1 Friday, 1 April 2005

2 [Open session]

3 [Accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning. If I could remind you, Mr. Kereakes,

7 of the affirmation you made at the beginning of your evidence, which still

8 applies.

9 THE WITNESS: Yes.

10 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Nicholls.

11 MR. NICHOLLS: Thank you, Your Honours.

12 First, before I ask the witness any questions, looking at the

13 transcript yesterday, when the witness reviewed a witness statement he had

14 taken, which was behind tab A of the package, I did not put the ERN

15 numbers on the record of the pages he looked at, which I should have done.

16 That witness statement is numbered 03230793 through 0803.

17 WITNESS: ANARGYROS KEREAKES [Resumed]

18 Examined by Mr. Nicholls: [Continued]

19 Q. Good morning, sir.

20 A. Good morning.

21 Q. I think if we can we should go into private session now, please.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Private.

23 [Private session]

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 4960 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 4961 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 4962 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 4963 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 [Open session]

7 MR. NICHOLLS:

8 Q. If you could remember now, please, Mr. Kereakes, just to use the

9 name "witness" for the person that we are talking about.

10 Did you show this witness any photo line-ups?

11 A. Yes, I did.

12 Q. Which ones did you show him?

13 A. U-1 and U-2.

14 Q. And can you tell us briefly - I know you have done it before - the

15 procedures you followed when you showed the witness the line-ups?

16 A. Yes. At this time I would place the photo line-up on a table,

17 escort the witness in a room. At which time I would instruct him to look

18 at each picture, take his time. And to circle the number of the suspect

19 that either caused him harm or detained him in the detention centre.

20 Q. Did the witness recognise or pick out anybody from the photographs

21 in U-1 or U-2?

22 A. Yes, he did.

23 Q. Can you tell me about U-1, what did the witness do.

24 A. Positively identified Isak Musliu as the suspect that he had

25 named.

1 Q. And what about U-2?

2 A. The witness positively identified Fatmir Limaj as the suspect in

3 the case.

4 Q. Did you include that in the witness statement that you took?

5 A. Yes, I did.

6 Q. And did you have the witness sign U-1 and U-2 in this case?

7 A. Yes, I did.

8 Q. What did you do with the photo line-up sheets U-1 and U-2 after

9 the interview was over?

10 A. I then attached them to the statement.

11 Q. Can we go into private session, please.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Private.

13 [Private session]

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 [Open session]

25 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session.

1 MR. NICHOLLS:

2 Q. Initially was the statement you took handwritten or typed?

3 A. It was handwritten.

4 Q. And when was the typed statement -- excuse me, created from the

5 handwritten statement?

6 A. When I had returned back to the CCIU office.

7 Q. Do you recall whether the typewritten statement is verbatim word

8 for word what was in your handwritten statement?

9 A. There would be small adjustments maybe that I would have made in

10 there.

11 Q. Why is that?

12 A. Because sometimes I take the notes shorthand. Like instead of

13 putting suspect photo line-up, maybe I would put photo line-up, U-1.

14 Instead of putting suspect number 1, maybe I would just put the number

15 symbol and 1. Maybe with a S next to it.

16 Q. Now, when you took that handwritten statement and typed it up, did

17 you have the witness sign the statement?

18 A. No, I did not.

19 Q. Why was that?

20 A. Well, my notes were in English, so I wouldn't have a witness sign

21 a statement in English in a language that he didn't understand. So the

22 procedure was, I would take the -- take the statement in my handwritten

23 notes, type it up and then I would ask him to come in -- or once I had it

24 translated, then I would have him sign it in his native language.

25 Q. All right. I would like you to look at the statement, again not

1 saying the name, which is at tab 6, of this witness.

2 MR. NICHOLLS: For the record, this is 03231247 through 1261. And

3 I should say the previous statement we referred to, I again forgot to put

4 the numbers in, 03231050 to 1054.

5 Q. Witness, could you please look at -- have you found that?

6 A. Yes, I have.

7 Q. Could you please look at handwritten page 10, the last page of

8 your notes. If I direct your attention to the bottom right-hand corner,

9 do you see where it is written: "U-1, number 4 looks familiar. Not

10 sure."

11 A. Yes, I do.

12 Q. Do you remember writing that in the notes during the interview?

13 A. Yes. This is my writing.

14 Q. Can you now go to page 4 of the typewritten statement. It has a

15 number at the top 03231251, if that helps you find it.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. See towards the bottom of the page there, it states: I viewed

18 line-up number 1, and number 4 looks familiar as being -- it should be

19 Lapusnik, but I am not sure.

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Can you explain the difference between the typewritten sentence

22 we've just looked at which has the additional words "as being at

23 Lapusnik." That's not in your handwritten sentence.

24 A. That was a question I had asked him though.

25 Q. Could you explain that a little bit more. You asked him what

1 question?

2 A. When I asked these photo line-ups if it had nothing to do with the

3 detention centre at Lapusnik, so that would be very -- that would be in

4 response to the initial question of asking him to view the line-up and

5 tell me if he had seen the suspects at Lapusnik, were these the suspects

6 that beat him, depending on what the witness had told me, so that that

7 makes a lot of sense, that I would have that in there.

8 Q. Okay. Now, again, if you look at the typewritten statement, he

9 specifically on pages 2 and 3, there appear to be numerous handwritten

10 corrections. Do you see that?

11 A. Yes, I see that.

12 Q. Did you make those corrections? Do you know what these are?

13 A. Yes, I do. What happened in this, the witness -- I hadn't made

14 the appointment yet, but I had soon -- if you look at the date, I had soon

15 left CCIU soon after that, and the witness wasn't available to come in and

16 sign the statement, so the colleagues of mine who took over the case

17 brought him in, had him review it, you know, and he made the changes on

18 the Albanian statement which were then also made on the -- changes on the

19 English statement.

20 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm going to object. Lack of foundation.

21 JUDGE PARKER: Sorry, I didn't catch the basis of the objection,

22 Mr. Guy-Smith.

23 MR. GUY-SMITH: Lack of foundation, lack of knowledge with regards

24 to the testimony of this witness with regard to what other people did when

25 apparently he was gone.

1 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

2 Mr. Nicholls.

3 MR. NICHOLLS: I will ask a few further question, Your Honour,

4 perhaps.

5 Q. Were you present when these corrections were made?

6 A. No, I was not.

7 Q. If you look at the bottom of the pages where the corrections are

8 made, do you see the date, 1st of April, 2002?

9 A. Yes, I do.

10 Q. Seven years ago actually. Can you tell the name of the signature

11 written there?

12 A. Yes, I can.

13 Q. Three years. I was thinking back further. Who is that?

14 A. That would be Andreas Manthey.

15 Q. Are you sure about the last name?

16 A. I'm not very good at pronouncing Andreas's last name

17 unfortunately.

18 Q. Do you remember who this person was?

19 A. Yes. He was the German investigator that took over the case.

20 Q. All right. And you were not present during any corrections to the

21 statement or the read-back to the witness?

22 A. That is correct. I just observed his initials on there where the

23 corrections were made.

24 Q. Now going back to 16th of January 2002, when you took the

25 statement at the witness's house, did you follow the same procedures

1 you've outlined to us that you take when you show photo line-ups?

2 A. Yes, I do.

3 Q. Do you recall which photo line-ups you showed this witness?

4 A. U-1 and U-2.

5 Q. When the witness looked at U-1, what did he say or what happened?

6 Did he recognise anybody?

7 A. If I could look at my notes, I would know the exact verbiage, if

8 that's what you would like.

9 Q. Again, that should be on a page 4 of the typewritten statement or

10 on page 10 of your handwritten statement.

11 A. He viewed U-2 and he positively identified Fatmir Limaj.

12 Q. And did you record which position that Fatmir was in on have

13 version of U-2?

14 A. Yes, I do. It was number 3.

15 Q. And as usual did you have the witness circle number 3 and sign the

16 statement?

17 A. Yes, I did.

18 Q. The photo sheet?

19 A. Then I would attach it to the statement.

20 Q. And what about in U-1?

21 A. I remember in U-1 he said that the suspect Isak Musliu looked

22 familiar to him but he could not positively identify him.

23 Q. Did the witness say the name Isak Musliu? I'm just trying to

24 clarify your answer.

25 A. If I could look at my notes one more time, I would remember.

1 He said number 4, and Isak Musliu was number 4 in that particular

2 line-up but he said he wasn't sure. He said, I can't be for sure. So at

3 which time I had him -- I just placed that in my notes and attached the

4 line-up with the notes also written on the photo line-up.

5 Q. Now, if you look at your notes -- well, strike that.

6 Thank you, Mr. Kereakes. I don't have any more questions at this

7 time.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Nicholls.

9 Mr. Mansfield.

10 Cross-examined by Mr. Mansfield:

11 Q. Good morning, Mr. Kereakes. I represent Fatmir Limaj, together

12 with Karim Khan who sits to my right here.

13 A. Good morning.

14 Q. I want to ask you carefully, first of all, about identification

15 procedures and how experienced you were to be undertaking such a task in

16 this case. Now, first of all, when you were in the United States of

17 America before you went to Kosovo, in particular had you had occasion to

18 deal with photo line-ups as they're called in America?

19 A. Yes, I did.

20 Q. Were you familiar with the procedures, the protocols and the

21 guidelines that existed in Illinois and Chicago in particular at that

22 time, that is, the time before you went to Kosovo?

23 A. Yes, I was.

24 Q. Were you particularly aware of the factors that the American

25 courts took into account in relation to assessing the reliability of any

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 identification that might occur on a photo line-up?

2 A. Yes, I'm aware of the factors.

3 Q. Now, in the light of those answers, what does the Illinois State

4 Code of Criminal Procedure provide with regard to a photo spread?

5 A. That's a pretty general question. I would have to look at the

6 Illinois criminal law and --

7 Q. I'm just asking you now whether you have any idea what the code

8 said. If you can't remember all the details, that's perfectly

9 understandable, but just some of the protections and some of the

10 guidelines that were in place before you went to Kosovo.

11 MR. NICHOLLS: Excuse me. These are two different questions. The

12 witness has talked about being familiar with police procedures. Police

13 have their own standards, procedures, training. It's different from what

14 is in the Criminal Code of the court that the court would used. So I --

15 he's not a lawyer.

16 JUDGE PARKER: I'm sure Mr. Kereakes will be able to explain that,

17 Mr. Nicholls, if that's the position he has.

18 Yes, Mr. Mansfield.

19 MR. MANSFIELD:

20 Q. Now, Mr. Kereakes, what were the protections in place practiced by

21 the police in the United States of America prior to you going to Kosovo

22 with regard to photo line-ups?

23 A. I can tell you what the Chicago police department trained us.

24 Q. All right.

25 A. At the police academy, but as far as other departments in the

1 United States, I'm not sure, but I can tell you how I was trained and how

2 I practiced them as a police officer in Chicago.

3 Q. Right. Well could you do that, then, please.

4 A. Sure. We were taught to -- that a photo line-up must be fair and

5 impartial. In other words, all the characteristics must be similar. Like

6 I explained yesterday, if you have a guy with glasses and he's your

7 suspect, make sure that the other five individuals that you're going to

8 use in that photo line-up all have glasses. If the suspect is balding,

9 make sure the other five individuals are balding. You want similar

10 characteristics. If one of the subjects has a goatee, they should all

11 have a goatee.

12 You don't want anything in particular to identify the suspect that

13 the other individuals don't have. You also never want to at all influence

14 the victim/witness viewing the photo line-up by saying, You know, is

15 this -- does number 2 look familiar? Could it be number 3? Or take a

16 look at number 2 again. You want to remain quiet. You want to give the

17 instructions, stand back, give them enough time to look. Once he makes

18 any type of comments like, Yes, it was number 4, or I'm sure it was

19 number 3, that's the suspect. You can record them in your notes.

20 Because being in Kosovo was so hard to always try to find

21 pictures, you know, we used a database of individuals that we had

22 collected at the time there and that's how we made our photo line-up.

23 In the Chicago police department, though, you know, I can go grab

24 six guys off the streets, take their pictures, you know, and use them in a

25 photo line-up. Or I can request pictures from our photo pool there and it

1 could be done. There it was a little more difficult though.

2 Q. Is that it? Is that all you were taught in Chicago?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. I'm going to suggest to you that if that's really all you were

5 taught, then you were not taught some of the basic fundamental procedures

6 that apply to photographic as well as other line-ups, were you? Or have

7 you forgotten?

8 A. It's possible I have forgotten.

9 Q. Is it? Well, I'll come to what the fundamental procedures are

10 because I make the suggestion clear so you know where I'm going now. I

11 suggest that what happened in Kosovo at your hands was a remarkably crude

12 investigative approach to identification in which fundamental principles

13 were violated by you. Now, do you appreciate what I'm putting to you?

14 A. I believe that's your opinion.

15 Q. You may believe what you wish. Do you understand what I'm putting

16 to you?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Thank you. Now once you got to Kosovo, you indicated yesterday

19 that you'd been trained at one point, once you joined the investigative

20 unit, by an officer from the RUC, part of the United Kingdom.

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. Now, did that officer train you in photo line-ups?

23 A. Yes. We did review them.

24 Q. All right. What was the training you got in photo line-ups from

25 him?

1 A. Well, similar to what I explained to you earlier.

2 Q. Is that all? Just those principles, fair and impartial and the

3 factors you've indicated are -- ensuring that there were similar

4 characteristics in the others in the line-up, and that you don't influence

5 yourself by anything said, the choice that the person may or may not make?

6 A. Yes. Also too I forgot to add you have each witness victim view

7 the line-up by himself. Not with any other victim/witness.

