. All right.
15 MR. HARMON: Well, then, I will await the arrival of the tape,
16 we'll put the original on, Mr. President. Again, I apologise for the
17 delay. We'll now turn to a different subject, and if I could have -- if
18 the witness could be given, please, a copy of Prosecution Exhibit 843 and
19 842/A and B.
20 MR. HARMON: Again, Mr. President and Your Honours, Prosecution
21 Exhibit 843, as you will see, is a copy of a notebook, and 842 is a copy
22 of an excerpt from the notebook. The original notebook I have. I will
23 ask the registrar also to distribute that to Your Honours for inspection.
24 And in the notebook, the original notebook, you will see, Your Honour, a
25 blue tab, and the blue tab is only to mark the location of the excerpt
1 that is Prosecutor's Exhibit 842. This original notebook also has been
2 given to the Defence for their inspection.
3 Now, there is one other piece of information that Your Honours
4 need to know about this particular exhibit, and this notebook confirms a
5 printout of the same conversation which is found in three separate
6 Prosecution exhibits. The printout of this conversation is found in OTP
7 Exhibit 364/1/13 July/tab 16. The printout is also found at OTP Exhibit
8 529 and at OTP Exhibit 404, tab 341.
9 With that background, then, Your Honours, I'll proceed with my
11 Q. Witness BB, have you had an opportunity to examine the original
12 notebook in my office and compare it to the copy, which is Prosecutor's
13 Exhibit 843, and can you tell the Judges if the Exhibit 843 is a true copy
14 of the original?
15 A. Yes, it is. That is to say, I had occasion to look through it,
16 and I agree that this copy is a true copy. It corresponds to the
18 Q. And does Prosecutor's Exhibit 842, which is an excerpt of a
19 conversation, correspond to, exactly to the entry that is in the notebook
20 that is found at page 01077793 and -94?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Now, after having inspected Prosecutor's Exhibit 843, can you tell
23 me, is this a notebook from Okresanica?
24 A. Yes, it is.
25 Q. And on what basis do you make that conclusion?
1 A. On the basis of the fact that I recognise the handwriting.
2 Q. Whose handwriting?
3 A. I recognise my own handwriting and some other handwritings of my
4 colleagues who were with me.
5 Q. Now, let me turn your attention to Prosecutor's Exhibit 842 and
6 ask you about this specific conversation which is found in the notebook at
7 01077793 and -94. Did you capture that conversation on tape? Did you
8 actually record that conversation?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And did you make the entry in the notebook relating to that
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, can you date this conversation? Did we go through that
14 exercise of attempting to date this conversation in my office?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Can you take a look at the notebook. If you need the original, we
17 can pass the original to you. I think you may need the original,
18 actually, to make the dating because there's ... If you refer to page
19 7770. I could assist you if -- if you turn to page 7770, which is the
20 cover, and you turn to page 7798. Do you see dates on those respective
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. What is the date on 7770?
24 A. The 12th of July, 1995. And on page 0017798 it is the 14th of
25 July, 1995.
1 Q. So based on those two dates which bracket the conversation, can
2 you tell the Trial Chamber when you believe that conversation occurred?
3 A. I believe the conversation occurred between the 12th, therefore,
4 and the 14th of July, 1995.
5 MR. HARMON: Now, let me briefly read this conversation into the
6 record. I'll start reading:
7 785.000, Channel 5, at 2040 hours. (General Krstic X - Y
8 (Borovcanin from the specials)
9 X: Hello, Krstic/here/.
10 Y: Hello, Borovcanin/here/, General, how are you?
11 X: Well, where the fuck are you?
12 Y: I'm here at the command post.
13 X: How's it going?
14 Y: It's going well.
15 X: Don't tell me you have problems.
16 Y: I don't, I don't.
17 X: And Krstic also ....., went somewhere towards you.
18 Y: That's exactly what I want to know.
19 X: ......
20 Y: Is there anything for us from you?
21 X: Work on this part -- and then "which" has a line through
22 it -- ...
23 Y: Yes.
24 X: ...
25 Y: At the moment.
1 X: ...
2 Y: We'll continue that tomorrow.
3 X: ...
4 Y: All right, bud.
5 X: OK, we'll be in touch.
6 And that concludes the reading from Prosecutor Exhibit 842.
7 Q. Now, in this conversation, General Krstic is identified as
8 "General" and Borovcanin is identified by name. Let me ask you this
9 question: In this conversation General Krstic's name appears in brackets,
10 as does Borovcanin. Can you explain those brackets, what they mean?
11 A. At the beginning, when the conversation started, when I came, at
12 the beginning of this conversation, the device for recording is switched
13 on and we write in the participants, the particulars in the heading. So
14 at that point I was not sure who the participants in the conversation
15 were, so I wrote in "X" and "Y." And later on, when I listened to the
16 tape again, and when I recorded it in my notebook, I realised who the
17 participants were and therefore put them in in brackets.
18 Q. Now, let me ask you: In respect of the words "from the specials,"
19 what does that mean? What does that signify, if you know?
20 A. That means -- that refers to the special units.
21 MR. HARMON: I have no further questions, Mr. President. I have
22 received a note about this tape, but I would like if I could have a break
23 for a few minutes, or I could play it later or after the
24 cross-examination. I just needed to make sure that the correct sequence
25 is found and played.
1 [Prosecution counsel confer]
2 MR. HARMON: I'm informed it is ready, so this is the recording of
3 Prosecutor's Exhibit 835 from the original.
4 [Audiotape played]
5 MR. HARMON: This apparently is not the conversation -- if we
6 could have a few minutes, I'll make sure the correct selection on the
7 master tape is found. I've concluded my direct examination.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So, Mr. Harmon, what you have
9 just suggested was that we do the cross-examination now and then
10 afterwards you will play us this part of the tape.
11 MR. HARMON: Yes. What I would suggest is since the purpose of
12 playing the tape is for Your Honours to listen to the different qualities
13 and the different volumes of the various speakers - in one case General
14 Krstic is softer and in another case he's louder - it's only for purposes
15 of Your Honours' listening to the two tapes. We can do that with or
16 without the witness present. At this point I've examined him about his
17 having listened to both of these and his having made a selection as to
18 which one was more likely to have been intercepted at Okresanica. He
19 doesn't have to listen to the tapes themselves. But I'm at the Trial
20 Chamber's disposal as to how it wants to proceed.
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrusic or
22 Mr. Visnjic -- Mr. Visnjic, have you any remarks to make regarding the
23 suggestion that we have just heard?
24 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President, no comments.
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
1 Madam Registrar, let us hear you.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Yes. I just received a call from the booth, and
3 both case managers apparently are in the booth and they've identified the
4 correct portion, so we can begin.
5 MR. HARMON: Fine. Then let's begin and finish this part of the
6 exercise. I'm happy to have it played now if it's ready and they have
7 selected the proper selection.
8 [Audiotape played]
9 MR. HARMON: May I be permitted to ask the witness a question
10 about this, Mr. President?
11 Q. Now, you've heard this tape now which is Prosecutor's 835. Can
12 you tell me which voice is louder and which voice is softer; General
13 Krstic's or Obrenovic's? I'm sorry, which voice is louder; General
14 Krstic's or General Obrenovic's?
15 A. General Krstic's voice is louder.
16 MR. HARMON: And I meant to say Obrenovic. I think I promoted
17 Mr. Obrenovic to the rank of General, so it should be "Obrenovic" and not
18 "General Obrenovic." Thank you.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. Harmon.
20 Mr. Visnjic, your witness for the cross-examination.
21 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
22 Cross-examined by Mr. Visnjic:
23 Q. [Interpretation] Witness BB, could you please take Prosecution
24 Exhibit 748 and turn to page ending 00804463. In response to Mr. Harmon's
25 question, you explained that the conversation beginning on that page was
1 recorded on the 2nd of August, 1995. Am I right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Could you please turn to page 00804465.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. The next conversation that follows this one, was it recorded on
6 the 7th of August, 1995?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Does that mean that between the 2nd of August and the 7th of
9 August, 1995, no entries were made of intercepted conversations in this
11 A. That is right.
12 Q. Does that also mean that there were no additional conversations
13 taped on this tape between the 2nd and the 7th of August?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Can you explain that?
16 A. There were several notebooks being used simultaneously so that
17 when the operator who was transcribing from the tape, he would take the
18 first notebook at hand and transcribe a conversation in it, so that it was
19 quite possible for nothing to be taken down in a particular notebook for a
20 day or two.
21 Q. Did this happen often or rarely? How many notebooks did you have
22 in front of you when you were working?
23 A. There were several, let me say five at least, so that this
24 happened quite frequently.
25 Q. In answer to a question by my learned friend Mr. Harmon, you said
1 that you were able to identify the conversation recorded at Okresanica
2 when you received both tapes. Did you remember whose voice was louder?
3 A. Whatever I took note of in addition to the actual facts, the
4 information, what I heard, the brackets, question marks, full stops and
5 commas, with regard to the parts of the conversation that were less
6 intelligible and comparing the recording with the transcript from those
7 days, I established that the recording fully corresponds to the transcript
8 in the notebook in terms of audibility and everything else.
9 Q. You have testified in this courtroom on the 23rd and 26th of
10 June. Do you know why you were not questioned about this particular
12 A. No, I don't know. I don't know why.
13 Q. Would you please look at Exhibit 843, please. This is the second
14 notebook, and will you look at the page beginning with 01077815.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. This is a conversation which is said to have started at 10.51.
17 Are we looking at the same page?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. In answer to a question from the Prosecution, you said that you
20 recognised the handwriting of your colleagues. Do you recognise the
21 handwriting of this person who took down this conversation?