8 Q. Yes. See, once again, I want to suggest if that's all you were

9 taught, then some of the basic principles that apply in the United Kingdom

10 are flouted once you were in Kosovo. Do you appreciate that?

11 A. It is possible that I may have forgot the exact procedures as far

12 as -- I have been gone from investigations for the last three an a half

13 years.

14 Q. Yes, I appreciate that. Are you still in the police?

15 A. I'm on a leave of absence with the police department.

16 Q. When did you last work for the police?

17 A. 2003, October.

18 Q. So after you left Kosovo, you went back to working for the police?

19 A. For about seven months.

20 Q. And since then you've been on leave of absence?

21 A. That is correct.

22 Q. Now I don't obviously want to pry into anything personal, but is

23 it to do with health or something else?

24 A. No. As I explained yesterday, I was -- accepted a contractor's

25 position with the US State Department working protection in Afghanistan

1 and Israel, not investigations.

2 Q. Now, in any of those circumstances since Kosovo, have you had

3 occasion to consider photo line-ups or line-ups of any kind?

4 A. No.

5 Q. No.

6 Now I want to ask you this question in relation to line-ups:

7 What is the most fundamental thing that someone who is conducting a photo

8 line-up must ensure that the potential witness who is attending the

9 line-up is told before they view the line-up?

10 A. To be honest.

11 Q. Yes. Anything else?

12 A. To look at each picture and not to make any guesses.

13 Q. Yes. Can I suggest there is a very fundamental proposition which

14 underlies certainly the law in the United States of America on this issue,

15 and the law in the United Kingdom on this issue, a fundamental principle.

16 And I suggest you don't even know what it is, do you?

17 MR. NICHOLLS: That's not really an appropriate question. He can

18 ask questions about what the witness did, what the witness knows. But not

19 whether the witness -- continues to ask whether the witness appreciates

20 where he's going, appreciates if he understands his assertions. I think

21 he should ask questions about facts.

22 JUDGE PARKER: I think there are refinements of cross-examination

23 technique, Mr. Nicholls. I don't see anything improper in what's being

24 done. It could be, if the witness was one likely to be confused by it,

25 but Mr. Kereakes is able to appreciate I think what is being put to him

1 quite well.

2 Thank you, Mr. Mansfield.

3 MR. MANSFIELD:

4 Q. Now, I'm not going to waste time, Mr. Kereakes. I'm going to put

5 to you what the fundamental issue is here.

6 A. That's fine, thank you.

7 Q. The one thing that a witness, potential witness - there are others

8 but one fundamental thing that the witness must be told before viewing the

9 line-up - is that the person - not suspect - but that the person who they

10 have seen in a particular situation may or may not be in the line-up

11 they're being shown.

12 Now, have you ever been told that?

13 A. No.

14 Q. No. Article 1075 of the Illinois Code of Criminal Procedure,

15 which I suggest American police officers in Chicago must know if they're

16 practising, it's 1075(b): "Each eyewitness who views a line-up or photo

17 spread shall sign a form containing the following information. The

18 suspect might not be in the line-up."

19 Have you ever heard that before?

20 A. I had heard that, but I had never followed, as far as the not

21 including the suspect in the line-up.

22 Q. No. And I suggest you didn't follow procedures in Kosovo any more

23 than you did in America. That's true, isn't it?

24 A. That was not the procedure in Kosovo. And I believe what you're

25 reading also doesn't mean that we have to have the suspect in the line-up.

1 It also means you can have the suspect in the line-up.

2 Q. No. I think you're not following, Mr. Kereakes.

3 A. I'm tracking.

4 Q. Are you?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. The important thing for a potential witness is that they are not

7 influenced in believing that the person who you regard as a suspect is the

8 person who they may have seen and, secondly, that the person who they may

9 have seen is amongst those who they're seeing, particularly if they're

10 only seeing seven faces or six faces. Do you follow?

11 A. Yes, I do.

12 Q. Yes. And that's the second part of this Article: "The eyewitness

13 should not assume that the person administering the line-up or photo

14 spread knows which person is the suspect in the case."

15 Now you yesterday indicated very clearly when you took somebody

16 into a room, in general terms applying it to this case, you would first of

17 all ask them if the suspect was in the line-up. That was the wording you

18 used yesterday. Is that what the wording you used at the time in Kosovo?

19 A. Yes, it was.

20 Q. Yes. I'm going to suggest to you, Mr. Kereakes, you haven't got

21 the slightest idea how to conduct an impartial and fair line-up. Have

22 you?

23 A. I would disagree with you.

24 Q. Now another feature is, of course, that -- I want to ask you about

25 this, is that the -- whatever goes on in a photo line-up should be

1 properly recorded at the time. Do you agree?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Dated as to when it happened?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Signed by the witness?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And this applies to whether there has been an identification, just

8 as much as when there hasn't.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Once again, not a procedure that you followed in this case. Is

11 it?

12 A. Yes, it was. I did have them attach the photo line-up to the

13 witness statement.

14 Q. We'll come to that. And I want to just -- again, dealing with

15 general principles, since you haven't mentioned them but I'm going to

16 mention them to you to save time.

17 The other thing you have to ensure before you even get a witness

18 to a line-up is that the witness has given as full a description in

19 physical appearance and clothing as possible. You're aware of that, are

20 you?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Yes. I suggest that's another one you haven't actually

23 encountered in this case. You haven't actually done it in this case, have

24 you?

25 A. I'm sorry, I don't quite understand the first question you asked.

1 Q. In this case - we'll come to it, specific instances - you as a

2 matter of procedure you have not ensure that individual witnesses you are

3 dealing with have actually recorded a full description of the person who

4 they say they saw, whether it's in a camp on a hillside or wherever it

5 was. You haven't got them to give a full description in all cases, have

6 you?

7 A. I believe I did.

8 Q. But you recognise it's particularly important if you're only going

9 to show their faces, isn't it?

10 A. I didn't have access to a database of, let's say, a person's

11 clothing. If he was wearing a black UCK uniform which identified the

12 military police of the UCK, I did not have suspects -- or I did not have

13 enough pictures of six people dressed in black uniforms in order for him

14 to say, Yeah, that's the suspect's face, along with the patch, along with

15 the boots.

16 Q. Mr. Kereakes, I don't think you're understanding, and it may be,

17 once again, you're a totally inappropriate person to be conducting

18 identifications.

19 May I put it again: If in fact in a photo line-up, which happened

20 in this case, where the person I represent, Fatmir Limaj, all you're

21 asking somebody to look at are faces. Yes?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. You're going to have to ensure that the person who you're asking

24 to identify has already given you a description as far as they can of the

25 facial characteristics.

1 A. Oh, I see what you're mean. The British English sometimes throws

2 me off.

3 Q. Oh, translation.

4 A. All right.

5 Q. Now you understand?

6 A. Yes, I do.

7 Q. Okay.

8 A. In each case I did try to get --

9 Q. Did you?

10 A. A description of the height, weight.

11 Q. When we get through we'll see that, will we?

12 All right. Because one of the further problems is that you want

13 to ensure, where possible, whether the person who again you're asking to

14 look at the line-up is in fact recognising somebody as opposed to

15 identifying somebody. Now, do you know the distinction between those two?

16 A. Recognising and identifying?

17 Q. Yes.

18 A. Yes, I do.

19 Q. What is it?

20 A. I don't have the exact definition here with me, but as far as

21 recognising, is this the person that he is familiar with? Whereas the

22 person that he identifies, is this the person that actually was the one

23 that committed the crime against him.

24 Q. I suggest once again you're way off beam, if that's an

25 understandable phrase in America.

1 A. Actually, it's not.

2 Q. Oh, right. Well, off the park, off the wall, whatever. I don't

3 want to take up time with phrases.

4 Now, what I want to get to with regard to this is the distinction

5 that is drawn in most jurisdictions with regard to this issue is you want

6 to know whether the person you're asking to look at the line-up knows the

7 person from before. In other words, is recognising somebody they know -

8 maybe a relative, could be a friend, very important in Kosovo - as opposed

9 to identifying somebody they'd never seen before in their lives.

10 Now are you aware of that distinction?

11 A. Yes, I am.

12 Q. Right. But when I asked you the question, you didn't seem to

13 remember it.

14 JUDGE PARKER: It's a matter of understanding - if I could

15 intrude - I thought that was the effect of what the witness said, but

16 maybe I had too generous an approach to the answer.

17 MR. MANSFIELD: I make no comment.

18 Q. So you recognise the significance of ensuring that you find out,

19 first of all - this is before we ever get to the line-up - the extent to

20 which the person is able to say, Well, I knew this person anyway, a member

21 of my family or a distant cousin, as opposed to, Never seen the person

22 before in my life, and the first time he walked through the door that's

23 the first time I saw him?

24 A. No. I did ask him questions --

25 Q. Did you?

1 A. Yes. How did you find out it was Isak Musliu, did you know him

2 before the war? A lot of times the witnesses would say, No, no, he was my

3 neighbour, or we went to school together, or I knew him, I had a

4 confrontation with him before. So I did try to establish if a

5 relationship had existed before the detention.

6 Q. And you recorded all of that, did you?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Where?

9 A. Depending on which -- I don't understand which witness you're

10 talking about.

11 Q. We'll come to the witnesses. Whereas a matter of course would you

12 record that distinction?

13 A. It could be in a statement or it could even be in my notes.

14 Q. What was the protocol? What was the procedure that you used as a

15 matter of course?

16 A. I would record it in a statement.

17 Q. Statement.

18 A. Uh-huh.

19 Q. By the witness?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Did you ever make a statement about these matters at the time? I

22 don't mean the one in 2003 and the one in 2004, after it was all over. I

23 mean at the time, did you make a witness statement about these processes

24 of identification?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. You did?

2 A. Of my witnesses?

3 Q. Yes. So when a witness -- it doesn't matter who he is, A, B or C,

4 when a witness either does or doesn't identify, do you make a statement

5 yourself, under your own name saying, On such-and-such a day I showed a

6 line-up to so and so. He did or he didn't identify in the following

7 circumstances. Did you ever make a statement like that?

8 A. Yes, I did.

9 Q. You did? Because I'll be corrected, we don't have those

10 statements if you did do them.

11 A. I could show you an example in my notes.

12 Q. It's not the notes. It's a statement.

13 A. I'm sorry in the statement. I can show you an example in the

14 statement.

15 Q. No. A statement by you at the time.

16 A. I also have it in my notes too.

17 Q. No, sorry, please answer the question. Are there any statements,

18 at the time of these purported lineups in which you state under your name,

19 signed by you and dated by you that the identification procedure has taken

20 place. Are there any such statements?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And you have them there?

23 A. I can show you in these statements right here.

24 Q. Well, since you wish to do so, could you just indicate -- I don't

25 want any names read out in public session because we're in public session.

1 A. Could I look through them?

2 Q. Yes.

3 A. Tab 3, second page, I believe it's marked 0323-2581, but it's

4 crossed out.

5 Q. Well, that's just --

6 A. I'm sorry, the next page 0323-2582, but it's been crossed out. Do

7 you see that?

8 Q. Yes.

9 A. Then I put in there reporting -- all the way at the bottom last

10 paragraph.

11 Q. Yes.

12 A. "Reporting investigator then displayed a photo line-up with

13 suspect Isak Musliu and five other Albanian KPS officers. The above

14 witness positively identified Isak Musliu as one of the suspects in the

15 illegal detention centre. They beat him. Review exhibit U-1."

16 Q. I will come to these because of course they're important. I

17 suggest -- you do understand what a witness statement is, do you?

18 A. Yes, I do.

19 Q. Right. What is it?

20 A. A witnesses statement is the one that I recorded at the time

21 explaining --

22 Q. Do you know how to make a witness statement, Mr. Kereakes?

23 A. Yes, I do.

24 Q. Do you know how to make one, yourself, for yourself?

25 A. Yes, I do.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 Q. Right. I will ask the question again. At the time, let us take

2 August 2001 as it happens to be in tab 3, did you make at the time of this

3 investigation a witness statement by you -- are you following?

4 A. Yes. Now I'm following.

5 Q. Right.

6 A. The procedures we had in Kosovo --

7 Q. Would you just answer the question, yes or no.

8 A. No. I did not make a separate witness statement in which the

9 suspect photo line-up that I had conducted in -- which I signed and

10 dated. I -- I put it either in the witness statement or in my notes.

11 Q. We'll come to just how bad the notes were and your difficulties of

12 recollection in 2003, because you've had a lot of difficulty recollecting

13 what happened, haven't you?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Oh, none at all?

16 A. For anything that counsel has asked me, I have remembered so far.

17 Q. So far.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Oh, we'll come to the difficulties.

20 I'm dealing with general principles before you ever get to the

21 line-up. Another fundamental question, I suggest, is to discover whether

22 the person who you're asking to look at the photographic line-up has seen

23 a photograph of this person before. Do you recognise that as a principle?

24 Do you?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Thank you. Did you ask any single witness in this case whether

2 they had, in fact, seen the photograph before?

3 A. No, I didn't.

4 Q. Why not?

5 A. I was not taught that or it wasn't required in Kosovo from us.

6 Q. You see, this has a particular relevance to the person that I

7 represent, doesn't it?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And perhaps you could enlighten us as to why it does.

10 A. I believe you're saying this is because Mr. Fatmir Limaj is a

11 public figure, which at the time, when I initially heard the name, I did

12 not know who Fatmir Limaj was. I didn't think at that time to ask these

13 questions of the witness or the victim, and it's because I never knew he

14 was such a -- in the public eye at that time.

15 Q. It didn't take long to find out though, did it?

16 A. I believe I didn't find out till a little bit later.

17 Q. How much later?

18 A. I don't recall.

19 Q. Certainly before you started doing photo line-ups which you only

20 compiled much later.