22 A. I couldn't say with certainty regarding the handwriting. I think
23 I know the initials of the person who took it down and the initials of the
25 Q. You don't have to give us their names because of protective
1 measures. This answer will suffice.
2 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] For the transcript, I should like to
3 read out this conversation because I have several questions for the
4 witness afterwards. And this conversation is in Serbo-Croatian, so for
5 the transcript I should like to read it.
6 10 hours 51, X, Y, Bogicevic - General Zivanovic.
7 X: Hello.
8 Y: Hello.
9 X: Is Zivanovic there?
10 Y: Yes, and who needs him?
11 X: Bogicevic from Belgrade.
12 Y: Just a moment, please.
13 X: Hello. Just a moment, General, you're wanted.
14 B: Hello.
15 Z: Hello.
16 B: Zile, hi.
17 Z: Hi, Bogi.
18 B: Good luck.
19 Z: Thank you.
20 B: Here I have the truck. Five tonnes of goods are here for you
21 in Ljubovija.
22 Z: Yes. It's the same as if you were in Belgrade.
23 B: What should we do now? That is what Triso told me.
24 Z: I beg your pardon?
25 B: Triso told me to do that.
1 Z: Triso doesn't know anything about borders.
2 B: Yes.
3 Z: If that is what he told you to do, report to him and then pass
4 it on to me.
5 B: We want to drive some stuff over there to you, but ...
6 Z: Where?
7 B: Over there where you are, up there.
8 Z: I am now in Belgrade.
9 B: Oh, I see.
10 Z: I have liberated Srebrenica and now I have been given a new
12 B: Yes, yes, fine.
13 Z: How are you?
14 B: Very well. I am coming up there.
15 Z: I have no home.
16 B: I'll come up there now to bring you some watermelon to cool
17 off with.
18 Z: Do that.
19 B: Fine.
20 Z: And how are my people, my Serbs?
21 B: Fine (Krile?) mine.
22 Z: Everything is fine. Say hello to the Serbs.
23 B: I will. Be well. We'll be in touch.
24 Z: Fine.
25 B: Bye-bye.
1 Witness BB, according to your theory for the determination of
2 dates, could you determine when this conversation took place?
3 A. By looking at the dates in this notebook, I can say that the
4 conversation took place between the 15th of July and the 18th of July,
6 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Witness BB.
7 Mr. President, the Defence has no more questions for this witness.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Visnjic.
9 Mr. Harmon, any re-examination?
10 MR. HARMON: May I have just a minute to look at this document?
11 Thank you.
12 Re-examined by Mr. Harmon:
13 Q. Witness BB, would you take the document that you've just been
14 examined on, and I'd like to refer you to page 01077811. And on that
15 particular page there is a date of July 15th, 1995; is that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And when you say the conversation took place between the 15th of
18 July and the 18th of July, would you turn to page 01077846. Do you see a
19 date of July the 18th, 1995?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Now, from July -- that date, at that entry point where that date
22 is, the conversations that follow are the conversations that were
23 intercepted on the 18th of July; is that correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Now, and the conversations, turning back to page 01077811, are the
1 conversations that were intercepted after the 15th of July; is that
3 A. That is the first conversation that was taken down into this
4 notebook, and it occurred on the 15th of July.
5 Q. Okay. Now, I've had an opportunity to look at many of these
6 notebooks, and let me ask you this: Are the conversations that are
7 intercepted, is there a time referenced in respect of each of the
8 conversations that is intercepted?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. So if we turn to page 01077811, the first conversation that was
11 noted in this notebook on the 15th of July occurred at 055 hours; is that
13 A. 5.54, yes.
14 Q. 5.54 hours. I'm sorry. Okay. So that's early in the morning.
15 And the subsequent conversations -- can you go through this notebook,
16 starting at this page where the first conversation is, and tell me when
17 you believe the 16th of July is?
18 A. The 16th of July could roughly have begun on page 01077819.
19 Q. Can you tell the Judges why you believe the 16th of July could
20 start at that particular page?
21 A. Because the conversation prior to that that was intercepted has a
22 time indication of 11.02 a.m., and this conversation on page 01077819 has
23 the time 6.19 in the morning. So most probably the next day in the
24 morning. It could have been one of the first conversations, because the
25 date is indicated. Probably the first conversation that day is contained
1 in one of the other notebooks.
2 Q. Can you tell me where you believe to be the 17th of July, where
3 that starts?
4 A. The 17th of July I think begins on page 01077833.
5 Q. Why is that? And why is that that you believe it occurs on that
7 A. The conversation on the previous page has a time indicated, 2203
8 hours, so that means in the evening. And then this conversation has a
9 time noted as 7.57 in the morning, so that means the next day.
10 Q. And would you just look from that particular page which ends in
11 833, over to page 846, to see if the times that are noted in respect of
12 each of the conversations continues to get later and later and later.
13 A. Yes. Until the page 01077846, on which the date is indicated of
14 the next day.
15 Q. Now, turning to the conversation about which you were examined,
16 which is found at page 815 and 816 - I'm sorry - 815, yes, and 816, and
17 having noted that before that is the date of the 15th of July, 1995, and
18 after that, on page 01077819, you believe to be the date of the 16th, are
19 you able now to more precisely give the Trial Chamber a view as to when
20 the conversation about which you were examined occurred?
21 A. The conversation certainly occurred between the 15th and the 18th,
22 of course, including the 15th, but it is my opinion that it could have
23 occurred on the 15th. So it is my opinion that this particular
24 conversation occurred on the 15th of July.
25 MR. HARMON: I have no further questions, thank you.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,
2 Mr. Harmon.
3 Judge Fouad Riad, you have questions?
4 Questioned by the Court:
5 JUDGE RIAD: Good morning, Witness BB. Can you hear me?
6 A. Yes.
7 JUDGE RIAD: I just want to understand a few things from you. You
8 mentioned in an answer to the Prosecutor that you were familiar with the
9 voice of General Krstic and Obrenovic, and you said, "I was familiar with
10 their voices at the time." What made you familiar with the voices? Did
11 you listen to them in tapes or on the radio, or meet them? What made you
12 familiar with their voices?
13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I apologise, Judge Riad, for
14 interrupting, but General Krstic needs to take a break, so with your
15 permission, can we take a 20-minute break and we'll reconvene for the
16 Judges' questions. I apologise for interrupting you, Judge Riad.
17 Let us take a 20-minute break.
18 --- Recess taken at 11.15 a.m.
19 --- On resuming at 11.39 a.m.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] May we proceed? Judge Fouad
21 Riad has the floor.
22 JUDGE RIAD: Witness BB, I'll repeat my question. You mentioned
23 that you were familiar with the voices of General Krstic and Obrenovic.
24 How did you become familiar with their voices?
25 A. In 1995 I worked as an operator on the monitoring of those
1 conversations and their recording and so, doing those jobs, I was
2 frequently in a position to hear those voices.
3 JUDGE RIAD: Just, can I just know the monitoring office where?
4 A. [redacted].
5 JUDGE RIAD: So you always heard their voices through your
7 A. Yes, that's right.
8 JUDGE RIAD: And was it always the same voice whenever you heard
9 it? It was always the same voice?
10 A. Yes.
11 JUDGE RIAD: It was never different? One day you would say, "Is
12 it, is it General Krstic or not," because there was never a face-to-face
13 or direct contact, was there?
14 A. In case of doubt, I would usually make a note of that in my
15 notebook, and then I would consult my other colleagues if I wasn't quite
16 sure myself.
17 JUDGE RIAD: So there was a very important, very important means
18 of verification?
19 A. Yes. It was essential to verify the participants in a
21 JUDGE RIAD: And sometimes you mentioned that you would put the
22 names between brackets. That would be in case of doubt?
23 A. In case of doubt, I would place a question mark beside the name
24 which was in brackets. And names in brackets alone meant that when I
25 listened to the tape again, they were written in, entered into the
1 notebook afterwards, after I had listened to the tape again and not when I
2 listened in to the conversation the first time.
3 JUDGE RIAD: Now, in one of your answers you mentioned that if you
4 have one receiver you can hear only one person better, better than the
5 other. Now, what happens if you doubt the other; what do you do in that
6 case? Do you adjust the receiver, or you can only be sure of one person,
7 not the other?
8 A. I could only be certain of one speaker.
9 JUDGE RIAD: Now, in a case like, for instance, an interception
10 where one voice was clear, which we happened to have heard, and the other
11 was not clear, what do you do in such cases?
12 A. In cases of that kind, in my notes, in my notebook, I would denote
13 that the other participant was not clear, not audible, and that is what I
14 would do. I would make a note of it.
15 JUDGE RIAD: And then what is the follow-up?
16 A. In any case, it was noted that some of the participants were heard
17 less well or not at all. And if you cannot identify the speakers, then
18 you say that you were not able to perform identification.
19 JUDGE RIAD: Yes. I mean, would there be a chance of comparing it
20 with other interceptions? Would other interceptions be made at the same
21 time and you try to find out?
22 A. I was not in a position to do that. I could not do that.
23 JUDGE RIAD: Was there somebody who does it?
24 A. I'm not aware of that. I don't know. Maybe, but I'm not sure.
25 JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Judge Fouad
3 Madam Judge Wald has the floor.
4 JUDGE WALD: Witness, at the time that you heard the intercept
5 788/A on August 2nd between General Krstic and Obrenovic and Jevdjevic,
6 can you estimate how many times you had previously intercepted
7 conversations in which General Krstic was a participant? Just a rough --
8 I mean, say, one, a dozen, a hundred; just how many conversations you had
9 intercepted in which he had participated, you had heard his voice before.