21 A. I didn't do the photo line-ups. I had requested someone to do

22 them for me.

23 Q. I'm sorry, yes, perfectly correct. When you requested someone to

24 do it. By that time you knew perfectly well who Fatmir Limaj was as a

25 person, didn't you?

1 A. I didn't know towards the end of the investigation or towards the

2 end -- when I was leaving Kosovo at what -- I knew he was a commander in

3 the UCK, but I didn't know that he had now transformed and gone into a

4 political role.

5 Q. Mr. Kereakes, you knew full well about the fact that he was a

6 political figure. You made that clear to anybody who you had cause to

7 detain and we'll come to that. You knew who he was and what he looked

8 like, because he's on television. You knee he'd been on television,

9 didn't you?

10 A. Yeah. After. Not in the beginning of investigating him I did not

11 know. Even towards the middle of the investigation I knew that he was a

12 commander from UCK. He knew he had some kind of political role, but I did

13 not know the exact, you know, position that he had in the political

14 spectrum.

15 Q. Didn't you? As an investigating officer, I suggest that you must

16 have known and, if you didn't you would have made enquiries to find out

17 who he is and whether his picture appeared in the newspapers and on

18 television. You would want to know that, wouldn't you?

19 A. Well, at that time I was -- when I started investigating this

20 case, it was more important to start identifying the victims, the

21 witnesses, and also the suspects. But I didn't start going into full

22 depths of who these suspects are as far as what are they doing now. I had

23 asked several questions in the witness statements asking, Where is he now?

24 But I had even requested backgrounds on these individuals from KFOR, from

25 other databases, but I had not sat down actually and began, you know,

1 building up a profile and finding out what exactly are they doing now. I

2 was busy recording the statements or exhuming mass graves.

3 Q. I am much more interested on this score the extent to which you

4 knew that Fatmir Limaj's photograph, his image, his picture was

5 widespread, his name was a household name, I suggest, in the years after

6 the war, and his picture appeared in the press and television regularly.

7 You knew that, didn't you?

8 A. Yeah. I did find that out later.

9 Q. Later?

10 A. Yeah.

11 Q. Just tell us how much later. When was it you say you discovered

12 that.

13 A. It was more towards the end of the investigation once I started

14 finding out more about him, and it wasn't towards -- I know for sure it

15 was not towards the beginning and even towards the middle of my

16 investigation, I still had not put -- known that he was a political

17 figure.

18 Q. And you recognise that there is a risk here that if somebody's

19 picture has been all over the press and television that people who then

20 identify line-ups may be identifying the person they've seen on television

21 or in the press. You recognise that risk, don't you?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. That is why, I suggest, as an investigating officer, you have to

24 be extremely careful to ensure that you have discovered that information

25 before you even attempt to line-up. Isn't it?

1 A. It would be important for me to know this.

2 Q. Yes.

3 A. At the beginning of the investigation and now that I'm thinking

4 back on it. But at the time, if you're new to Kosovo, as an investigator,

5 and, you know, somebody comes in, reports a war crime and gives you the

6 name Fatmir Limaj, and you don't know that name, you just continue your

7 investigation, recording statements, gathering evidence. I did not know

8 at the time that he had been in newspapers.

9 Q. I'm still on the preparatory stage before you ever show

10 photographs. The one thing, another fundamental thing you would need to

11 discover from your potential witness, having gone through these

12 preliminaries, most of which, I suggest, in your case, you haven't done,

13 but once you've gone through the preliminaries, what's the final question

14 you must ask the witness before you even take them into the room where the

15 line-up is?

16 A. I don't know the final question.

17 Q. It would help to know, wouldn't it, whether the witness says he or

18 she is able to recognise or identify, using those terms carefully, the

19 person that they saw again, wouldn't it?

20 A. I did ask them that though.

21 Q. You recognise it is important?

22 A. Oh, yes. And I did ask him that. I didn't know there was going

23 to be the final question per procedure to say, As soon as I'm going to

24 take you in this room, the final question I have to ask you is: Can you

25 still recognise this suspect.

1 The way you're putting it is you're saying that we have a

2 check-list, and on that check-list first question is, you know, Have you

3 seen this guy in the media. Second question is, Have you seen him in the

4 newspapers. No such check-list existed at CCIU or I could say in any

5 particular police department. And finally, there isn't, you know, the

6 last final question before you go in there, you know, Can you identify.

7 I've already established that I believe before I have shown the suspect --

8 Q. Oh, have you now?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Right. So we'll find that on statements, will we, the few records

11 that we have, that you asking the question and the response, will we?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Thank you. I suggest once again, Mr. Kereakes, you're completely

14 wrong. It does not occur on the documents we have and we'll go through

15 them, don't worry.

16 Now, in relation to the line-up itself that is assembling the

17 photographs, you got someone else to do it from a database. What's the

18 minimum number in the United States of America or let us put it more

19 precisely, in Chicago, that are required? The minimum number.

20 A. At least six.

21 Q. At least six. And you would recognise yourself, would you not,

22 that in fairness six is the minimum but it is really much better to have

23 more, if you can.

24 A. If you can.

25 Q. Yes. Did you ask in this case whether you could have or find more

1 than six in these cases?

2 A. Yes. At one point I did and we had trouble finding similar

3 characteristics. Our database was small. We just didn't have enough

4 pictures.

5 Q. Would you just turn to the one we have in the bundle that you've

6 been provided with, tab 2.

7 A. Bundle?

8 Q. Have you got tab 2?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Now, the photograph number 2 doesn't provide a very similar

11 appearance, does it, on that line-up?

12 A. I think it does.

13 Q. You think it does. In terms of hair, did anyone describe the

14 person who they purported to say was Fatmir Limaj with hair like that?

15 A. With brown hair?

16 Q. Well, --

17 A. Dark hair.

18 Q. How can you tell that's brown hair?

19 A. I can tell it's dark hair.

20 Q. Yes, of course. Now, please be careful. Did any witness that you

21 can recall, dealing with the question of purporting to identify Fatmir

22 Limaj, ever describe the person they saw and thought was Fatmir Limaj with

23 hair of that length?

24 A. I think the hair in each photo is very similar.

25 Q. You think the hair in these six photographs are very similar, do

1 you?

2 A. Number 2 is a little bit longer but --

3 Q. A little bit longer. Mr. Kereakes, how much care and attention

4 have you paid to this case?

5 A. Hours.

6 Q. Oh, really?

7 A. Yes. When I was working it.

8 Q. And in relation to these six, just -- I'm just looking at tab 2

9 still, these six, one of them, of course, appears on these photographs to

10 have facial hair; is that right?

11 A. I don't see it. Maybe you have a better copy than I do.

12 MR. NICHOLLS: I would like to know which one he's referring to as

13 well.

14 MR. MANSFIELD: I'm so sorry.

15 MR. NICHOLLS: I was just wondering you're saying has facial hair.

16 MR. MANSFIELD:

17 Q. Well, it appears on the photocopies, and I will

18 come to the originals in a moment, number 4 appears to have facial hair.

19 A. It appears to me that it doesn't.

20 Q. It doesn't? Well, in order to resolve these, did you ensure that

21 the originals of any photographs that were going to be shown were

22 preserved so we could tell?

23 A. The originals were taken from a database.

24 Q. Yes.

25 A. And then copied.

1 Q. Right. So what was being shown in a photo line-up were

2 photocopies of a copy. Is that fair?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Once again, I suggest, not entirely satisfactory, is it?

5 A. If you're in Kosovo working it is pretty satisfactory, considering

6 the fact that we did not have a photo department to make the pictures nice

7 and clear, be able to make duplicate pictures at all time. We just did

8 not have access to that type of technology.

9 Q. There's an Albanian community in the United States of America,

10 isn't there?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Was any request made by you of the American authorities to be

13 provided with a much bigger database from America?

14 A. Yes. I also asked my commander several times to get us better

15 type of photo equipment and along with Albanian-American language

16 assistance, or other nationalities that spoke fluent Albanian, and I never

17 got any of those.

18 Q. Was the supervisor Dennis Sherman?

19 A. Yes, he was.

20 Q. Why did you stop being a part of the investigation unit in

21 February 2002?

22 A. I transferred to another department.

23 Q. Or were you moved?

24 A. No. I was not moved. I transferred to another department.

25 Q. Did you have a disagreement with the very man we've just

1 mentioned?

2 A. Yes. I did have a difference of opinion with him.

3 Q. Right. And were you moved because it was recognised that you were

4 not up to the job?

5 A. On the contrary. I received a great letter of commendation from

6 him. I was also promoted to a chief of investigation position for a task

7 force for the police commissioner, and I even received invitations to join

8 the regional murder squad, which I did later.

9 Q. What was the disagreement about?

10 A. It was -- had to do with another case.

11 Q. Nothing to do with this case?

12 A. No. Nothing to do with this case.

13 Q. I want to move in general terms from assembling the line-up to be

14 shown to the showing of a line-up. I've already dealt with one of the

15 aspects of the showing, which is indicating that -- to the witness that

16 the person they've seen, as opposed to the suspect, may or may not be

17 present. And I want to move to another factor.

18 Did you indicate to any of the witnesses the standard of certainty

19 that had to be reached before they picked out a photograph?

20 A. Yes, I did.

21 Q. And what did you say the standard was?

22 A. Excuse me. I didn't want him to guess. You know, I wanted him to

23 be 100, positively, sure that when he picked the person in that line-up

24 that that was the person that committed the crimes against him.

25 Q. So you wanted the person to be sure?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And you told them that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And that's recorded?

5 A. No. That's what I told him.

6 Q. Yes. That's recorded, is it, that that's what you've told them.

7 I've been asking you about records being kept of the whole procedure so we

8 knew what questions were asked, so we know what the witness was told.

9 That was recorded, was it?

10 A. I answered, no, that's what I told him verbally.

11 Q. Yes. Why don't you record it?

12 A. It wasn't required of us.

13 Q. In relation to the viewing itself, did you record how long the

14 actual exercise took?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Why not?

17 A. Because we didn't record it.

18 Q. You do recognise that it may have a bearing on the reliability,

19 the reliability of any identification as to how long it took, how much

20 care was taken, how many times particular photographs were looked at,

21 whether other photographs were hesitated over. That kind of thing. You

22 do appreciate all of that, do you?

23 A. Yes, I do.

24 Q. Yeah, right. Did you record any of that on any occasion?

25 A. I recorded when a statement began and when a statement ended, if I

1 did finish the -- if I did show the photo line-up I would have placed that

2 in the witness statement as far as what time the whole statement ended.

3 Q. Oh, yes.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. That's a very different matter.

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. You see some of the factors taken into account in America -- I

8 mean you've been to court in America over identifications, have you?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. In Illinois?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. So you know the kind of things that the court is looking towards

13 in assessing on reliability, do you, in America?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Yes. And can I just read you the factors to see if you agree that

16 these are the factors, at least in America, that are relevant to the

17 reliability of a line-up. The witnesses opportunity to view the suspect

18 at the time of the crime is where it starts. You're aware of that?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. The witness's degree of attention, you're aware of that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. The accuracy of the witness's prior description of the suspect?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. The level of certainty demonstrated at the time of the line-up?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. The length of time between the crime and the line-up?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. In this case, quite considerable.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And any acquaintance with the suspect prior to the crime.

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. You're aware of all of those factors?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Now I suggest I've taken a little time to take you through the

10 general principles and I now want to deal with some specific instances

11 with you. For the moment, I can certainly do it in public session without

12 referring to the name of the person who we're concerned with.

13 If you turn to tab 4, there is a particular witness mentioned

14 there. Now, that is also -- or that person is also somebody you referred

15 to in tab 3 in your supplement continuation form notes. And that's

16 Appendix A. Do you see that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Right. I'm just going to, for the moment, call this, if I may,

19 this person A. Can I just call him A, so that there is no risk of...

20 So when you first were involved in this -- in this investigation,

21 you viewed this witness as a central witness, didn't you?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And you were given, to start off with, a record of an interview

24 that had been had with him. Do you remember?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. And I'm using your words. You were impressed by the account that

2 you read of that interview, weren't you?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. You thought it was graphic, didn't you?

5 A. I thought the statement in itself was, yes.

6 Q. Yes. Now, the first question I have on this: Did you have

7 anything to do with taking that statement?

8 A. You're referring to the first statement that -- when I was first

9 assigned the case?

10 Q. No?

11 A. On witness A?

12 Q. No. The interview. So it is clear, this was an interview that

13 had taken place on the 20th of August, 2000.

14 A. Could you please tell me which one you're referring to.

15 Q. Yes. I'm going to come to it. Don't worry --

16 MR. NICHOLLS: I just wanted to tell the witness who is looking

17 that it is not in the binder in front of you.

18 MR. MANSFIELD:

19 Q. It is not in that bundle. But I want to ask you about it, and I'm

20 going to let you see it in a minute, if you need to.

21 Did you have anything to do with an interview of this witness

22 we're calling A for these purposes in public, on the 20th of August 2000?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Yes. On the 20th of August, 2000.

25 A. I'm a little bit confused because I know that I wasn't working for

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 CCIU on the 20th of August 2000, so I'm not sure if you're referring to

2 the statement that was taken by investigator Kaare Birkeland or the

3 statement that was taken of witness A, by myself or I think unless you

4 have the dates wrong. 20th of August 2002 I had arrived at Kosovo and I

5 wasn't working for CCIU.

6 Q. You see it's a fairly minor matter but I suggest even on minor

7 matters you are all over the place. You made a statement or rather you

8 were interviewed and it resulted in a statement in 2004, September and

9 November of 2004. Do you remember? It was last year.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. All right.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Again, I will show you the document if you wish to see it. I want

14 to, if I can, do it without necessarily belaboring you with documents.

15 And in paragraph 3 of that interview statement with you last year, you

16 said, you interviewed A, the witness we're calling A, on the 20th of

17 August 2000.

18 A. I believe the Prosecution told you that there was a typo.

19 Q. Oh. Well, --

20 A. So it should be 2001. It would be easier if I could see the

21 statement you're referring to.

22 Q. Yes, certainly. Because in fact it can't be a typo, do you

23 follow? And you're welcome to add any explanation you like.

24 MR. MANSFIELD: Could we have -- I don't know whether it is

25 available -- a record of the interview. I can give the page, it's 84015.

1 Is there a copy of that?

2 MR. NICHOLLS: The witness has that. That's in your hard bound

3 binder, marked 2004, the witness statement, if that's the one

4 Mr. Mansfield is talking about.

5 MR. MANSFIELD:

6 Q. It should be, yes.

7 A. Excuse me, but this is not the statement I took. This is the one,

8 like I said, was taken by Kaare Birkeland, so that would mean I'm not all

9 over the place.

10 Q. Yes. We're slightly at cross-purposes. I want you to look at

11 your interview statement, in view of your answers --

12 MR. NICHOLLS: Maybe instead of saying "your interview statement,"

13 which could also mean statements taken by the witness, counsel could say

14 the witness statement which you provided to ICTY, make it a little bit

15 clearer.

16 MR. MANSFIELD: Yes, certainly.

17 Q. This is a statement you provided to the ICTY last year. It's got

18 two dates on it which you say you remember, September 2004 and November

19 2004. We've certainly been provided with supplemental information about

20 this statement that there is an error in this paragraph, but I want to ask

21 you how the error occurred in the first place.

22 Now, do you have a copy in front of you now of the statement you

23 provided to the ICTY?

24 A. One moment, please.

25 MR. NICHOLLS: If I could tell the witness there were two ICTY

1 witness statements in there. The one Mr. Mansfield was referring to

2 should be labelled 2004.

3 MR. MANSFIELD: Thank you.

4 THE WITNESS: Yes, I have it.

5 MR. MANSFIELD:

6 Q. Yes, thank you.

7 If you would look at -- first of all, just so it is clear, you

8 will see on the first sheet or should be on the first sheet, dates I've

9 been mentioning, which they're regarded as an interview but it obviously

10 results in a statement you provide. You see the dates 24th of September,

11 2004 and the 10th of November, 2004. You see that?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Now, if you turn over the page, I'm dealing with a particular

14 point at this stage, paragraph 3: "I am providing this statement at the

15 request of the ICTY to clarify a few matters in my investigation. I

16 interviewed," then I will insert A "on the 20th of August, 2000," with a

17 reference to page numbers, "and again on the 17th of August, 2001."

18 Do you see that?

19 A. Yes, I do.

20 Q. That's not a typo, is it?

21 A. Yes, it is.

22 Q. Is it?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. How does that typo come about?

25 A. For example, on witness A, where it says I interviewed him on the

1 20th of August, 2000, that's a mistake. I believe I arrived in Kosovo on

2 the 21st.

3 Q. Yes, I appreciate that. How does a statement, in your name,

4 because I'm going to suggest you are thoroughly careless with dates, times

5 even those relating to yourself, and this is an example. How does that

6 get into the statement which presumably you then sign? Don't you?

7 A. If you see on the first page, I was assigned in Afghanistan, and

8 the interview took place over the phone and also via e-mail. I didn't

9 have any access to any of the case files that were with me. I printed it

10 up, and I remember that I was trying to remember the exact dates and I

11 read through the statement, I signed it, but I did not catch that error.

12 Q. Well, it's a fairly major error, because according to you, you

13 weren't even on the job in August 2000.

14 A. That's correct.

15 Q. You see, we're dealing here -- I didn't preface all of this, this

16 is minor. We'll get to major matters in a moment. This is a minor

17 matter.

18 Now I'm still dealing with this witness who I am calling A for the

19 moment. I think you should have what is referred to there in that

20 statement as the interview or statement of A on the 20th of August, 2000.

21 You should have a copy. And it is 03230787 in your bundle of statements.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Do you have that in front of you?

24 MR. NICHOLLS: He does not.

25 THE WITNESS: I have one that was handed to me a few minutes ago.

1 MR. NICHOLLS: Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realise you handled it.

2 You said the bundle.

3 MR. MANSFIELD:

4 Q. Now, just to make sure, I will go slowly. This is witness A.

5 We're calling him A for the moment, and it is the 20th of August, 2000.

6 Is that right?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Now, in relation to this -- first of all, the person who actually

9 did the interviewing of this person on the 20th of August, 2000, is that

10 person's name on the statement anywhere? I don't mean the name of the

11 witness, the name of the person doing the investigation or interviewing.

12 A. No, it's not.

13 Q. So how do you know who took it?

14 A. There was nothing else attached to this when it was given over?

15 Q. Well, I pause for a moment to check. I have a bundle. As far as

16 I'm aware, that's the only other thing that came with it, that particular

17 one. Am I right? Yes. That's the only thing we've been provided with.

18 Anyway, from that document - I won't take up a load of time -

19 there is no way of knowing, it would appear, on the face of the document,

20 who actually took this one in August 2000.

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. All right. Now when you read it and you were impressed by it, was

23 there something that later was rather obvious to you about this statement?

24 No?

25 A. I don't know what you're referring to.

1 Q. Well, let's deal with Fatmir Limaj, shall we, whom I represent.

2 A. Okay.

3 Q. Did you recognise or realise that in this initial statement he's

4 not mentioned at all? Is he?

5 A. Can I take a quick glance at this?

6 Q. Yes. You're very welcome to do so.

7 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mansfield, the witness is needing to look

8 through the statement carefully. Given the clock, I think we might leave

9 your question or the answer to it until after the break.

10 MR. MANSFIELD: Yes.

11 JUDGE PARKER: We will resume at five minutes to 11.00.

12 --- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.

13 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Mansfield.

15 MR. MANSFIELD:

16 Q. Now, Mr. Kereakes, you've had an opportunity to look at the

17 interview or statement by this witness A made in August 2000, and do you

18 agree that that statement does not mention Fatmir Limaj or the name

19 Celiku, does it?

20 A. That is correct.

21 Q. And I want to deal carefully with how things progress over this

22 witness. You see this witness A - and so it's clear, we can follow it in

23 tab 3, you have before you, tab 3 - on the 17th of August 2001, so it's a

24 year later?

25 A. Correct.

1 Q. And on this page of a supplementary continuation form, you have in

2 fact a list of suspects numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. And I want to ask you,

3 carefully, if you can help us as to how the name Fatmir Limaj came up at

4 all a year later, it never having been mentioned before by this witness.

5 A. Yes. Can we go to tab 4?

6 Q. Yes. Well, I can understand in tab 4 we have the witness's

7 statement and we can see the one that you took on the 17th of August, and

8 there's a paragraph on page 0794 where Fatmir Limaj, Celiku, is mentioned

9 as the commander of the area. All right?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. I'm going to tread carefully because some of this, what is said

12 here, so you understand, actually hasn't been said by this witness in his

13 evidence. Do you follow?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And what I'm interested in, for the present, is how the

16 name "Fatmir Limaj" came to be mentioned.

17 A. The witness told me that in his statement.

18 Q. Did you mention the name?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Are you sure?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Did you ask him whether, in fact, he knew somebody called Fatmir

23 Limaj and that's how it came up?

24 A. No. I didn't even know who Fatmir Limaj was.

25 Q. I know, you said that before. Were you aware that in the year

1 2000, that's the year before you arrived, and in the year 2001 Fatmir

2 Limaj had been standing in local elections in the year 2000 for mayor of

3 Pristina and his photograph was all offer the city and as a member of the

4 Assembly in the summer of 2001 at the very time you're there with his

5 photograph all over the city. You did know that, didn't you?

6 A. No, I didn't.

7 Q. No? Why do you think that's funny?

8 A. Because before I even went to Kosovo, I didn't even know where

9 Yugoslavia was. So I knew nothing of the politics. I didn't know

10 anything of the political figures. Or when I even got there, I was

11 assigned to the Kosovo Polje police station, which is outside of Pristina,

12 and I didn't know anything to do any of the politicians.

13 Q. Mr. Kereakes, as a street police officer you walk around with your

14 eyes shut, did you?

15 A. Never. Not on my beat.

16 Q. Are you saying you didn't see a single poster with this man's name

17 and photograph up?

18 A. I saw many posters while I was there, but I didn't pay attention

19 to the names or to who they were.

20 Q. Or did this witness, in fact not know the name Fatmir Limaj at

21 that time that you were speaking to him and he knew the name Celiku? Is

22 that a possibility?

23 A. No, it's not. Because how he told me the name is how I wrote it

24 in the witness statement.

25 Q. What I'm trying to get at is whether this witness has been

1 subjected to heavy suggestion from you.

2 A. Never.

3 Q. Well, let's just look at the statement, since you said look at the

4 statement, 03230794, the paragraph which begins "the commander of the

5 whole area was." Do you see that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Right. What's written above it?

8 A. "He beat me on two separate occasions. Always I was handcuffed

9 and he used his hands and feet on me."

10 Q. I think we may be looking at the wrong passage. Because

11 witness A, 0794 --

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Right? I'm looking at the paragraph. The commander -- I'm only

14 dealing with Fatmir Limaj and how the name came up. "The commander of the

15 whole area was Fatmir Limaj."

16 Do you see that paragraph?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. It's halfway down.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Right. Now, above that sentence, something is written.

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. What is it?

23 A. At that time I know -- oh, you mean the little handwritten notes?

24 Q. That's right.

25 A. At that time I know only Celiku. Celiku.

1 Q. Right. Whose writing is that?

2 A. That could be Andreas or Edgar's.

3 Q. It's not your handwriting?

4 A. No.

5 Q. All right. And it appears that that has been added in handwriting

6 therefore, if you look at 0796, that this was a statement that was amended

7 in 2002 on the 3rd of the 4th 2002, nine months later. Do you see that,

8 at the end?

9 A. Yes, I do.

10 Q. Right. So it looks as though the handwritten additions not in

11 your writing but in the writing of the person dealing with him after you'd

12 finished, you'd gone from this investigation --

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. -- yes? Has written "at that time I knew him only as Celiku".

15 A. Yes, that's what they wrote.

16 Q. Well, let's just think about this. If he only knew him as Celiku

17 at that time, how is he able to say his name was Fatmir Limaj to you?

18 MR. NICHOLLS: Your Honour, that's completely misleading,

19 confusing way of reading it. "At that time" he's correcting his

20 statement, at that time refers to 1998.

21 JUDGE PARKER: I hadn't understood it to be anything else,

22 Mr. Nicholls. And I don't think Mr. Mansfield suggested anything else.

23 MR. MANSFIELD: That's right. I'm not suggesting that.

24 JUDGE PARKER: No.

25 MR. MANSFIELD:

1 Q. Can you help, Mr. Kereakes, about this matter?

2 A. Yes. I would have to agree with the Prosecution --

3 Q. You don't have to, but never mind.

4 A. Well, sir, what I believe -- sometimes when taking statements, you

5 know, the witnesses would throw certain things out there, Oh, by the way

6 so you know the commander of that area is Fatmir Limaj Celiku. I believe

7 what Andreas or Edgar, because I'm not sure who, I believe this is

8 Andreas, what he did here was, he's saying at the time of the detention.

9 Q. Yes, quite.

10 A. Now, I'm sorry, I can't -- that's all I could offer. But I know

11 that if I wrote in there "the commander of the whole area was Fatmir

12 Limaj, Celiku," that's something that the witness A would have thrown out

13 there.

14 Q. Would it?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Because, you see, I appreciate my learned friend's interjection

17 about the date of it. Of course I appreciate it's referring to the time.

18 See, what you say here is -- or rather what the witness is telling you, is

19 that he learnt the name at the time, that is his name. If you look at the

20 later sentence, "from other prisoners I learnt his name and that he was

21 the commander of the whole area."

22 Do you see that?

23 A. I'm not sure where you're at right now.

24 Q. In the same paragraph.

25 A. Okay.

1 Q. Just a couple of sentences further on.

2 A. Okay.

3 Q. "From other prisoners I learned his name." Well, what name?

4 A. I believe he's referring to Fatmir Limaj, Celiku.

5 Q. Both names?

6 A. From my writing it would be Fatmir Limaj, Celiku, yes.

7 Q. Yes, quite. But then apparently according to the writing that is

8 written on later, he didn't know the name Fatmir Limaj in 1998. He only

9 knew the name Celiku in 1998.

10 A. Yes, that's possible. But he was clarifying to me that at that

11 time, when I was taking the statement, that the commander of the whole

12 area was Fatmir Limaj, Celiku. He had already put them together, you

13 know.

14 Q. Well, did you --

15 A. Go ahead, go ahead.

16 Q. Do finish.

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted), you know, I

19 had learned the name from other prisoners as this was Celiku. But when I

20 was taking the statement from him, you know, he turned and he said the

21 commander of the region at that time was, and he gave his full name.

22 Q. How did he know the full name?

23 A. Well, this was two years later.

24 Q. How did he know the full name?

25 A. He had probably either asked people about it, found out from other

1 witnesses.

2 Q. Or did you suggest the name?

3 A. No. I didn't know who Fatmir Limaj was.

4 Q. Oh, yes you did, I suggest.

5 A. No, I didn't.

6 Q. He was one of the main suspects you were being asked to

7 investigate, wasn't he?