10 A. I can't tell you exactly, but a number of times, perhaps several
11 tens of times.
12 JUDGE WALD: Okay. That's good enough. Thank you. Now, in both
13 of the conversations that you have been examined about in which General
14 Krstic is alleged to have been one of the participants, in both of the
15 conversations somebody identifies themselves as General Krstic. They say,
16 "Hello, I'm Krstic," or, "Krstic here." When you were intercepting the
17 conversations and later writing down your versions of them, did you rely
18 more on the self-identification by the person who said they were General
19 Krstic or on your voice recognition, or was it a combination of the two?
20 Which would you say you relied on more heavily; the fact that they
21 identified themselves as a particular person or your independent
22 recognition of their voice?
23 A. I would rely more on their own self-introduction, although I used
24 both for identification.
25 JUDGE WALD: Okay. Now, on the August 2nd conversation with
1 Obrenovic and Jevdjevic, did you, even though at least one of the versions
2 was barely audible, General Krstic's voice was very audible [sic], did you
3 perceive anything different about the manner in which he spoke based upon
4 your having heard him before? Did anything remain in your mind that he
5 sounded any different, since you said you had heard him tens of times
7 A. This second conversation, that is, the one that I did not
8 record --
9 JUDGE WALD: Right.
10 A. -- was only a few days ago that I heard it. After so many years,
11 it would be difficult for me to recognise the voices exactly, but at the
12 time when I listened to those voices frequently, I was able to recognise
14 JUDGE WALD: I understand that. My question was whether, even
15 recognising the voices at the time, you felt or heard anything different
16 about the way in which the General spoke in that one intercept. Did he
17 sound any different than he had sounded in other intercepts?
18 A. I can't remember.
19 JUDGE WALD: All right. Now, you were asked what parts of that
20 August 2nd conversation, or why you remembered it, and you told Mr. Harmon
21 you remembered the talk about the cattle and the cowboys. My question
22 is: The rest of the conversation, or another part of the conversation had
23 these phrases like, "Kill all the Turks," or whatever the phrase was,
24 "Don't let a single one of them stay alive." Did that not remain in your
25 mind? Did there not seem anything unusual about that, that you would
1 remember that as opposed to the bit about the cattle and the cowboys? Was
2 that the sort of thing you didn't pay much attention to because you heard
3 it from a lot of different sources?
4 A. Parts like that, conversations where killings were mentioned, I
5 had heard hundreds of times before that, and that was usual for me to hear
6 that kind of thing, whereas the thing about the cattle and the cowboys
7 seemed to me to be a good joke at the time and I remembered that part.
8 JUDGE WALD: Okay. And my last question is in regard to the
9 second conversation that you were questioned about between General Krstic
10 and Borovcanin. One thing -- I just want your comment on this. Again,
11 the transcript says that General Krstic identified himself in the
12 beginning, "Hello, Krstic here," and the conversation is very fragmented,
13 with many dots. I mean, it's very hard to get much sense of what it's
14 about. But were you not surprised, or what was your reaction to the fact
15 that in the middle of the conversation the person who is alleged to be
16 General Krstic refers to Krstic; in other words, he refers to, if it is
17 himself, in the third person. Would you not have expected him to have
18 said "I" or "me" or "myself" rather than using the third person, and did
19 that not raise any doubt in your mind in a conversation which is so full
20 of dots and so -- all the rest of it is -- for the rest of the page it's
21 all dots; there's nothing else that's intelligible that's attributed to
22 him? Did you think about that? Did it give you any concern?
23 A. There was doubt, yes. And everything that I doubted, that I was
24 not sure of, I either jotted it down or, most frequently, I would consult
25 my other colleagues, who at that point had a little more experience on the
2 JUDGE WALD: Okay. So if that figured among your doubts, you
3 would have gone and consulted with your colleagues and resolved the doubts
4 in favour of attributing the conversation to him; is that right?
5 A. Yes, if my doubts were cleared up. But if the doubt remained, if
6 I was still unsure, then I would denote that too. I would say that those
7 facts had not been cleared up, and that is how it would go on to the
8 Superior Command.
9 JUDGE WALD: But we are then to infer from the fact that you
10 didn't record those doubts that your own doubts were resolved as far as
11 this second conversation between Krstic and Borovcanin? You didn't send
12 on anything to the Superior Command saying, "I've still got doubts,
13 unresolved doubts, about this," did you? You didn't? You didn't send
14 anything on?
15 A. No, I did not.
16 JUDGE WALD: That's all. Thank you.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Judge Wald.
18 Witness BB, I too have a few questions for you.
19 The first question is the following: How long, how much time, had
20 you been working up until the time you listened in to this communication
21 between supposedly General Krstic, Obrenovic, and Jevdjevic? How many
22 times before that -- how long had you been working before that? How long
23 were you working on intercepts before you intercepted that particular
25 A. I was at Okresanica from about the beginning of May 1995, in that
1 location, although I had been doing the same sort of work at another
2 location, that of Konjuh. I had been there one year before that, one year
4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So in total, how much experience
5 had you had on these intercepts?
6 A. I personally had been working for a little more than a year in
7 work of that kind.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you. So if I
9 understand correctly, you were able to identify the voices because the
10 interlocutors either said the names, gave their names; but were there any
11 other characteristic features which would lead you to identify a
12 particular voice, and in particular, that of General Krstic?
13 A. At that time each of the operators was able, to a fair degree of
14 certainty, to recognise the voices of the participants, the ones we
15 focused on in the conversations, which means that all the higher officers
16 of the army of Republika Srpska. And all the conversations that were
17 recorded were listened to several times, a number of times, by the
18 operator, and several times during the day. So these conversations were
19 recorded and they were heard and played over again and again so that they
20 were the voices that the operators had been accustomed to, and then after
21 several months of working in this way, you would be able to recognise the
22 voices very well.
23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you. And now
24 another question. We have seen the notebook. Let me just find it. I
25 think it was the Defence counsel that asked you a question with respect to
1 the intercepts and intercepts of conversations which did not -- between
2 the 2nd and 7th of August, and you said that in that notebook the
3 intercepts had not been recorded; they did not exist between that period.
4 Now, my question is, if we take a look at the entirety, at all the
5 notebooks in this time frame, would it be possible to find other notebooks
6 with intercepted messages between the 2nd and 7th of August? Yes or no.
7 A. If I have all the notebooks that existed at that time in that
8 locality in the field, I could with certainty ascertain the date of each
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay, very well. Another
11 question for you, Witness BB. You said that you knew the handwritings of
12 your colleagues. Did you know them in 1995, or do you recognise them now,
14 A. Some of the handwritings I can partially recognise today as well,
15 but the initials, the signatures and that kind of thing, I can certainly
16 recognise today too because I had a lot of occasion to see them, and they
17 have lodged in my mind.
18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] And now another point, another
19 question. In some of the intercepts we see -- for example, if we look at
20 Exhibit 788, it is the intercept supposedly between General Krstic,
21 Obrenovic, and Jevdjevic, the text says, for example - and it says in
22 English, I'm looking at the English version - "The Turks are probably
23 listening. Let them listen."
24 Did you hear that expression or that idea several times, or was it
25 very rare, if I can put it that way, to hear an expression like this used,
1 indicating that other people were listening in?
2 A. I did have occasion many times to hear that, especially from the
3 operators and their signalsmen, and they would caution and warn that there
4 was the possibility of tapping in, people tapping in to the conversation,
5 tapping in to the participants in the conversation.
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] And another question, to wind up
7 with, Witness. You gave an answer to Judge Wald a moment ago and said
8 that the expression "kill them all" did not particularly grab your
9 attention because you had heard that frequently. My question now is the
10 following: Did you hear that expression frequently - and you'll explain
11 afterwards what you mean by frequently - coming out of the mouth and with
12 the voice of General Krstic? Did you hear that expression from his mouth
13 and in his voice?
14 A. From General Krstic I did not hear that often, but I did have
15 occasion to hear on a fair number of occasions, and even when I worked as
16 a signalsman, I would receive written documents where that was written.
17 It would be written fairly frequently. And that is why, as I said, it had
18 become -- I had become accustomed to it, to that type of information. But
19 in concrete terms for General Krstic especially, no. As far as I can
20 remember, I could not hear that often, and perhaps that was the only time
21 that I had heard him say that.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay, very well, Witness BB. We
23 thank you very much for coming back to the Tribunal, and we wish you a
24 safe journey back to your place of residence and to your work.
25 I see Mr. Harmon on his feet. I suppose you're going to tender
2 MR. HARMON: That's correct. Yes, we would like to tender the
3 following exhibits: Prosecutor's Exhibit 748, which is a notebook, we
4 would ask that that be tendered under seal because of the name of the
5 witness that is included in it; 788 is an excerpt; we would submit 786
6 which is a printout, we would ask that that be admitted under seal because
7 of the initials of the witness that are on that; 789, which is a
8 transcript of tape 48 -- I'm sorry, which is tape 48 and the transcripts;
9 Prosecutor's Exhibit 835, which is tape 32 and the transcripts;
10 Prosecutor's Exhibit 843, which is a notebook, we would ask that that be
11 admitted under seal because of the names of people in it; 842, which is an
12 excerpt from that notebook; and lastly, Prosecutor's Exhibit 858, which is
13 the diagram drawn by Witness BB.
14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Visnjic, any objections or
16 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Defence opposes
17 the admission of these exhibits regarding the notebooks on the grounds
18 given by Mr. Petrusic in his previous statement and which are to be found
19 on pages 4718 to 4723 -- 4711 to 4723, so as to avoid repetition. These
20 are reasons that this Trial Chamber has been informed of by Mr. Petrusic.