8 A. Sir, at the time I took this statement is when I first started

9 with CCIU. I did not know Fatmir Limaj, Celiku. I did not know any of

10 these suspects at all.

11 Q. Now I just want to continue on this theme of the name for the

12 moment. Did you ask this witness why he hadn't mentioned -- now whether

13 it's Celiku or Fatmir Limaj -- or these two instances that he puts in this

14 statement, why he hadn't mentioned this before in the previous statement

15 in 2000?

16 A. Could I review my statement real quick?

17 Q. Yes, certainly.

18 A. There were a lot of questions I had for this particular witness

19 after I read the initial statement by Investigator Birkeland. And once he

20 started talking, I just documented exactly what he was telling me, and I

21 didn't catch it at first, that this name hadn't been mentioned in the

22 first statement.

23 Q. Oh, you wouldn't take long to discover, would you, as an

24 investigator, if it's being done this way, that, in fact, having read and

25 been impressed by his August 2000 statement, that none of this is

1 mentioned in that statement. The one question to test the veracity of

2 your witness is to ask him why he's never mentioned it before. Isn't it?

3 A. That's correct.

4 Q. Yes. So --

5 MR. NICHOLLS: I'm sorry.

6 MR. MANSFIELD: Why didn't you?

7 MR. NICHOLLS: Sorry to interrupt. Can we go into private one

8 second.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Private, Mr. Nicholls.

10 [Private session]

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 5018 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 [Open session]

5 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session.

6 MR. MANSFIELD:

7 Q. Yes, sorry, I won't take up time. I asked you why you hadn't

8 asked the obvious question as to why it hadn't been asked before, and you

9 answered in short form is that you didn't think it was significant.

10 Now I just want to continue, again dealing with this witness who

11 we're calling A for these purposes.

12 Having -- this witness having mentioned the commander of the area,

13 it would be important for you to see if this person was capable of

14 identifying him, wouldn't it?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Right. And that's what you did in one form or another, is it?

17 A. Yes, at a later date.

18 Q. No, no. On this occasion.

19 A. I identified him through the name, but I don't understand your

20 question.

21 Q. The question is: Having brought the name up for the first time,

22 can he actually identify the person he says he's seen twice? Actually

23 look at the pictures and identify him?

24 A. Yes, I did not have pictures at that time.

25 Q. Did you -- you didn't have any pictures of Limaj?

1 A. No.

2 Q. But you did of others?

3 A. Yes. As you can see in the -- in my sub report on the first time,

4 is I had a picture of Isak Musliu, and the reason for that was because he

5 had been mentioned in the first statement. (redacted)

6 (redacted), so I didn't have

7 a photo line-up established yet, which for me to show at that time the

8 witness, witness A, the suspect photo line-up.

9 Q. So when was the photo line-up U-2, in relation to Fatmir Limaj,

10 assembled by somebody who you had asked to do it?

11 A. At a later date.

12 Q. Yes. Please help us. We're only dealing with about a year that

13 you're actually involved in all of this. This interview is in August,

14 2001. How long after that?

15 A. Could I begin looking through a -- my sup report?

16 Q. Yes.

17 JUDGE PARKER: While that is being done, there will be another

18 redaction of the name that was just mentioned.

19 THE WITNESS: My supplemental log which shows the actions to be

20 taken, which says "must identify and create photo line-up for the

21 suspect," I don't see it here.

22 MR. MANSFIELD:

23 Q. All right. Well, I will leave that for the moment.

24 A. Okay.

25 Q. Did you personally, once the line-up was in your possession, show

1 it to this witness A?

2 A. Witness A was never shown Fatmir Limaj by me.

3 Q. You're sure about that?

4 A. I would have to look in my notes, but I believe I wasn't the one

5 who showed him that picture. I'm almost sure that I didn't. Didn't show

6 him that, the photo line-up. I had requested that one be created, but I

7 don't -- I don't believe I had another chance to interview him again in

8 order to show the picture, because then he had entered the protective

9 custody and I had not -- I believe I didn't have the photo line-up yet

10 done, or -- I know I -- it wasn't me that showed it to him.

11 Q. Well, in view of those answers, I would like you to see - and you

12 have it in front of you - another statement that you provided to this

13 Tribunal, for the purposes of this Tribunal, dated 2003. Would you kindly

14 look at that. You have it in a separate bundle, I think, there.

15 A. 2003.

16 Q. You might cross-check it. I think you have it separately detailed

17 there. The one from 2003 which has paragraph numbers in it.

18 A. Yes. Which number?

19 Q. Would you kindly look at paragraph 96. I'm going to take it

20 slowly and carefully to avoid mentioning, again, names in public. Have

21 you got paragraph 96?

22 A. Yes, I do.

23 Q. In this paragraph, vis-a-vis witness A, you say this: "I cannot

24 recall how many witnesses that I personally showed the suspect sheets to,

25 but I do recall showing A," - I leave out the rest - "photographs of

1 Fatmir Limaj."

2 And then in the next paragraph you say: "I recall that A

3 identified Limaj." I leave out the other names.

4 Do you see all that?

5 A. Yes. Yes, I do. And --

6 Q. That's complete nonsense, is it?

7 A. That was a mistake and I can explain what happened.

8 Q. Yes. How did the mistake happen?

9 A. When the ICTY investigators came out to Chicago to interview me, I

10 didn't have my continuation of my sub report with me, so I can refer. I

11 could have sworn that I had shown the picture of Fatmir, but I had made

12 the mistake without looking at my notes and signed that. I shouldn't have

13 done that.

14 Q. Once again, I suggest, if you are right that it's a mistake, it's

15 a pretty serious mistake for you to be making and signing a statement as a

16 police officer, isn't it?

17 A. Yes, it is. I'm not proud of that.

18 Q. On the other hand, of course, you're pretty sure that you did show

19 a photograph of Fatmir Limaj to witness A, aren't you?

20 A. No. I just testified that I don't believe I showed a picture. In

21 order for me to confirm that I'd have to see my supplemental continuation,

22 but I'm almost sure that I had made that mistake about concerning Fatmir

23 Limaj to witness A.

24 Q. You see, what the wording of -- you can see it on the screen, the

25 wording you just told the Tribunal is "I could have sworn that I'd shown

1 the picture of Fatmir." Do you see that?

2 A. At the time.

3 Q. Yes.

4 A. At the time.

5 Q. That's what I'm putting to you.

6 A. Once I went through my supplement continuation report and I looked

7 at it, I saw that, yeah, I had created the suspect photo, I had requested

8 it to be created, I had shown it to a couple of other witnesses, and I

9 couldn't remember -- and I had assumed that, well, witness A, was my first

10 witness. I remember showing him the one photo line-up and I had gotten so

11 routine into showing both suspect photo line-ups to future witnesses I had

12 made the mistake and said, U-2, which was the suspect, I had shown it also

13 to him. And that was a mistake on my part.

14 Q. When did you notice the mistake?

15 A. I noticed the mistake when I came here and I had time to look

16 through all my notes.

17 Q. So in March of this year?

18 A. No. This is the first time I'm -- oh, yes, in March of this year.

19 Q. March of this year.

20 MR. MANSFIELD: Your Honour perhaps we should go into private

21 session, just for the next two questions.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Private.

23 [Private session]

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 5024 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 5025 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 5026 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 5027 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 [Open session]

4 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session.

5 Q. Can I just summarise in public session in relation to a third

6 name, who for these purposes we will just call C, in a statement that you

7 made, you showed him photographs of Fatmir Limaj when he hadn't even

8 mentioned the person, is that right, that's the summary?

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. Now, I want to ask you some further questions about some other

11 individuals. And I want to do it in public as far as possible without

12 mentioning names, so if you could be careful --

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. -- and I will do the same. If you look behind tab 5 - you dealt

15 with this this morning - there is another statement by an individual who

16 is named there. Tab 5, please.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Now, first of all, did you ask this witness -- I will call him

19 tab 5 witness so it is clear on the record. Did you go through all the

20 formalities with this witness, tab 5? The questions that I've put in the

21 past; you know, have you seen him before, can you give me a good

22 description, et cetera, et cetera.

23 A. According to the statement, he knew him. He mentioned him in a

24 statement that he was his commander.

25 Q. Yes. But of course, even if somebody says that, it's important to

1 get a description from the person who says he knows him, isn't it?

2 A. Yes, it is.

3 Q. Because a person's appearance may change?

4 A. Yes, it may.

5 Q. Especially in wartime, if that's what was going on at that time,

6 people may grow beards, they may not have beards, they may have

7 moustaches, they may have very short hair, very long hair, all of that

8 kind of thing. On a face identification matters, doesn't it?

9 A. Yes, it does.

10 Q. Right. Where are the questions?

11 A. Like I said, he said he was his commander so he knew him, so I

12 didn't ask that question. He was under his command. He had taken orders

13 from him, so he said he did know him.

14 Q. Are you following the question?

15 A. Yes, yes.

16 Q. Right. So why didn't you ask him, somebody who claimed to know

17 him, why didn't you ask him some of the basic questions?

18 A. Actually, looking at my statement, I did ask about the other two

19 suspects in this case.

20 Q. Yes, please stick to Fatmir Limaj.

21 A. Yes. And what I did, I forgot to ask -- get a physical

22 description from him concerning --

23 Q. You forgot?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Right.

1 Q. And I'm going to suggest that's not all if what happens in this

2 case, that is tab 5 witness, would you turn to the second page, 1051.

3 Now, all that the statement indicates here is that you showed a photo

4 line-up marked U-2 and that the witness identified number 3. All right?

5 That's what the statement -- your statement says.

6 A. That's correct.

7 Q. Sorry, to be more precise, the statement that is taken from tab 5

8 witness.

9 Now, the first question is: What happened to the U-2 line-up?

10 A. Are you saying what I do with the line-up afterwards?

11 Q. Yes, yes.

12 A. Is I attach it to the statement -- or first I have the witness

13 circle it, circle the number, sign it, then I would attach it to the

14 statement.

15 Q. Right. You're sure?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Have you been asked yourself, when you got here, about where it

18 might be?

19 A. Yes, I have.

20 Q. You appreciate that it's not available now, don't you?

21 A. No, I don't appreciate it.

22 Q. Oh, sorry. Bad use of English as opposed to American. You

23 understand that it's not available.

24 A. Yes, I do understand.

25 Q. I'm sure you don't appreciate it.

1 A. No, I don't.

2 Q. No, right. I understand what you mean. Are you aware that when

3 another set of officers took over the investigation from you and still

4 later the whole investigation was handed over -- you know that's what

5 happened?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. You know that much. No one, no one has ever found a version of

8 the U-2 line-up in which Fatmir Limaj appears at position 3. Can you help

9 us with that?

10 A. The only thing I could think of is, you know, this -- this case

11 had been copied and maybe that that piece of paper was lost. That's the

12 only explanation I have. I know if I had written in my notes that I

13 displayed them and he identified them as number 3, it was always my

14 procedure to then inventory it with the statement.

15 Q. Right. Now, you would be stapling the photo line-up to the

16 English version or the Albanian version?

17 A. Actually I would use a paper clip and I would put -- I would

18 either staple or paper clip and I would put the Albanian version, the

19 English version, and the photo line-up together in a binder.

20 Q. Were they stapled?

21 A. Sometimes I stapled. Sometimes I used paper clips.

22 Q. Because if they were stapled, the originals would have the staple

23 marks, wouldn't they?

24 A. They could, yes.

25 Q. Hmm. Have you looked at the originals?

1 A. The original statement or -- the original witness statement or the

2 original suspect photo line-up?

3 Q. Both, actually.

4 A. Oh, because the original -- no I haven't seen originals. I've

5 just been handed copies. But at one time I had seen the originals.

6 Q. Yes, all right. See, so it's clear again where I'm going, this

7 isn't the only instance of this. We'll come to another one where it just

8 doesn't seem to be in existence anymore. You can't help about this at

9 all, is that the position?

10 A. I wish I could. I know that they were there. I wouldn't have --

11 I wouldn't have created a suspect photo line-up and per the directions of

12 the Prosecutor at the time he had us circle the number of the -- had the

13 witness circle the number of the suspect, sign it, and then we would

14 inventory it along with the -- with the original witness report. And the

15 translated copies.

16 Q. Now, looking at the witness's statement, tab 5 witness, has this

17 tab 5 witness actually -- as opposed to yourself and another witness --

18 has he signed or initialled this statement, either the English version or

19 the Albanian version which you have attached to it in this copy?

20 A. I see a signature on the back page of 0323-1054, but I was not

21 present for this signing.

22 Q. So on 1054, you're pointing, are you, to the -- an apparent

23 signature in the top left-hand corner, is that it?

24 A. Yes. I'm not sure whose that is.

25 Q. See, looking --

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 MR. NICHOLLS: If I could assist counsel, the same signature

2 appears on 1052 in the place which appears to be signature in the

3 declaration, if one looks at the English as well.

4 MR. MANSFIELD:

5 Q. The signature, if that is the signature of the witness, I think

6 what you just said was, you're not present when the statement is signed.

7 A. That is correct.

8 Q. So when is it signed by the witness?

9 A. Once we have it translated from English to Albanian, he's then

10 called in to come in and sign the statement.

11 Q. Now, that's -- that particular witness, I want to give you another

12 example, which is tab 6, please.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Again I'm going to call it, this one, the tab 6 witness. It will

15 take a little longer. Now, the tab 6 witness gives a relatively lengthy

16 statement, as you can see. And in the statement, in describing things

17 that happened, he does not mention the name Fatmir Limaj in the body of

18 the statement. Does he? Check it if you wish.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Once again, I'm going to ask you how this witness managed to come

21 up with the name. If you look at 1251 - your attention was directed to

22 this earlier on - there is the passage where a photo line-up apparently

23 relating to Limaj was shown to him.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. I just want to take out -- take you to the sentences before we get

1 to that. Do you see the question which is apparently from you: "How did

2 you figure out the commander Celiku was Fatmir Limaj?"