21 Also regarding tapes and excerpts of conversations from those
22 tapes, the Defence particularly objects to those exhibits, the reasons
23 having been given in our motion for the exemption of these exhibits from
24 the rebuttal case as we feel that they are not appropriate for rebuttal.
25 Those would be, in brief, our objections.
1 JUDGE WALD: If I could just clarify, you -- I have read all your
2 papers, but they have been over a long period of time, and I just want to
3 clarify the grounds of your objections. Your grounds are still -- we have
4 ruled on the statement portion, but your grounds are still authentication,
5 are they? You raised that initially, and you raised the appropriateness
6 of bringing them up in a rebuttal rather than a case in-chief. Are those
7 the two main grounds?
8 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, our objections
9 regarding authenticity of these exhibits are based on the grounds given by
10 Mr. Petrusic on pages 4718 to 4723. These relate to the written
11 documents. As for the tapes, themselves --
12 JUDGE WALD: Right.
13 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] -- our objection is again based on
14 lack of authenticity, or rather, inadequate evidence to prove
15 authenticity, and also that that type of evidence, and bearing in mind the
16 criterion of authenticity which would be adequate for the Court, we feel
17 that they should not be admitted. So our objection regarding authenticity
18 applies to all these exhibits, both tapes and written documents.
19 JUDGE WALD: But just to make sure I understand: Putting
20 authenticity aside, you are still objecting that they shouldn't have come
21 in on rebuttal or you're not?
22 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Yes.
23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Visnjic.
24 Mr. Harmon, anything new to add, having heard what Mr. Visnjic has
25 just said?
1 MR. HARMON: No. I understand the objections. Those objections
2 do not apply to, I assume, Prosecutor's Exhibit 858, which is a hand-drawn
4 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] That was my mistake, Your Honour.
5 The objection does not apply to that exhibit.
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Just a moment. Now let me
7 confer with my colleagues.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think there is no doubt
10 regarding Exhibit 858, so that exhibit is admitted into evidence.
11 With respect to the other exhibits, they are linked to the
12 decision that the Chamber took yesterday. In other words, when the
13 Chamber decides on the Defence motion, then these decisions will be
14 considered in the same context, and I take advantage of this opportunity
15 to inform the parties that we have felt some doubts regarding our decision
16 yesterday - rather, that certain clarifications are necessary - and that
17 is why we're going to review that decision and perhaps tomorrow give you
18 explanations and possibly also to give you a decision in writing. So in
19 any event, we will communicate to you tomorrow.
20 There are some things that are already clear in yesterday's
21 decision, but there are others that may be under doubt, and we felt that
22 the parties needed some clarification, and we are going to clarify that
23 decision tomorrow and possibly, as I have already told you, give it to you
24 in writing so that the time for the appeal will be counted as of the time
25 the written ruling is issued, if there is one. So for the moment that is
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 the decision of the Chamber, in other words, that these exhibits will be
2 considered in a package with all the others.
3 Witness BB, thank you very much, once again. Please don't move so
4 that the usher can pull down the blinds for you to be able to exit safely.
5 So Mr. Usher, please.
6 [Trial Chamber confers with registrar]
7 [The witness withdrew]
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon, I think there are
9 some exhibits from yesterday. Perhaps we could take advantage of the time
10 to clear up certain things, to clean up any outstanding issues. So could
11 you tell us what they are, please?
12 MR. HARMON: Yes. I'll have my colleague, Mr. McCloskey, address
13 the Chamber.
14 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President. Thank you. We do have some
15 exhibits. One would be Dr. French's C.V., which is 840; Dr. French's
16 speech report, 839; and his audio report, 838. We would ask that 839 and
17 838 be entered under seal because of some of the information and people it
19 And then Exhibit 841, which was the C.V. of Witness EE, we would
20 ask for under seal, and as well as the diagram of Witness EE, which I
21 would also ask be entered in under seal. And as far as I see, that is all
22 the exhibits.
23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. McCloskey, and the diagram
24 of Witness EE, it is Exhibit -- what is the exhibit number, please?
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: 847.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you very
3 Mr. Visnjic.
4 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we have no
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,
7 Mr. Visnjic. So Exhibits 838, 839, and 841 will be admitted into evidence
8 under seal. The other exhibits, 840, 841 - no, sorry - 840 and 847, those
9 two will be admitted also into evidence.
10 Have I forgotten anything? Have I left anything out,
11 Mr. McCloskey?
12 MR. McCLOSKEY: No, Mr. President. That's fine.
13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you very much.
14 Mr. Harmon, I don't know whether you would prefer to have a lunch
15 break now or should we begin? Perhaps let's begin, yes.
16 MR. HARMON: Yes, we can begin. We have another witness,
17 protected witness, so we will have to lower the blinds while he comes in.
18 I can tell Your Honours this will be Witness Z, and Witness Z testified
19 before the Trial Chamber with protective measures on the 22nd of June,
20 2000. Again, he will be a protected witness. In his testimony today he
21 will have face distortion and he will continue to use the pseudonym.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon, you're telling us
23 that those will be the same protective measures that the witness had in
25 Is there any objection by the Defence? Mr. Petrusic?
1 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] In that case, the Chamber grants
3 and maintains the same protective measures.
4 [The witness entered court]
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Witness Z. Can
6 you hear me?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Good afternoon. I hear you
8 very well.
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You remember being here on the
10 22nd of June?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] And you also remember taking the
13 solemn declaration?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So I wish to remind you that
16 you're continuing to testify under oath. You know what that means. So
17 you may be seated.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You will now be answering
20 questions by Mr. Harmon, whom you know very well, and he is standing to
21 your right.
22 Mr. Harmon, your witness.
23 WITNESS: WITNESS Z [Resumed]
24 [Witness answered through interpreter]
25 MR. HARMON:
1 Q. Good morning, Witness Z. I'm going to be referring to you by your
2 pseudonym that you used previously in your testimony in June. We're not
3 going to go over all of your testimony. We're going to be focusing today
4 on certain exhibits. Before we focus on those exhibits, let me ask you,
5 just to refresh the Judges' recollection: You were an intercept operator
6 at which location in June, July, and August of 1995?
7 A. At a location near Banovici called Konjuh.
8 MR. HARMON: Could I have Prosecutor's Exhibit 747 and 787 shown
9 to the witness, please, and distributed to the Trial Chamber. For the
10 record, Your Honours, Exhibit 747 is a copy of an original notebook which
11 has been shown to the Defence, which has been shown to the witness, and
12 which I have here in my possession. I'd like to pass it up to the Chamber
13 for their inspection as well.
14 Q. Witness Z, did you have an opportunity in my office to examine the
15 original notebook and the copy of that notebook which is marked as
16 Prosecutor's Exhibit 747?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Based on those comparisons, can you tell the Judges whether the
19 Prosecutor's Exhibit 747 is an exact and true copy of the original
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Is it?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And did you also examine Prosecutor's Exhibit 74 -- I'm sorry,
25 787, which is an extract of a conversation from the notebook 747?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And is the conversation and the pages that are found in
3 Prosecutor's Exhibit 787 exact copies of what are found in the notebook?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Now, having identified and having examined the notebook, both the
6 original and the copy, can you tell me at what intercept site that
7 notebook was filled in?
8 A. At the location of Konjuh.
9 Q. And on what do you base that opinion?
10 A. I base it on the fact that this is certainly my handwriting, I
11 recognise it, and I know that in that period I was at that location.
12 Q. Now, if I could turn your attention, please, to the notebook pages
13 00804430 and -431.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. We see a conversation in the notebook that starts out with --
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. -- frequency 245.950, taken at 9.50 hours, with participants
18 General Krstic and Obrenovic.
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Is that your handwriting?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Did you record the conversation?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Did you then make a notebook entry relating to that conversation
25 in this notebook 747?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Now, let me read for the record the translation of the notebook
3 entry. I'll start now:
4 Frequency: 245.950. Time: 9.50. Participants: General Krstic
5 - Obrenovic.
6 K: Hello Obrenovic, Krstic here.
7 O: How are you, General, sir?
8 K: I'm great and you?
9 O: Thanks to you, I am too.
10 K: Way to go chief. And how's your health?
11 O: It's fine thank God, it's fine.
12 K: Are you working down there?
13 O: Of course we are working?! A few have been caught by gunpoint
14 or on mines.
15 K: Good. Kill them all, God damn it.
16 O: Everything, everything is going according to plan.
17 K: Don't leave a single one alive.
18 O: Everything is going according to plan.
19 K: Way to go chief. The Turks are probably listening; Let them
20 listen, the motherfuckers.
21 O: Let them. They know what they can listen to.
22 K: Right. Where is your boss?
23 O: He went up towards you.
24 K: When, this morning?
25 O: Yes.
1 K: OK. OK. Go on. We'll be in touch.
2 O: Can I talk to Jevdjevic?
3 K: Sure.
4 O: Hello Jevdo? Which road should I use to send a truck in your
5 direction to pick up some cattle?
6 J: And where is that?
7 O: Well, I don't know. My boss told me to ask you where most of
8 them are.
9 J: Well, the others have already grabbed everything and there's
10 nothing left.
11 O: The motherfuckers are worse than termites.
12 J: Yes, now their code-names are Cowboy 1 and Cowboy 2. If your
13 guys have caught some ...
14 O: OK then, where are they? From Milici ...
15 J: They're in the place where Legenda often carried out
16 searches ...
17 O: So, I should go to Milici ...
18 J: ... Podravanje and up to Stublic. You'll find them there.
19 You know the frequency and there are lots of soldiers and lots
20 of sets, so you can call.