3 Do you see that?

4 A. Yes, I do.

5 Q. Right. Now, if you look -- if you keep your finger in that page

6 and turn to 1261, is that question I've just posed to you "how did you

7 figure out the commander Celiku," do you see that?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Is that your writing?

10 A. Yes, it is.

11 Q. Right. Now, this is a question, in your writing, posed therefore

12 on the date of this statement, was it, in January 2002?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. You certainly knew about Fatmir Limaj by then, didn't you?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Right. Where on earth in this statement or anywhere does he say

17 prior to this question that he has figured out that Celiku is Fatmir

18 Limaj?

19 A. Could I take a second to review the statement?

20 Q. Certainly.

21 A. Thank you. If you look at 0323-1250 --

22 Q. Yes.

23 A. -- he mentions Celiku in the statement, at the bottom.

24 Q. Sorry, on 1251 --

25 A. 1250.

1 Q. Sorry, sorry.

2 A. 0323-1250.

3 Q. Yes.

4 A. Okay. Should I read for you?

5 Q. Yes, please.

6 A. Okay. "As we were walking along, we came to a crossroad where a

7 car pulled up. In this white car a person exit and walks towards us.

8 I described that person as dressed in a green uniform with a pistol at his

9 side, broad face, brown hair, was not wearing" --

10 Q. I'm sorry. I am asked to ask you if you wouldn't mind slowing

11 down because --

12 A. Oh, yes. Yes.

13 Q. It's being translated. I think we're all following the passage

14 on 1250. Yes?

15 A. I heard him tell Shala to tell prisoners to sit down. This is how

16 I found out he was a commander. The commander told Shala at this time. I

17 still did not know this UCK commander's name.

18 Q. All right. Let's just pause there. When you were taking this

19 statement in February -- I'm so sorry, January 2002, he told you that

20 whoever the person was, a commander at that stage, and of course there is

21 more than one commander in this whole business, isn't there?

22 A. Yes, there is.

23 Q. So it could be anybody, couldn't it?

24 A. Well, it could be either the commander of the prison, it could be

25 the commander of the region, or it could be the commander of the UCK

1 police, yes.

2 Q. Yes, so it could be anybody.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And he's telling you, "at this time." What did you understand him

5 to mean by "this time"?

6 A. Meaning at the -- during his detention.

7 Q. Right. "I still do not know this UCK commander's name". I

8 suggest he's telling you that he still didn't know the name of the

9 commander.

10 A. No, no, no. No, no. That's not --

11 Q. So --

12 A. Meaning at this time, when the action -- look at the action before

13 that.

14 Q. Yes.

15 A. You've got a guy giving orders, right? And he's saying "at this

16 time." This time. Not meaning present tense when I'm taking the

17 statement. He's describing something that happened to him -- I'm sorry,

18 I'm going too fast but -- he's describing something that happened to him

19 at the detention centre. We're not talking about what he was doing in his

20 house at that particular moment. We're talking present tense. He said,

21 At that time --

22 Q. But it doesn't say that, you see. It says "at this time, not "at

23 that time."

24 A. No. Mine says: "At this time I still do not know this UCK

25 commander's name."

1 Q. Yes, right. Well, for these purposes, it doesn't matter whether

2 it's referring to 1998 or referring to the time of the statement. Where

3 does he tell you that this person who's a commander, one was Celiku and

4 two was Fatmir Limaj?

5 A. When I asked him the question at the end of the interview.

6 Q. Quite. I think you have the point, do you, Mr. Kereakes?

7 A. Yes. But --

8 Q. Yes.

9 A. I would like you to -- I would like to explain that a little more,

10 if I could.

11 Q. Certainly. I will allow you to do so, certainly. I don't want to

12 cut you off.

13 What has happened here, you will see on this page, is that the

14 sentence, or part sentence - I think it is a whole sentence - "at this

15 time I still do not know this UCK's commander's name," has been crossed

16 out. Did you cross it out?

17 A. No, I did not.

18 Q. And what appears - I hope you will follow me here - is that when

19 this statement is checked over later on in 2002 by another officer whose

20 initial is M, 1402, he crosses that out and he writes in "Fatmir Limaj" in

21 the margin and signs it. Do you see that?

22 A. I see -- yes.

23 Q. So none of that, that's the crossing out and the name, Fatmir

24 Limaj, in the margin, would have been there in January 2002, would it?

25 A. That's correct.

1 Q. Right. So in the body of the statement, as I was putting to you,

2 there is no indication of the name Fatmir Limaj, nor the name Celiku,

3 being the same as Fatmir Limaj, at least on that page, when you took it in

4 January. Let's turn over.

5 1251, a separate incident right at the end, there was a piece of

6 paper, and there was a commander's signature, he claimed on it, with the

7 name Celiku. Now, that too is not a paragraph in which he says, Celiku

8 was the commander who I'd seen earlier on and is the commander known as

9 Limaj. Is there?

10 A. No.

11 Q. No. So how did you know, before you worked -- you came to the

12 question -- how did you know that he had figured out that commander Celiku

13 was Fatmir Limaj?

14 A. Well, there was a name Celiku on a piece of paper, he said that

15 there was a commander earlier. So I asked him the question and how he had

16 figured it was Fatmir Limaj.

17 Q. Please, Mr. Kereakes. These are very simple questions.

18 A. Maybe I could explain.

19 Q. Well, just answer the question, then you can explain.

20 How, how was it that you had thought that he had figured out that

21 Commander Celiku was Fatmir Limaj?

22 A. I believe what happened is, when you're translating from Albanian

23 to German, and then German to English, the question that I asked or when I

24 was writing it down, that a lot of it was lost, could have been lost in

25 the translation. So that's what I believed, that while I was trying to

1 clarify, you know, how was this commander -- how did you find out who it

2 was, you know, and what had happened is, part of it could have been lost

3 in the translation, and what I was trying to show at the time was, You had

4 received the name Celiku and there was a commander earlier, how did you

5 figure out that it was Fatmir Limaj.

6 Q. Where is your record, in English, of all of this?

7 A. It's 0323-1252.

8 Q. Yes. And if we read that, the record in English does not suggest

9 typed or written, that any such questions were asked which might explain

10 it in the way you suggest. Do you follow?

11 A. Yes, I do.

12 Q. Right. Why not?

13 A. Because that could have been a mistake on my part.

14 Q. Another one?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Just how many mistakes?

17 A. Like I said, when you're translating from a different language --

18 Q. No, no, no.

19 A. -- it's possible that a lot of it was lost in the translation.

20 Q. Sorry. Nothing to do with lost in translation. Do you follow me?

21 This is to do with the questions you ask in English that have to be

22 translated, you write them down so there is a record of how often did you

23 see him, what were the circumstances, what's the full description, have

24 you seen him before, are you able to recognise, how did you work out, all

25 of that. You know, very simple questions. Where is that record in

1 English?

2 A. I thought that one question that was sufficient enough to show

3 that he had identified Celiku, who he was.

4 Q. Or is it a case that you were desperate to get Fatmir Limaj

5 identified at all costs?

6 A. I wasn't desperate to get anyone.

7 Q. Oh, no?

8 A. No. Not at all.

9 Q. Well, I want to pause for a moment and ask you about that. Do you

10 know somebody called Gani Imeri [phoen]?

11 A. Yes, I do.

12 Q. Right.

13 MR. NICHOLLS: I'm sorry, at one point the witness wanted to

14 explain about a line being crossed out.

15 MR. MANSFIELD: Certainly, yes.

16 MR. NICHOLLS: And Mr. Mansfield said he was going to let him come

17 back to that. I don't know if we're moving on.

18 MR. MANSFIELD: I was because there's a supplementary statement,

19 but I will do it now.

20 Q. Before we pass on to that name I've just put to you, can you

21 explain, therefore, the line that's been crossed out, the name Fatmir

22 Limaj added later, the explanation for your question about how he had

23 worked out that Celiku was Limaj. What's the explanation you wish to

24 give?

25 A. Why they crossed it out is maybe they're assuming that there was a

1 mistake in there, why the other detectives, the future detectives, crossed

2 that line. I don't know why they did that.

3 At that time, when I wrote -- let me go back to that. When I

4 wrote what the witness had stated "at this time I still did not know the

5 UCK commander's name," meaning at the time of the incident. That's what I

6 wanted to explain. He didn't know the commander's name. He had given the

7 piece of paper with Celiku on, right there and, you know, it was an

8 oversight on my part. How did you figure out -- or how did you figure out

9 that Commander Celiku was Fatmir Limaj. He's saying, In the prison I

10 heard the name Celiku and other prisoners mentioned that it was Fatmir

11 Limaj.

12 If he had heard the name Fatmir Limaj in prison, right, and then

13 later he is given a sheet of paper that says Celiku on it, you know he had

14 already heard of different prisoners who it was or had heard that name,

15 it's reasonable to think he would put them together. He is given a sheet

16 of paper from him saying Celiku on it, and later he remembered, you know,

17 that it was Fatmir Limaj. That's --

18 Q. It would have been so straightforward, if that's the explanation,

19 for him to have said, on page 1250, At the time I didn't know it, but I

20 learned the name from other prisoners, and it was Commander Celiku or

21 Fatmir Limaj who came up. It would have been so simple, wouldn't it?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Yes. And he didn't.

24 A. No. But he still continued telling history about that part.

25 Q. Hmm.

1 A. He said, At this time I still do not know this UCK commander's

2 name. Meaning at this time, during the incident, during the chain of

3 events he did not know. But then, you know, a little bit later he is

4 given a piece of paper that says Celiku on there, and he had also stated

5 in there he had heard people's name mentioned that, that was Fatmir Limaj,

6 the commander.

7 Q. That's only telling you after you put the question, how did you

8 figure out. It's only after that he gives you a description that he

9 claims that he'd heard the name Celiku and other people saying it was

10 Fatmir Limaj in the prison. It's only then?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Yes.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. I'm suggesting to you, I hope clearly, that you were desperate to

15 get Fatmir Limaj identified and you don't agree.

16 A. No. I was not desperate to --

17 Q. Right. That's why I wanted to ask you about a name Gani Imeri.

18 You do remember that name?

19 A. Yes, I do.

20 Q. Yes. He was detained by you and others for a considerable period

21 of time, wasn't he?

22 A. Yes, he was. Now when you say by "you and others," are you

23 meaning that CCIU kept them in some office locked up? No, it was by the

24 court after the arrest was made.

25 Q. Was he charged?

1 A. Yes. Charges were brought against him.

2 Q. Were they proceeded with?

3 A. I believe that they were proceeded with and then later dropped.

4 Q. Dropped? He was in detention for a considerable period of time,

5 wasn't he?

6 A. I don't remember the amount of time exactly.

7 Q. In very difficult circumstances. Wasn't he? Physical

8 circumstances.

9 A. As far as the condition of the gaols, you mean?

10 Q. Yes. No heating. No hot shower for six months. All meals are

11 eaten in darkness. The light in his cell turned off. Did you know about

12 any of this?

13 A. No, I did not. I wasn't ever visiting the detention centres where

14 they were detained.

15 Q. But you did have occasion to speak to him from time to time?

16 A. I believe I saw him once after, in an interview room, at which

17 time he said that he wanted to give the names of the others that were

18 involved in the kidnappings.

19 Q. Oh, right. Now we're getting close to it. I want to -- I'm not

20 able to -- well, I'm able to suggest that -- or I want to ask, first of

21 all, is there any other American or a person wearing an American uniform

22 in Kosovo who had a Greek name involved in all of this? CCIU, I mean

23 obviously.

24 A. No.

25 Q. No. Because that's the description. And did you on one occasion

1 go and visit this person with an Austrian officer, police officer?

2 A. I would have to see my notes on this. I know that a interview was

3 conducted after the arrest, but I'm not sure at that time frame of -- did

4 I go see him. I believe I saw him one more time, but I don't can't

5 remember if I did or not, or was that the initial interview after he was

6 placed under arrest.

7 Q. No, later.

8 A. Oh, on that later would be -- as soon as he was placed under

9 arrest I know that I conducted an interview in Mitrovica with him.

10 Q. What I want to suggest to you is that during that interview, you

11 were anxious to get a statement from him which named Fatmir Limaj and that

12 you were indicating to him that if he cooperated, all sorts of privileges,

13 as opposed to detention, might be offered to him, a change of identity, a

14 new location for his family, and so forth. Do you remember all of that?

15 A. No, I don't remember that. I remember that, on that particular

16 case -- because it was a different region than Fatmir Limaj's area of

17 responsibility. And I do recall that we did offer him to enter the

18 witness protection programme if he was willing to testify on any other

19 type of war crimes or if any other suspects in the case, that it would all

20 be taken into consideration.

21 Q. You see, I think just to remind you, he was a commander in the KLA

22 of a battalion in Brigade 141. Do you remember?

23 A. Yes, I do remember that. But I believe he became a commander

24 after the newly formed -- from the KLA when it went to the TMK.

25 Q. Yes.

1 A. Right? But I believe during conflict that he wasn't a commander.

2 Q. Now, what you wanted from him, do you agree, is information and so

3 forth which may become evidence about Fatmir Limaj, didn't you?

4 A. No, I didn't.

5 Q. Do you say his name never came up?

6 A. No, it didn't.

7 Q. Did you keep notes of the interviews with him, this particular

8 individual?

9 A. Yes. Or it would be in a statement, yes.

10 Q. It would be in a statement?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. So on your account, he was offered what you call witness

13 protection, was he?