21 O: Good. Bye.
22 And that ends the reading of Prosecutor's Exhibit 787.
23 Now, in this particular intercept, Witness Z, the parties identify
24 themselves. One identifies himself as Krstic, and Obrenovic asks, "How
25 are you, General, sir?" Before you intercepted this conversation, were
1 you familiar with the voices of General Krstic and with Obrenovic's voice?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And how were you familiar with their voices?
4 A. Because we had been listening in to those frequencies for some
5 time, and somehow the voice modulation enters your ear and one gets to be
6 able to recognise them, because, after all, those people were important
7 for us to listen in to.
8 Q. In addition to these parties identifying themselves by name, were
9 you able independently to recognise the voices of the speakers in this
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And did you recognise General Krstic's voice based on the fact
13 that you heard General Krstic before on a number of occasions?
14 A. Yes, many times before that.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Mr. Harmon, but I
16 think you are putting two questions at the same time. Could you divide it
18 MR. HARMON: Yes.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] How many times did you hear him
20 before, and whether you recognised him. So please do that.
21 MR. HARMON: Yes.
22 Q. Prior to intercepting this conversation, are you able to estimate
23 today how many times you had heard General Krstic before this conversation
24 was intercepted?
25 A. I couldn't give you a number, but many times, several times.
1 Q. Based on those many times or several times, on the date that you
2 intercepted this conversation, was the voice of one of the speakers
3 General Krstic, in your opinion?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Now, do you have any doubt about that?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Now, let me next turn to Prosecutor's Exhibit 859, and if that
8 could be distributed. And while this exhibit is being distributed, let me
9 ask you, from Konjuh, were important conversations transmitted to the
10 Superior Command?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And how were they transmitted to the Superior Command; by what
14 A. As the operator would take down the conversation from the tape
15 into the notebook, the notebook was given to an operator on a computer who
16 would type in the text and, by standard procedure, would send it on to the
18 Q. Would you take a look, please, at Prosecutor's Exhibit 859, which
19 is the exhibit which was just presented to you, and if you take a look at
20 the B/C/S version, does this, Witness Z, appear to be similar to the types
21 of printouts that were sent from Konjuh to the higher command?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Do you see the conversation that is mentioned in your notebook
24 reflected in Prosecutor's 859, in the printout?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Would you take a look at the header on this printout, and you
2 will -- can you identify the location where you had intercepted this
3 conversation? At the top of the page.
4 A. I recognise the type of device, the frequency, the participants.
5 Q. And if you go all the way to the top of the printout itself --
6 A. Ah, you mean up in the corner.
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. Yes, yes.
9 Q. What is the location?
10 A. The location is Konjuh.
11 Q. And there's a date next to the location, August 2nd, 1995. What
12 does that date signify?
13 A. That date signifies the day when it was recorded, typed out and
14 sent on.
15 Q. Thank you. Now, at what frequency did you intercept this
16 particular conversation?
17 A. The frequency was 245.950 megahertz.
18 Q. Did you have an opportunity, Witness Z, in my office, to listen to
19 two tapes of the same conversation?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And in one of those tapes was the voice of General Krstic louder
22 than the other tape?
23 A. Yes.
24 MR. HARMON: Mr. President and Your Honours, I can play those -- I
25 can ask that those tapes be played once again, or alternatively, I can ask
1 the witness about having heard each of these tapes and making his
2 conclusions based on having heard the two tapes and furnishing a
4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Perhaps, Mr. Harmon, I think
5 that we've already heard them.
6 MR. HARMON: That's fine.
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We are able to compare.
8 MR. HARMON: So I will not replay those tapes if ...
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] If I understand correctly, they
10 are the same tapes.
11 MR. HARMON: That's right.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay. Very well. I
13 understand. I don't think it is necessary to play them again. But let me
14 hear the viewpoint of the Defence.
15 How does the Defence feel about that, Mr. Visnjic or
16 Mr. Petrusic? As the tapes are the same, do you feel the need to have us
17 hear them again or may we proceed?
18 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Defence
19 considers that there is no need for us to hear the same tapes if the
20 witness has heard them. And quite obviously, this has been borne out by
21 Mr. Harmon, so we may proceed.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
23 Mr. Harmon, please proceed.
24 MR. HARMON:
25 Q. Did you hear one tape version of the conversation where General
1 Krstic -- the voice attributed to General Krstic was lower and one
2 conversation where his voice was more audible?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, of the two conversations that you heard, the two versions,
5 which of the conversations do you believe was intercepted from Konjuh?
6 A. I can only assume which one.
7 Q. Which one do you assume was intercepted from Konjuh?
8 A. I assume it was the stronger conversation that was intercepted at
10 Q. When you say "the stronger conversation," do you mean the
11 stronger -- I'm focusing on General Krstic's voice.
12 A. Yes, yes. Both were stronger.
13 Q. All right. Now, let me then -- could you explain to the Judges
14 why you believe that the stronger conversation, where General Krstic's
15 voice is stronger, may have come from Konjuh as opposed to Okresanica?
16 A. The reason was that Konjuh is about 400 metres higher, a higher
17 elevation feature than Okresanica. That is the basic prerequisite for us
18 to hear better on those wavelengths. The reception is better with
19 those -- at that altitude.
20 Q. Does a greater altitude give you better reception?
21 A. Based on my experience as a radio ham as well, I can conclude that
22 yes, it does.
23 Q. Now, are conversations, the same conversations, carried over
24 different frequencies?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And what significance, if any, does the difference of frequencies
2 have on the ability to hear the participants in a conversation?
3 A. It would happen that on one frequency the signal is weaker and on
4 the other stronger because the equipment has a bearing capacity. It is a
5 telephone signal and has this bearing capacity, and I think it is about 10
6 megahertz, the scale. And the difference is always felt, was always felt.
7 Q. Yesterday we had a witness testify in Court - Dr. French - who
8 analysed the tapes, and his testimony was that after a word at the
9 beginning of a conversation -- at the beginning of the tape, after the
10 word "momenat," there was a click, and the word "halo," "hello," was
11 missing, and then the conversation picked back up and carried through the
12 rest of the conversation. Can you explain to the Judges your practice
13 when you intercepted conversations about putting pause
14 buttons -- depressing the pause button?
15 A. Yes. The tape recorder was always switched on with the pause
16 button, and you can hear the voice from the tape recorder or you could
17 hear it via the headsets, the earphones, if they were switched into the
18 device. And when we hear a signal, we stop the scanner, that is to say,
19 the device that scans the frequencies, or it stops automatically; depends
20 on how it is set. We then approach the tape recorder and, at the
21 beginning of the conversation, we lift the pause and start recording. But
22 if the operator on the -- connecting the participants, if he needs more
23 time on the switchboard to connect them, or if it is busy, then we depress
24 the pause button again and wait for the real participant to make himself
1 Q. Now, why did you do that?
2 A. We did that first because we were able to listen to the tapes
3 again much quicker, and the pause would sometimes take as much as half a
4 minute, depending on the switchboard. And also, we did not have enough
5 tapes, and to be able to get in as many conversations as possible on one
6 tape, that's what we did.
7 Q. Now, were the tapes on which these conversations were recorded,
8 they were reel-to-reel tapes, weren't they?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Were they reused?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. So when you say you didn't have enough tapes, was the reason why
13 you were depressing the pause button at certain points in order to
14 conserve space on the tapes?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now, let me put a question to you. General Krstic has heard one
17 version of the tape-recorded conversation that we've been talking about,
18 and when he heard the version of the tape-recorded conversation, he
19 indicated that it was a hundred per cent a montage. Let me put that
20 proposition to you. Can you comment about that?
21 A. All I can say is that that is impossible.
22 MR. HARMON: I have no further questions. Thank you.
23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrusic for the
25 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Cross-examined by Mr. Petrusic:
2 Q. Witness Z, my name is Nenad Petrusic. I am the Defence lawyer and
3 I'm going to ask you a few questions. And good afternoon to you, before I
4 go ahead.
5 Exhibit 747, and it is the notebook that you have before you,
6 bearing in mind -- taking a look at the first page -- take a look at the
7 first page of that notebook, that is to say, the page numbered 00804344.
8 It has the date, the 24th of July, 1995, written in in handwriting.
9 Can you determine, looking at that date, within what time period
10 did the conversation take place which was quoted to you by the Prosecutor?
11 A. At all events, it was after this particular date.
12 Q. In this notebook, can you say for certain at the end of the
13 notebook or in any other part of the notebook, can you say -- can you
14 determine the following date, the next date?
15 A. Can I have a look?
16 Q. Yes, please do.
17 A. It says here the 25th/07, and the page is 00804355. Page
18 801371261 [as interpreted], 26th of July.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Petrusic, I think there
20 has been a slight mistake. You can confirm that, perhaps.
21 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. To economise with the time, Witness Z, at the end of this
23 notebook, is there a date, the date when the notebook was completed?
24 A. I can't find the date.
25 Q. So there is no date at the end of the notebook when the notebook
1 was completed?
2 A. I was not able to find the date, no.
3 Q. Thank you. Witness Z, in the heading when you did your work as an
4 operator, did you introduce the frequency, the time, and the participants
5 in the conversation? Did you include that in the heading?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Can you explain if in this conversation in Exhibit 787 we have
8 three undisputed participants - General Krstic, Obrenovic, and Jevdjevic -
9 why then in the heading for this conversation you do not have the name of
10 Major Jevdjevic? Why is it not included?
11 A. Because they were the participants when they called up. Jevdjevic
12 appeared later on, so we didn't go back to the beginning.
13 Q. When you transcribed the conversation, that is to say when you put
14 it down on paper, did you listen to it again?
15 A. Yes, we would listen to it again and put it down on paper.
16 Q. Would it be usual for you to introduce the name of the third
18 A. No, it wouldn't be usual or customary.
19 Q. Witness Z, how long did you monitor these conversations before the
20 2nd of August, 1995; for how much time?
21 A. I came to the location sometime in the spring of 1995. I can't
22 tell you the exact date for these conversations.
23 Q. Could you be more precise? You say in the spring of 1995?
24 A. Well, the spring could have meant May or June 1995.
25 Q. Up until this particular conversation, can you remember whether
1 you had heard General Krstic, the voice of General Krstic up until this
3 A. Yes, we heard him a number of times.
4 Q. What do you mean when you say "a number of times"?
5 A. Well, General Krstic would call up on the phone frequently, and
6 there were a lot of conversations, ones that were trivial. He would ring
7 up sometimes and just say that he was calling, that he would introduce
8 himself as General Krstic, and then he would wait for the connection, so
9 we could hear him a number of times. But those conversations were not
10 considered important, so some of them we didn't even put them down on
11 paper because they had no particular substance. He would just call up,
12 wait, that kind of thing.
13 Q. Did you hear General Krstic in a previous conversation of any kind
14 talking to -- having this -- a conversation with this type of content or a
15 similar content?
16 A. Well, I don't know about this content because it was only when I
17 came here that I actually saw this particular conversation, and I don't
18 remember. It was a long time ago.
19 Q. When did you first see this conversation?
20 A. I saw it when I came here the first time, when I came to the
21 Prosecutor the first time.
22 Q. Was that in June last year?
23 A. No, since last June up until a few days ago. I wasn't able to see
24 it again, nor did I ask to see it again, nor did I remember that it
1 Q. So in June earlier on, you didn't know -- in June 2000 you didn't
2 know of the existence of this conversation?
3 A. Well, I had forgot that it existed at all.
4 Q. Witness Z, did you at one time talk to Mrs. Stephanie Frease?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Do you recall that conversation?
7 A. I remember having had the conversation, but not the actual
8 conversation. We signed some papers, something like that. She asked us
9 to be witnesses, to give our consent because of some things that could ...
10 Q. Do you remember, Witness Z, that on that occasion the lady that
11 worked for the OTP brought to your attention this conversation, and to
12 that you answered the following: "Then Mr. Z was asked," and I quote, "to
13 leaf through the photocopy of notebook 103 on pages 46, 53 to 55, 64 to
14 72B, 86 to 89, and to identify his handwriting. After having identified
15 his own handwriting in notebook 103 on page 87 and 88, he was asked to
16 read the transcript. The time of the conversation, 9.50, the frequency,
17 245.950, and it was between General Krstic and Obrenovic. [redacted]
18 said that he remembers the recording of the conversation from the tape and
19 the exact sentence, and the concrete sentence, `We're working. Yes, we
20 are. Someone gets caught on a mine or a barrel.' The witness recalled
21 that conversation because at that time he knew that in the forest there
22 were a lot of Bosnians who had difficulties in finding the road, the way
23 to the free territory. The witness also confirmed that he had written the
24 word `Wednesday' which appears before the beginning of that particular
1 Witness Z, are these records done by the OTP correct?
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. Therefore on that 21st of November, 1999, you -- this conversation
4 was brought to your attention by the representative of the OTP?
5 A. Yes, it was brought to my attention.
6 Q. After that time, as you say, up until two or three days ago, you
7 did not have occasion to either hear or read through the transcript of
8 that conversation; is that right?
9 A. Yes, that's right.
10 Q. Do you have an explanation? Do you know why you were not asked
11 about the contents of that conversation?
12 A. Well, I had no explanation for that, no. At the time when
13 Ms. Stephanie was there, it was just recognition of the handwriting, but
14 the actual matter -- I didn't -- I just simply forgot those things.
15 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Defence has no
16 further questions. Thank you.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. Just a
18 moment, please. We wish to confer.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon, any re-examination?
21 We shall try to finish with this witness prior to the lunch break, so
22 please proceed.
23 MR. HARMON: I have no questions, thank you.
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Judge Fouad Riad,
1 Questioned by the Court:
2 JUDGE RIAD: Witness Z, good morning. You can hear me?
3 A. Good morning. Yes. Yes.
4 JUDGE RIAD: I have just one question, or perhaps one and a half.
5 In one of the conversations which we have just seen, and the Prosecutor's
6 Exhibit 859, there is General Krstic saying, or allegation, "The Turks are
7 probably listening. Let them listen, the motherfuckers."
8 Now, in case -- in such cases, did you ever notice at any point in
9 time that some of these conversations appeared later to be meant to
10 mislead your party since they knew that you were listening, that your
11 party was listening? Did you discover afterwards that they were fake, as
12 sometimes it is done when people know that others are listening? What's
13 your experience?
14 A. Your Honour, my job was to copy down from the tape and to send it
15 to superiors, because they were the people over there who were to study
16 these things and decide. We didn't give much thought to these things
18 JUDGE RIAD: And now, you seem to -- you said you had been
19 listening to the frequencies of the voices and you started knowing them.
20 Whenever you heard the voice of General Krstic, did you immediately know
21 that it was him or you waited to know -- to have him announce himself?
22 A. We had the frequency of his telephone, and if our device stopped
23 at that frequency, we would tape the conversation. If he introduced
24 himself, fine; if he didn't, then we'd take down the frequency and forward
25 it on, and then they would probably know who it was. It was up to us to
1 assume who it was. If we recognised the voice, we would say it was
2 General Krstic; if we were not sure, we would put a question mark. And
3 that is how it was sent on, and then they would summarise these things
4 further from there.
5 JUDGE RIAD: Did it happen at any time that you would point out
6 that it was a certain person and then the experts would find out that it's
7 not the voice?
8 A. For some persons, for persons that we were not sure of, we would
9 put a question mark. We would never put names down just like that,
10 because we would be lying to ourselves and then to everyone else. That
11 was not our aim. Our aim was to report the information correctly.
12 JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much.
13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Judge Fouad
15 Madam Judge Wald, no questions.
16 Witness Z, I have a few questions. I shall try to be quick. You
17 told the Prosecutor, with respect to the idea of a montage, as expressed
18 by General Krstic, your answer was that that was quite impossible. Why do
19 you say that that was quite impossible?
20 A. Because I was there, because I know what we were doing. That is
21 one reason. And secondly, I don't think any one of us had sufficient
22 knowledge or skill to make such a montage. It never occurred to anyone.
23 There was a war on. What was important was to listen in, to intercept,
24 and convey the information if it could assist our people. That was our
25 aim. We didn't know that this would happen. If we had known, then we
1 would have acted in an entirely different manner.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Another point: Could you take
3 the notebook - the number I see on it is 103 - and tell us on which page
4 you see the date of the 26th of July.
5 A. Page 804371.
6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So it is indeed page 371 at the
8 end, because the transcript said, 58 -- line 12, on page 58, line 12, that
9 the pages -- that the three last numbers were 261. So it is 371, is that
10 right, the last three numbers?
11 A. Yes, 371.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. A final question
13 from me, Witness Z. You told my colleague, Judge Fouad Riad, that there
14 were brackets that you used as a kind of code, that it had a definite
15 meaning. Did your colleagues apply the same procedure? Did they use the
16 same brackets?
17 A. Each one of us had his own methods. We never made any
18 agreements. But simply when the operator took down these tapes, he had
19 his own way to mark things that would assist him should anyone ask him
20 about it, so he could give an explanation, and it would be easier for him
21 to take down the recording.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, Witness Z. You have
23 completed your testimony. Thank you very much for coming.
24 I think that Mr. Harmon has some documents to tender.
25 MR. HARMON: Yes. I recognise that the Court was going to defer
1 its decision on the admission of these documents, but I would like to move
2 into admission Prosecutor's Exhibit 747, which is a copy of the notebook;
3 787, which is an excerpt; and 859, which is a printout. And 747 should be
4 under seal. Thank you.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] If I understood you correctly,
6 there are three exhibits. Is that right, Mr. Harmon?
7 MR. HARMON: Yes, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, then.
9 Mr. Petrusic, I think you have the same position as you took with
10 respect to the other exhibits.
11 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. The Defence
12 abides by the objections made earlier on.
13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So the Chamber also maintains
14 its position, so we will defer the time for deciding on the admission of
15 these exhibits.
16 So now, Witness Z, thank you very much for coming. I'm going to
17 ask the usher to pull the blinds so that you may leave.
18 [Trial Chamber confers with registrar]
19 [The witness withdrew]
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So let us have the lunch break
21 now. Can we come back at 2.00? Yes, 2.00. So we'll resume work at
23 --- Recess taken at 1.13 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 2.04 p.m.
25 [The witness entered court]
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon.
2 MR. HARMON: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon,
4 Your Honours, the next witness is Witness W. Witness W testified
5 previously with protective measures; face distortion, voice distortion,
6 and a pseudonym. He testified on the 20th and the 26th of June, 2000. I
7 have discussed reimplementing the same protective measures with my
8 colleagues from the Defence, and they have no objection.
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrusic.
10 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour, no, Mr. President,
11 we have no objection to the protective measures.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] The Chamber grants the right to
13 this motion, and the same protective measures will apply as applied
14 earlier. We now have Witness W.
15 Witness W, do you remember being here on the 20th and 26th of
16 June, 2000?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You took the solemn declaration
19 at the time, so we consider that you are still under oath, and I'm sure
20 you know what that means.