14 A. Concerning the case he was --

15 Q. Yes?

16 A. He told me he was scared to give up the names of the other

17 suspects that were involved in the kidnapping of the Serbs and we said at

18 this time that we could offer him protection.

19 Q. And I suggest all of that was happening in the context of Fatmir

20 Limaj, wasn't it?

21 A. No, it wasn't.

22 Q. No?

23 A. No.

24 Q. And I just want to ask you about some other names in the same

25 context.

1 Did you ask him about Hasim Thaqi?

2 A. I asked him if he was -- if knew who he was.

3 Q. So but not Limaj?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Haradinaj?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Not asked at all?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Selimi?

10 A. No. He brought up the name Hashim Thaqi.

11 Q. In the end, I suggest, this particular witness was offered removal

12 to anywhere in the world if he wanted it, provided he came up with

13 material about Fatmir Limaj.

14 A. That is not true.

15 Q. And what has happened in this case -- can I just summarise, it as

16 far as you're concerned -- is you're a police officer from America whose

17 main experience has been inside a housing estate, street crime. Suddenly

18 you find yourself dealing with war crimes. Would that be fair?

19 A. That is fair.

20 Q. Yes. And you were out of your depth, weren't you?

21 A. No. I don't believe I was.

22 Q. And nobody was really supervising what you were doing, were they?

23 A. Yes, they were.

24 Q. Who?

25 A. International Prosecutor would guide me on a case, would also like

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 look at the case, would want certain things done.

2 Q. If that's the case, I just ask you this: Did the International

3 Prosecutor, whoever it was, ever point out to you that in fact your

4 methods and your approach to identification was seriously flawed?

5 A. No.

6 Q. On no occasion?

7 A. No.

8 MR. MANSFIELD: Thank you.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Mansfield.

10 Mr. Guy-Smith.

11 Cross-examined by Mr. Guy-Smith:

12 Q. Good afternoon.

13 A. Good afternoon.

14 Q. I'm Gregor Guy-Smith with Mr. Richard Harvey here. I represent

15 Haradin Bala.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. I think we will understand each other. I come from

18 San Francisco.

19 A. I still may not understand the California.

20 Q. Let's see how we do here, all right?

21 A. Let's try it.

22 Q. When you first became involved in police work, you were, at what

23 university?

24 A. Loyola University.

25 Q. Do you know of a place in that area called Northwestern?

1 A. Yes, I do.

2 Q. Where is that? Is that close to where you were?

3 A. I'd say it's about, let's see, Loyola is in Rogers Park and

4 Evanston is on -- Northwestern is in Evanston, maybe five miles. Five

5 miles north.

6 Q. And Northwestern, did you ever have any dealings with the centre

7 that they have there, the law school on wrongful convictions?

8 A. No, I did not.

9 Q. During the time that you were getting your training as a police

10 officer, did that issue ever come up?

11 A. Wrongful convictions?

12 Q. Yes.

13 A. In my arrests?

14 Q. No. Just generally, as a topic of something that you needed to be

15 concerned about as a police officer.

16 A. At the police academy?

17 Q. Yes.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Okay. Now, before you got involved at the police academy, you

20 also were taking courses in psychology; correct?

21 A. Yeah, that's correct.

22 Q. And what's psychology, the study of the mind?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And in that particular field, you learned about various factors

25 that could influence the way an individual would act; right?

1 A. I wasn't taking anything related to any type of criminal applied

2 psychology or anything like that.

3 Q. I appreciate that. But it's one of the things you learned about

4 in psychology.

5 A. I had just started my Psych 101 class. I just started the major,

6 so I hadn't really gotten that deep into how, you know, certain aspects of

7 psychology can get into -- affect the mind or ways that I could do it, no.

8 Q. Okay. But when you were at the police academy, one of the things

9 that you learned about was various investigative techniques when you were

10 talking to witnesses; right?

11 A. Yes. I was taught various investigative techniques, yes.

12 Q. Everybody is.

13 A. Yes, yes.

14 Q. I mean, that is standard practice whether you're in Chicago,

15 San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York. It doesn't make any difference.

16 A. That's correct.

17 Q. There are a series of guidelines that exist for that stuff all

18 over the United States.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Some of it promulgated by something that's called -- I think it's

21 the Department of Justice?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. That's some of the information that you study when you're at the

24 police academy?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. The DOJ [realtime transcript read in error "OJ"] procedures as

2 they're called?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. You also, I think, you studied various particular issues that

5 exist with such things as gangs.

6 Q. That's DOJ procedures, not OJ.

7 All right. You also dealt with such things as gangs; right?

8 A. That is correct.

9 Q. When you started off in your career as a police officer, you were

10 involved with Chicago housing authority; right?

11 A. That's correct.

12 Q. Chicago housing authority deals with projects?

13 A. That's correct.

14 Q. Those are closed communities?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Those are communities that have folks who are pretty suspicious in

17 it; right?

18 A. Well, I wouldn't generalise and say that all the folks.

19 Q. Not all the folks, but --

20 A. No. But there is criminal element just like this is in the rest

21 of the society.

22 Q. With regard to the gang issue, the people who are either part of

23 gangs or who are suspected of being a part of crimes, they're a pretty

24 tight community, aren't they?

25 A. Gangs overall are a pretty community, whether it could be in the

1 west side of Chicago or in public housing, so yes.

2 Q. When you were in public housing -- that's what I'm dealing with

3 for the moment.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Because you were dealing with gangs; right?

6 A. That is correct.

7 Q. And you were specifically dealing with the culture of gangs;

8 correct?

9 A. That is correct.

10 Q. And you learned both on the street as well as when you were at the

11 police academy, a series of investigative techniques in terms of dealing

12 with gangs.

13 A. That's correct.

14 Q. And what I'm talking about is, more specifically, you learned how

15 to deal with closed communities; right?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Now, in the gangs that you dealt with back in Chicago, one of the

18 things, there was an attribute of those gangs -- some of those folks had

19 monikers, nicknames; right?

20 A. That's correct.

21 Q. And the gangs in the housing projects, most of the people you're

22 dealing with, they weren't white now, were they?

23 A. It depended on public housing, which one I was working. For

24 example, on the south side, Lathorp did have whites in it. But overall,

25 the higher percentage were African Americans.

1 Q. Okay. Now, one of the issues that was of a constant source of

2 concern to you in dealing with your investigation back then, before you

3 got over the strange and curious land of the former Yugoslavia, a place

4 that you never knew about, was issues concerning identification; right?

5 A. That's correct.

6 Q. And you had to be pretty careful about the identification

7 procedures that you dealt with when you were out on the street. True?

8 A. That is correct.

9 Q. As well as the identification procedures that you dealt with when

10 you were trying to identify suspects, witnesses, or anybody else; right?

11 A. That is correct.

12 Q. You learned at the police academy a procedure for doing that?

13 A. That is correct.

14 Q. During the time that you were learning that procedure, you were

15 aware, as were police officers all across the United States, of the number

16 of convictions that were obtained through wrong eyewitness identification.

17 Weren't you?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. That was a pretty big issue when you were in the police academy,

20 wasn't it?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. As a matter of fact, there were a series of cases you probably

23 even discussed one of them in your academy, a case Neil versus Biggers?

24 A. I vaguely remember it.

25 Q. And one of the things you learned about was how important it was

1 to have a fair, neutral identification process.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. There's no doubt about that, is there?

4 A. No, there isn't.

5 Q. You went through the series of components about what would be

6 fair, didn't you?

7 A. Yes, I did.

8 Q. You were told by your training officers years ago what a

9 standard -- we're talking about a standard not even of excellence but what

10 a standard of minimum guarantees were, weren't you?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And those guarantees are the guarantees that you just discussed

13 with Mr. Mansfield.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Okay. Now, among other things --

16 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters request the speakers not to

17 overlap with each other, please.

18 MR. GUY-SMITH:

19 Q. Was also the way of conducting an investigation; right?

20 A. Was also the way of conducting --

21 Q. Conducting an investigation; right?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And I'm sure one of the things you were taught in Chicago, the

24 same way you are taught it all over the United States, is that you were

25 taught the importance of memorialising each and every important and

1 critical detail involved in the investigation.

2 A. That is correct.

3 Q. As a matter of fact, you were probably given something in terms of

4 sheets that you could use and they were called maybe same as in Chicago

5 other places as in the United States, they're called chronos?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Stands for chronological; right?

8 A. Yes, correct.

9 Q. When you're supposed to do when you're using a chrono, is it not,

10 is you're supposed to write down the date and the time that you have

11 contact with regard to the particular investigation you're involved in;

12 right?

13 A. That is correct.

14 Q. And you're supposed to put in that particular piece of information

15 on that chrono, all of the important stuff that is -- that occurs; right?

16 A. That is correct.

17 Q. People you meet?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Things that they say?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. How they've said it?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. What other leads you get?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And what your impressions are?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. That doesn't deviate from one place to another, does it?

3 A. No.

4 Q. These are some of the things that you were armed with when you

5 went to Kosovo; correct?

6 A. That is correct.

7 Q. This is not something that was new to you, was it?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Okay. In terms of dealing with your investigative techniques, it

10 was important, when you were back in the police academy, not when you got

11 on the street, but when you were back in the police academy, it was

12 important that all details were memorialised, including, for example, when

13 you received negative information. Do you follow me?

14 A. Yes, yes.

15 Q. And if you received information that, for example, an individual

16 wasn't involved, that was something you're supposed to write down.

17 A. That's correct.

18 Q. If you received information that an individual wasn't identified,

19 that was something you were supposed to memorialise; correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. As a matter of fact, when you're dealing with it from the

22 standpoint of photo line-ups or photo spreads, as I think we call them;

23 right?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. I'm sure you appreciate that, don't you?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Okay. When you're dealing with photo spreads, whenever an

3 individual looks at a photo spread, whether or not there is a positive

4 identification, a negative identification, or no identification, what

5 you're supposed to do is you're supposed to have them sign it?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Date it?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Get the time that that occurred?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. So you have in the entirety of the package, the information that

12 you're going to give to the Prosecutor, all of the things that occurred.

13 A. That is correct.

14 Q. So there's a full and complete dossier.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Although we wouldn't call it a dossier, would we?

17 A. No.

18 Q. We would use another word.

19 That was something you knew before you went to Kosovo?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Now you said yesterday that when you showed somebody a photo

22 spread, that was I guess in Kosovo and they didn't identify anybody, you

23 did nothing. That's what you said yesterday; do you remember that?

24 A. No. I believe I also stated that I would document it in my notes,

25 saying that suspect -- or witness was not able to identify any suspect in

1 that case.

2 Q. Yes.

3 A. And there are several instances of that in there.

4 Q. But you didn't do what we just talked about a second ago, did

5 you? You didn't have them sign that document, did you, that photo

6 spread. You didn't have them do that?

7 A. I had them sign it only when they identified someone.

8 Q. That's not my question.

9 A. But I did inventory the photo line-up that I had used. That would

10 be attached to the statement, although I did not have him sign it if he

11 didn't recognise anyone, that is true.

12 Q. Why not? If that was something you learned back in the police

13 academy, if that was something you were doing in the United States, if

14 that was something that you knew was -- and remember, we're not talking

15 about the standard of excellence now, we're talking about minimal

16 procedures, and now you're over in this other place where you're dealing

17 with war crimes, why wouldn't you do that?

18 A. When I first got to CCIU there was different procedures in tact at

19 the time on how we were going to do the photo spreads, as you call it.

20 There was -- at that time they wanted us, the International Prosecutor

21 under the case -- because they kept telling us we're dealing with

22 Yugoslavian law, okay? And the procedures that they only wanted -- like

23 was to circle the number, sign it and put it in; if he didn't identify

24 anyone, just have the attachment with the case report and put in your

25 notes or in the statement that, you know, witness was not able to identify

1 a suspect.

2 See, with each Prosecutor we were dealing or each case or each

3 commander that would come in, there was always maybe a different set of

4 rules. And that was happening and the reason for that was because you

5 had, you know, 50 different police forces coming from all over the world

6 working together under Yugoslavian law, and that's what we were told, at

7 the time you're working under Yugoslavian law.

8 Q. Do you consider yourself to be a pretty good cop, don't you?

9 A. I try to be.

10 Q. You pride yourself in your work; right?

11 A. I try to.

12 Q. And you learned a standard of behaviour as you talked about a

13 second ago working on the streets in Chicago dealing with closed

14 communities, so you had some expertise with regard to being involved in

15 difficult situations, and are you telling us that what you did you didn't

16 follow what you considered, yourself, to be minimal standards, because it

17 was too confusing because there were police officers from all over the

18 world?

19 A. No. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying there was different

20 guidelines at that time concerning the photo spreads at CCIU. At that

21 time, they required us to just take those pictures, circle them, and

22 which -- that's what I did. That's what I followed, you know, per my

23 training officer at that time --

24 Q. And who was that?

25 A. From the RUC, Robin Hodgkins.

1 Q. And tell us specifically if you can what was the protocol that

2 Robin Hodgkins from the RUC gave you with regard to the use of photo

3 spreads.

4 A. At that time we were told to bring in the witness, into a room.

5 Have the photo spread already placed on the table, do not say anything.

6 Ask him to look through all of the pictures, take his time. And at that

7 time go ahead and circle the number and sign it, if he identified anyone.

8 If he didn't identify anyone, take the photo line-up that you

9 showed and place it in a -- along with the statement and make some

10 comments on your sup report saying that he did not identify anyone.