21 Mr. Harmon, your witness.
22 MR. HARMON: Yes, thank you
23 WITNESS: WITNESS W [Resumed]
24 [Witness answered through interpreter]
25 Examined by Mr. Harmon:
1 Q. Good afternoon, Witness W.
2 A. Good afternoon.
3 MR. HARMON: If I could have Prosecutor's Exhibits 855, 856, and
4 857 distributed to the witness and to the parties and to the Court, then I
5 can proceed.
6 Q. And while I'm waiting for the distribution of these particular
7 exhibits, just to refresh the Court's recollection, when you testified
8 previously, Witness W, you testified that you had formed an interception
9 group that was stationed at Okresanica; is that correct?
10 A. Yes. We could put it that way, although I formed it at the
11 initiative or following orders from my superiors.
12 Q. And your group, your intercept group was associated with the State
13 Security Service and not the army; is that correct?
14 A. Yes, yes. We worked in the State Security Service.
15 Q. I'm going to wait until you receive the exhibits before I continue
16 with my examination.
17 Witness W, could you inspect Prosecutor's Exhibit 855, and when
18 you've finished, just let me know when you've finished inspecting that
19 particular exhibit.
20 Witness W, I'm interested in the conversation on Prosecutor's
21 Exhibit 855 which is numbered 988.
22 A. Yes. I have just seen it.
23 Q. Having inspected this exhibit, Witness W, can you tell from your
24 inspection whether or not this is an intercepted communication that was
25 intercepted by the State Security Service, by your intercept group?
1 A. Yes, this is the document that we did. We intercepted it and
2 compiled it.
3 Q. Witness W, in the upper left-hand corner there is a header at the
4 very top left-hand corner that says the army of the Republic of Bosnia and
5 Herzegovina and indicates a date, a location. Do you see what I'm talking
7 A. Yes, yes. I'm looking at it.
8 Q. And then you will see a dotted line in the upper third of the
9 conversation, and then you will see below that the initials or the letters
10 CSB-SDB Tuzla, the date, and a number. Can you explain what those two
11 different portions of this document mean?
12 A. Yes, I can. It's a document which we gave over to the army of
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and we spoke about this last time. I hope that we
14 don't have to go into the exchange of documents at Okresanica.
15 They took over the document, they recorded it, assigned it a
16 number, and the authenticity of the report compiled by my unit.
17 Q. Now, focusing your attention on the portion that says CSB-SDB
18 Tuzla, the date of the August 1st, 1995, and then a number, what does the
19 date represent?
20 A. This is the date -- this date represents the time when the
21 conversation took place and the number under which it was registered in
22 the records book, recordkeeping book.
23 Q. So turning your attention to the conversation number 988, on what
24 date was that conversation intercepted? When I say "988," Witness W, I'm
25 still referring to Prosecutor's Exhibit 855.
1 A. Yes. Yes. We can see here that it is one report which was typed
2 into a file, which means that all these conversations, as far as I can
3 see, took place on the same day at different times.
4 Q. Now if you could turn your attention to Prosecutor's Exhibit 856.
5 I'm specifically interested in the conversation that is numbered 998.
6 First of all, inspect the document, and when you finish inspecting the
7 document, let me know.
8 A. Yes, I've already seen it.
9 Q. Is this a document that was intercepted by your unit from
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And can you tell the Chamber on what date the conversation that is
13 numbered 998 was intercepted?
14 A. It was the 1st of August, 1995, and of course at 2245 hours
16 Q. Now, if I can direct your attention to the last exhibit in this
17 series. It's Prosecutor's Exhibit 857. And I'd like you to focus on the
18 conversation number 999.
19 A. Yes, I've seen it.
20 Q. Do you recognise this intercept as one that was intercepted by
21 your unit from Okresanica?
22 A. Yes, that's our document.
23 Q. And do you know the date of this particular intercept?
24 A. I think it is a continuation of the other document, the previous
25 document, because it's on the same frequency at such-and-such an hour. We
1 recorded another conversation between these two men again.
2 Q. And so would that conversation also have been intercepted on the
3 1st of August, 1995?
4 A. Yes. According to this, it would be -- that would be it, but I
5 can check it out.
6 Q. Can you check it out here, while you're here?
7 A. Yes. I have it with me somewhere in the diary that we kept and
8 where these documents were recorded, registered.
9 Q. Would you check it out, please.
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Petrusic. You're on
11 your feet.
12 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I will be objecting,
13 but I think the witness will be able to answer. That is to say, is this
14 document that the witness is looking at now his personal document or is it
15 an official document in which he introduced certain data, that is to say,
16 an official document of the service to which he belonged, all as a
17 function of the job he did?
18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon, are you going to ask
19 those questions?
20 MR. HARMON: I'll be glad to.
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay.
22 MR. HARMON:
23 Q. Let us finish this question, which is: Can you tell us the date
24 when the conversation that is numbered 999 was intercepted?
25 A. I have it here. That is, it says the file, and the file was coded
1 and prepared to be handed over on the 2nd of August, 1995, at 0044 hours,
2 that is to say, after midnight. And it therefore appears that as the
3 conversation was at 2300 hours, that after that we moved on to the next
4 day. So I have it registered that it was coded on the 2nd of August, 1995
5 and that it was dispatched at 0044 towards the base, dispatched to base.
6 Q. Now, do you recognise the formatting in each of these intercepts
7 as being the formatting that was used by your organisation at the time
8 these conversations were intercepted?
9 A. Absolutely. Everything is as it was recorded by us, the
10 formulation at the beginning of the text and so on, the type of lettering,
11 the type of print, and everything else. And I spoke about that last
12 time. I don't think you'll be needing it again.
13 Q. Witness W, my colleague raised a question as to whether or not you
14 personally intercepted these conversations. Can you answer that question?
15 A. I apologise. I didn't understand it to be -- that to be the
16 question. I don't think they asked me that. But of course I did, yes.
17 MR. HARMON: I think, Mr. President, that hopefully answers my
18 colleague's questions.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I don't think so, but,
20 Mr. Petrusic, perhaps you could ask that question in the
21 cross-examination, because the question was the nature and the provenance
22 of the document that the witness is using. Your question was along those
23 lines. But I think, Mr. Petrusic, that you could ask those questions
24 yourself when you come to the cross-examination.
25 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] I completely agree with you,
1 Mr. President, and that is not what we are contesting. What is contested
2 is that if this notebook is a working document, then it has a completely
3 different character, and the Defence attaches a different dimension to it
4 with respect to the further questioning of this witness.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon.
6 MR. HARMON: Perhaps I'll leave that to my colleague to
7 cross-examine on, but I have no further questions. Thank you.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, very well. Mr. Petrusic,
9 you will have the opportunity now of going ahead with your questions. Ask
10 your own questions. You each have your salaries, so you do your work,
11 Mr. Harmon does his work. Please proceed.
12 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President, but none,
13 of course, here are acting solely with our salaries in view. I think that
14 is undisputed.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, I was joking. You're
16 right. We are here to achieve some far more important objectives than
17 that, and thank you for reminding me of that.
18 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] No, that was not my intention at
19 all, but I accept what you said as a good joke.
20 Cross-examined by Mr. Petrusic:
21 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, my name is Nenad Petrusic. I
22 have several questions for you in connection with your testimony, so let
23 us start with the objection that the Defence made regarding this notebook.
24 The notebook that you just took out of your bag, is it a working
25 notebook that you used while doing your job at the interception centre at
2 A. Records of all dispatches received and sent had to be kept
3 somewhere, and we registered them in this logbook, so it is an official
4 document and not a private one because all documents that were sent from
5 the communication centre, or, rather, from that location were taken note
6 of when they were received and when they were sent out. So this is an
7 official document, not a private one.
8 Q. Did my learned friends from the Prosecution or the investigators
9 who interviewed you have a chance to have insight into your notebook when
10 determining the timing of the conversation, or, rather, the timing when it
11 was dispatched to the computer centre?
12 A. They didn't ask me for it. If they had, I would have let them
13 look at it. May I just add, I can't even remember. Perhaps some of the
14 pages were taken from me, because after all, it was a long time ago when
15 we had our conversations.
16 Q. Witness W, when did you start working at this interception centre?
17 A. You mean at Okresanica?
18 Q. Yes.
19 A. It was at the end of 1994.
20 Q. From that interception centre, did you have occasion, you
21 personally, to hear General Krstic?
22 A. I hope you will understand me. I had occasion to hear many
23 people. Among them, he was certainly one of them. But there was a great
24 deal of work to do, and we were very few, so I couldn't tell you now that
25 I heard Krstic or Mladic or anyone else on such and such a day. We
1 listened in. This was really just a technical procedure, to hear, record,
2 reproduce, and forward. So that would be my answer.
3 Q. Witness W, in your statement dated the 20th and the 26th of June
4 you said, among other things, that the heading or the header that you
5 prepared was of standard format, and the header would include a number,
6 the direction, the frequency, the channel, the time, and the participants
7 in the conversation that was being recorded. Am I right when I say that?
8 A. We mostly tried to have the header always contain the same
9 elements. Sometimes it may not have been necessary, as in the case of
10 this document, 999, because it is pointed out that it is a conversation
11 between the same two individuals.
12 Q. However, in this document, Exhibit 855, 857, and 856, in the
13 header one of the standard elements that you would register is missing,
14 and that is the direction of the route of the intercepted conversation.
15 Am I right, sir?
16 A. No, you are not. No, no, you're not.
17 Q. In Exhibit 855, registered under number 988, your number 988, it
18 says, and I quote, the header, on "Frequency 779.000 megahertz, channel
19 13, at 1002 hours, we recorded a conversation between Jevtic (J) from
20 Serbia, and Stevo (S) and Ljubija Beara (B) from the Main Staff of the
21 so-called VRS." So in this registered conversation, the route is not
23 A. May I explain, the frequency 779 is actually the route. Once we
24 determine that frequency 779 is on the route such and such, it doesn't
25 have to be repeated, though it can be. But in this case the frequency
1 itself determines the route, unless it is replaced with another.
2 Q. Witness W, I showed you Exhibit 305 to 310 that you testified
3 about in June 2000, but if you can remember now -- but I would like the
4 usher to give you copies of those exhibits. These are exhibits from 305
5 through to 310.
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrusic, if I understand
7 you correctly, you would like to show the witness Exhibits 305 up to 310
8 so that the witness can refresh his memory. Is that right?
9 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, precisely.
10 A. I don't see here the versions in the Bosnian language.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
12 A. I can't see A and B, or rather B and C. This is A in English.
13 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Maybe we can save time,
14 Mr. President.
15 Q. My question, Witness W, in brief, is that in these exhibits, from
16 305 to 310, that you testified about, the direction is mentioned in the
17 header. There is indication of the route. However, in these exhibits,
18 855, 856, and 857, that you testified about today, no such indication is
19 included. Do you have an explanation for that, please?
20 A. I cannot remember which direction frequency 779 - I think it was
21 that we were talking about - had, but maybe it is missing. Maybe it is
22 lacking. But the frequency determined the direction, and we would record
23 it when we knew it. Perhaps in my own log book I could look for it. It
24 may be recorded somewhere which direction corresponds to which frequency,
25 and if you wish me to, I can look it up.
1 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Defence has no
2 further questions for this witness.
3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,
4 Mr. Petrusic.
5 Mr. Harmon.
6 MR. HARMON: I have no questions.
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Judge Fouad Riad? No? Judge
9 JUDGE WALD: Could I just ask Mr. Harmon a question? It may be my
10 faulty memory, but have these exhibits, have they -- I know they've been
11 introduced, right, before?
12 MR. HARMON: The previous exhibits, I believe, have been admitted.
13 JUDGE WALD: Yes. That's what I thought. Can you tell me in
14 relation to what? I mean, was it part of the Butler testimony or what?
15 I'm just trying to put it in some kind of context and I'm having trouble.
16 MR. HARMON: It was in relation to his testimony that he gave on
17 the 20th and 26th of June.
18 JUDGE WALD: Okay. But that's where -- that's the only place
19 where it came up?
20 MR. HARMON: We have many exhibits of the same throughout imbedded
21 in the transcript and the Court proceedings.
22 JUDGE WALD: Yes.
23 MR. HARMON: I'm aware at this point, and I can check in a few
25 JUDGE WALD: No, no, no. I just would ...
1 MR. HARMON: They came in through Witness W's testimony earlier.
2 JUDGE WALD: Right. Right. So they're in the book of intercepts.
3 MR. HARMON: Yes.
4 JUDGE WALD: Okay. Thank you.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Just to clear up a point. When
6 Mr. Harmon and Madam Judge Wald were talking about these exhibits, you
7 were talking about Exhibits 305 to 310; is that right?
8 MR. HARMON: That's correct.
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Fine. Because there are many
10 exhibits here.
11 JUDGE WALD: I was talking about -- I'm sorry. I was talking
12 about, no, the main exhibits: 856, 857, and 858.
13 MR. HARMON: I apologise, Your Honour. I didn't understand it.
14 JUDGE WALD: I should have given the numbers.
15 MR. HARMON: These are new exhibits --
16 JUDGE WALD: Right.
17 MR. HARMON: -- that we're now tendering through this witness.
18 JUDGE WALD: Okay. Just tendering them.
19 MR. HARMON: At this point, and we'll move to admit them at the
20 conclusion of Your Honours' questions.
21 JUDGE WALD: Will they ever be sort of tied to the narrative, or
22 we'll take them at their face value, assuming they're admitted, assuming
23 they're admitted?
24 MR. HARMON: Initially I asked you to take them at face value. I
25 think Mr. Butler, who was planning to testify later on --
1 JUDGE WALD: That's exactly what I was asking you.
2 MR. HARMON: -- may well be coming in to connect these.
3 JUDGE WALD: I said: Are they going to come up in the -- have
4 they come up or are they going to come up in the Butler testimony?
5 MR. HARMON: They may come up in the Butler testimony.
6 JUDGE WALD: Okay. Thank you.
7 Questioned by the Court:
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So you see, even when speaking
9 the same language, one may be referring to two different things.
10 So before we conclude with the testimony of Witness W,
11 Mr. Petrusic asked you some questions about this direction. At one point
12 you said that if Mr. Petrusic wanted to know the direction, you perhaps
13 had an indication of it in your log book, notebook, or whatever. Can you
14 check that, whether you have taken note of the direction in that log book?
15 A. I can. Do you wish me to do that?
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, please. Please do
18 A. I apologise. Could somebody just remind me? Was it 779 or 799?
19 I think it was 779. I have it noted down in the log book. The frequency
20 836 has its duplex 779, and it is 90 degrees azimuth in relation to the
21 location where we were situated. So as far as I am able to remember,
22 because it really was a long time ago and we have to bear that in mind,
23 that direction was the direction Pale, Han Pijesak, I think Zvornik. I
24 cannot guarantee this a hundred per cent. This is as far as I can
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] That's very good, Witness.
2 Thank you very much.
3 Mr. Petrusic seemed to be getting on his feet. Do you have any
4 observation to make, Mr. Petrusic?
5 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] No. No, Mr. President.
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Fine. Witness W, we have no
7 further questions for you. We wish to thank you once again for coming
8 here and we wish you a safe journey home and success in your work. I will
9 ask the usher to accompany you out.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Harmon.
12 Just a moment, usher. Just a moment, please.
13 MR. HARMON: We would move to --
14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please proceed, Mr. Harmon. I
15 was giving the usher a sign, not to you.
16 MR. HARMON: We would move to enter Prosecutor's Exhibit 855, 856,
17 and 857.
18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrusic, I see your
19 position is the same.
20 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. The Defence
21 objects to the admission of these exhibits.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So the Chamber will take the
23 same position, that is, we will decide when we make a ruling about the
24 other relevant issues relative to this.
25 Witness, please wait a moment for the usher to bring down the
2 Judge Wald has a question.
3 JUDGE WALD: I have a question. I understand the ongoing dispute
4 about the -- which we will decide tomorrow, about the grounds on which the
5 Prosecutor proposes to admit the intercepts that we discussed the last two
6 days, and specifically they -- one of the grounds is that they are in --
7 they are collateral evidence to impugn credibility of General Krstic when
8 he actually was on the stand.
9 But I don't understand what link has yet been made about these
10 intercepts being rebuttal evidence since they haven't, to my knowledge,
11 been connected to any testimony of anybody so far, nor do I accept -- from
12 my general knowledge of the case, have an idea what your theory that
13 they're rebuttal, and I know you're going to connect them with Butler
14 later, but he hasn't appeared yet so I don't know whether that connection
15 is a valid one yet. So I'm not sure -- the reason I bring it up, I'm not
16 sure that all of them at this point fall under the same theory.
17 MR. HARMON: I agree. Perhaps it's premature for me to move these
18 into evidence. They will be connected. These are exhibits that are
19 background evidence to put into context with another witness.
20 JUDGE WALD: I understand. Since we're in rebuttal --
21 MR. HARMON: And --
22 JUDGE WALD: Since we're in rebuttal, it does seem to me that the
23 theory of rebuttal as enunciated by the Appellate Chamber here in the
24 recent Celebici case is, you know, there has to be some rebuttal to
25 something that arises out of the Defence case, and as of yet, we don't
1 know that. So I think, at least in my view, I don't have the necessary
2 connecting link to know if I think it is proper.
3 MR. HARMON: I think I will withdraw my application for admission
4 at this point in time.
5 JUDGE WALD: And do it later. I think that will be better.
6 MR. HARMON: And when these are linked up with -- then we will
7 demonstrate the purpose of the rebuttal, and then I'll move to admit
8 these. Thank you very much.
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So now, yes, you may bring down
10 the blinds, Mr. Usher.
11 [The witness withdrew]
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Harmon.
13 MR. HARMON: Mr. McCloskey will present the next evidence and the
14 next witness.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, but perhaps it's
16 only -- it's already ten to three. Perhaps it's not worthwhile beginning
17 now just for ten minutes. I think we will adjourn there now. There's no
18 point in beginning this testimony now.
19 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, I was planning to address an issue
20 that Judge Wald has mentioned in the first five minutes of this testimony.
21 Mr. Harmon and I went slightly out of order with these witnesses because
22 of the order, but I can -- I am prepared to address exactly the issues
23 that she was asking about, and I can do that now, if you please.
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, please do.
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: This last witness and the witness that is about to
1 testify are directed -- have been asked to testify to respond to a
2 particular statement made by General Krstic in his cross-examination
3 regarding speaking to Lieutenant Colonel Popovic.
4 He was asked -- now, this was in private session, so to complicate
5 matters, perhaps we should go into private session and I can tell you what
6 the subject matter was, but I don't think it will be something that
7 counsel will be concerned about.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, let us go into private
9 session for a few minutes.
10 [Private session]
13 Page 8793 redacted – private session
13 Page 8794 redacted – private session
1 [Open session]
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think that for today, we have
3 no other issues to address, so we will adjourn until tomorrow at 20 past
4 9. So the hearing is adjourned.
5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.58 p.m., to
6 be reconvened on Wednesday, the 21st day of
7 March, 2001, at 9.20 a.m.