11 Q. Now, during your investigation, did you show any photo spreads of

12 Mr. Bala?

13 A. No, I did not.

14 Q. Now, I'm a bit confused here. Maybe you can help me out. Being a

15 police officer, I assume that one of the things that you do is you're

16 pretty careful about what you sign your name to; right?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. As a matter of fact, that's something you know is really

19 important?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Because as a matter of fact, the information that you give to

22 prosecuting authorities is something they're going to rely on; right?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. So you're real careful before you commit to anything?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. And that's something you've been doing for years?

2 A. That is correct.

3 Q. That is not something which is new to you, is it?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Strange?

6 A. No.

7 Q. It's not something which was different, for example, in Kosovo

8 than it was when you were in Chicago, was it?

9 A. That is correct.

10 Q. And incidentally when you trained -- you said to us that you

11 trained police officers; right?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And do you train police officers in the use of identification

14 techniques?

15 A. No.

16 Q. What do you train them in?

17 A. Street survival, firearms.

18 Q. And as a matter of fact, the work that you're doing right now

19 which -- you're a bodyguard?

20 A. Close protection.

21 Q. I'm sorry?

22 A. Close protection.

23 Q. Well, yes, you're a bodyguard. You're guarding people; right?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. I mean close, far away, you're a bodyguard?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Well, when you were involved -- when you were involved in -- in

3 the interviews with folks in the ICTY, some of whom who were your buddies,

4 and you were going over your statement --

5 A. No, that's not true.

6 Q. Okay.

7 A. I didn't know any of the ICTY investigators from -- that have ever

8 interviewed them. I have never had a relationship with them. We were

9 never in CCIU together with the ones that there were on this case.

10 Q. Did you have contact with them?

11 A. I'm sorry.

12 Q. You had some contact with them, right. I mean for example, Ole.

13 You know Ole; right? Ole Lehtinen.

14 A. No. I met Ole here in, at The Hague. I remember I had seen him

15 once -- I'm pretty good with faces bad with names, but I never had any

16 personal contact with him at all.

17 Q. Written contact with him?

18 A. Not with Ole, no.

19 Q. Really?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Well, when you were working up your statement and you came to this

22 point about who you had showed suspect sheets to, the information that you

23 just spoke about with Mr. Mansfield?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. You said, and now I'm not going to deal with Mr. Limaj and I'm not

1 going to deal with Mr. Musliu. I'm only dealing with Mr. Bala, okay?

2 A. That's correct.

3 Q. You said: "I cannot recall how many witnesses that I personally

4 showed the suspect sheets to, but I do recall showing" -- I will use the

5 same name, witness A, "we also talked about another witness."

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. "And we also talked about Zeledin" [phoen]; right?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Photos of Haradin Bala?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. That's what you said?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Well, that wasn't true.

14 A. No. That was a mistake I made.

15 Q. Well, before we get to whether it was a mistake you made or not.

16 It wasn't true.

17 A. That's true.

18 Q. Now, you then said, this is paragraph 97 --

19 A. Can I look at it?

20 Q. Absolutely. If you've got it there, yes. It's your witness

21 statement. Have you got the witness statement there? Your witness

22 statement. I believe it is in your binder. 2003. Paragraph 97.

23 MR. GUY-SMITH: Can we go into private session just for one moment

24 so the record is clear.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Private.

1 [Private session]

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 [Open session]

8 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session.

9 MR. GUY-SMITH:

10 Q. On 97 you say: "I recall that witness A identified Bala."

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Right?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And that wasn't true?

15 A. That is true.

16 Q. Now, you told us that the reason that you made these mistakes was

17 because you didn't have documents with you. You didn't have stuff to

18 review.

19 A. That's correct.

20 Q. Well, as a police officer with some experience, as a police

21 officer who knows the importance of a statement, could you explain why you

22 didn't require a full review of the case that you'd been involved in,

23 before you made as bold a statement - because this is a pretty bold

24 statement here - not only do you have these witnesses being shown photo

25 spreads that you never showed them, but you have a witness identifying my

1 client which never happened.

2 A. Yes. That's true.

3 Q. Well, as a police officer or one who exercises great care in terms

4 of putting an investigation together, how could you let that occur?

5 A. Because I was relying on my memory, unfortunately, and it didn't

6 serve me right that day.

7 Q. And we're to rely on your memory with regards to the other matters

8 that you've told us about here today to the extent that you haven't got

9 them documented, we're supposed to rely on your memory?

10 A. Which particular ones are you talking about?

11 Q. Well, I'm not going to get involved in the conversation you just

12 had with Mr. Mansfield. But there were a number of occasions when we have

13 to rely on your memory again, don't we?

14 A. That is correct.

15 Q. Now, do you remember when you were putting -- and I understand you

16 did not put the photo spreads together yourself personally. But do you

17 remember whether or not, during the period of time that you were doing the

18 placement of the photographs, whether or not -- because you mentioned that

19 you would use more than one form for a photo spread?

20 A. Yes, that's correct.

21 Q. Do you recall whether or not you put the individual who you

22 believed to be the suspect in any particular position consistently, for

23 example, positions 2 and 4?

24 A. I would switch them around, but I can't recall exactly which one I

25 had them in.

1 Q. But you keep them in two positions? Or would you go to any

2 position at all on the photo spread?

3 A. No. I had switched I believe two, three, different positions.

4 Q. Okay. But you kept them in that regard consistently?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And did you have -- did you have a chart that you used so that you

7 said that you were going to use a photo spread, for example, A, of

8 suspect A, with this witness. And photo spread B, of suspect A, with the

9 second witness?

10 A. No, I didn't.

11 Q. Did you have some kind of chart for that?

12 A. No, I didn't.

13 Q. So there was a way of making a determination in case the paper

14 clip slipped off?

15 A. No, I didn't.

16 Q. Or in case the stapler came loose?

17 A. No.

18 Q. So there was some way of making a determination what went with

19 what?

20 A. No.

21 JUDGE PARKER: Is that a convenient time?

22 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure.

23 JUDGE PARKER: I waited to see whether you were going to rush

24 straight into something.

25 MR. GUY-SMITH: No, no. I was actually thinking about rushing

1 into something.

2 JUDGE PARKER: Let's break for half an hour. So we will resume on

3 the hour.

4 --- Recess taken at 12.29 p.m.

5 --- On resuming at 1.04 p.m.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.

7 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes. With your permission, I am going to try to

8 finish my examination by 1.15. In the event that I cannot, I am going to

9 ask that my examination be truncated and Mr. Topolski can proceed because

10 he cannot be here on Monday, if I have Court's permission to do that. I

11 will try to get it done in any event.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Just move along quickly.

13 MR. GUY-SMITH: I shall. I shall.

14 Q. You indicated that you were involved when you were in Kosovo in

15 actually investigating war crimes.

16 A. That's correct.

17 Q. Now, I would like to ask you whether or not you were involved --

18 you personally were involved in investigation of war crimes concerning

19 massacres in Fushe Kosova?

20 A. Fushe Kosova.

21 Q. Thank you. Obri, Cikatov or Poklec?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Were you involved in the investigation of war crimes concerning

24 massacres that occurred in Likoshan, Qirez, and Prekaz?

25 A. The last one was?

1 Q. Prekaz.

2 A. No. No.

3 Q. All of those are war crimes that involved Serbians.

4 A. Okay.

5 Q. Were you ever involved in any war crimes involving the

6 investigating Serbs?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Now, I want to go back to the question about the placement of

9 photographs in the photo spread.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And I want to use the photo spread of Fatmir Limaj, if I might.

12 And I have received permission to do so. And I would like you to go back

13 to tab 2, if you could.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And in this particular photo line-up he is in position number 1;

16 correct?

17 A. That's correct.

18 Q. The other position that you had Mr. Limaj in was in position

19 number 6; correct.

20 A. That's correct.

21 Q. Apart from positions number 1 and 6, you had him in no other

22 positions, did you? You placed him in no other positions in your photo

23 spreads, did you?

24 A. That's correct.

25 Q. Now, I have -- oh, we're doing very well.

1 I want to go back just for a moment with regard to the issue of

2 photo spreads, eyewitness identification, information that you learned,

3 okay.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And I think we've established already that during the time that

6 you were in the police academy the whole issue of witness identification

7 was a pretty pressing issue throughout the United States because there

8 were a fair number of wrongful convictions during that time that occurred

9 as a result of that.

10 A. Correct.

11 Q. Okay. Did you, in your classes, come across any of the studies

12 that were done by a professor named Elizabeth Loftus?

13 A. No. The name doesn't ring a bell.

14 Q. Did you come across any of the studies that were done by a

15 gentleman whose name is Gary Wells?

16 A. No.

17 Q. During your tenure with the police department, up until the

18 present -- I assume you have some contact with the guys back in Chicago

19 who are police. Do you still talk to them and see what's going on?

20 A. A couple of them, yes.

21 Q. Keep up on current events?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Are you aware of the recommendations that were made in 2002 with

24 regard to photo identifications?

25 A. No.

1 Q. Are you aware of the studies that have been done that included

2 work by Mr. Wells specifically with regard to the state of Illinois

3 because of some of the concerns that existed in terms of wrongful

4 convictions as a result of faulty identifications?

5 A. No. I'm sorry, I'm not.

6 Q. That's not something you guys talked about, in terms of the stuff

7 that was going on as you're administering justice or attempting to?

8 A. No. We weren't talking about photo spreads or the different -- I

9 mean, I had gone back to Chicago. We were visiting. Actually, we were

10 talking about which pub we were going to frequent to have a beer

11 together. But the conversation of photo spreads or these authors never

12 came up in conversation.

13 Q. During the time that you were in the United States, were you aware

14 of a project called the Innocence Project which dealt specifically with

15 the issue of wrongful convictions of individuals in the United States, a

16 lot of who have been convicted and were sentenced to death as a result of

17 improper photo identifications?

18 A. I know that several people had been sentenced to death because of

19 improper photo identification, but I'm not familiar with the cases, or --

20 you know, of course I know about that.

21 Q. Well, when you were doing work in the gang task force, and you

22 said that you were involved even in homicide investigations; right?

23 A. That's correct. I would receive a name from the detective

24 division, or if it had just happened and I would then begin to try and

25 locate the suspect.

1 Q. And when you were involved in homicide investigations, especially

2 when you were dealing with issues concerning gangs, those kind of cases

3 had the potential of being cases in which individuals could be charged

4 with a crime that could have as a consequence the death penalty, couldn't

5 it?

6 A. Yes, that is correct.

7 Q. And in those situations, were you involved in any cases in which

8 the issues concerning eyewitness identification and the frailties that

9 exist with regard to them came up?

10 A. In the homicide investigations I wasn't involved in any photo

11 line-ups. I had handled armed robberies, burglaries or lesser crimes.

12 Q. You told us, I think yesterday, that when you were doing work

13 with the gang task force, you even did work with murders or homicides;

14 right?

15 A. Yes. I assisted -- I assisted the detective division.

16 Q. So when you said even homicides, were you kind of inflating what

17 you were doing there? You really weren't doing much homicide work?

18 MR. NICHOLLS: That's not fair. The answer is clear. He talked

19 about he didn't use photo line-ups in homicides. I think that is clear

20 from his answer.

21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay.

22 Q. As a police officer, somebody who is involved in -- in trying to,

23 I would hope, you know, cut everybody a square deal, the issues that I've

24 just been discussing with you, these are important things, aren't they?

25 A. Yes, they are.

1 Q. With regard to fairly producing a photo spread for somebody to

2 look at, did you ever discuss the following: Eyewitnesses should be told

3 explicitly that the suspected perpetrator might not be in the line-up or

4 photo spread and therefore they should not feel that they must make an

5 identification?

6 Was that ever anything you discussed?

7 A. No, it wasn't.

8 Q. Did you ever discuss, when you were in the police academy when you

9 were learning how to do this stuff, the following idea, the following

10 notion: Eyewitnesses should be told they should not assume the person

11 administering the line-up or photo spread knows which person is the

12 suspect?

13 A. No. In the police academy, yes, but it was -- I was following a

14 different set of procedures when I was in Kosovo.

15 Q. I see. So what happened when you were in Kosovo which was an

16 idea, a principle of fairness, that existed, that you'd been taught as a

17 young officer, was not required in Kosovo and therefore you didn't do it.

18 Right?

19 A. No. That's not true. For example --

20 Q. Answer that question. Answer that question. That wasn't

21 required; right?

22 A. No. The principle of fairness was required in all of my cases and

23 so --

24 Q. The principle that I'm just referring to right here, this one.

25 A. That is correct.

1 Q. And because it wasn't required, you didn't do it.

2 A. That's true.

3 Q. Right?

4 A. That's true.

5 Q. Thank you. I have no further questions.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Topolski.

7 MR. GUY-SMITH: I think I made the time.

8 JUDGE PARKER: I am very impressed, Mr. Guy-Smith.

9 MR. TOPOLSKI: Your Honours, may I make it clear that I do not

10 propose to ask this witness any questions at all and can we just go into

11 private session for the purposes of the name, please.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Private.

13 [Private session]

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 [Open session]

24 Cross-examined by Mr. Topolski:

25 MR. TOPOLSKI:

1 Q. Mr. Kereakes, my name is Topolski --

2 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session.

3 MR. TOPOLSKI:

4 Q. I am neither from Chicago nor California. Mr. Powles and I

5 represent Isak Musliu.

6 Regarding the approach to the photo line-up aspect OF the

7 investigation is the sole topic I want to deal with in the time that is

8 left this afternoon, and I hope to finish in that time.

9 I suggest to you that your approach to this entire investigation

10 was a biased one. Do you agree or do you disagree?

11 A. I agree.

12 Q. You agree? That you were biased?

13 A. I'm sorry. No, No. I was impartial.

14 Q. Impartial. So when a witness speaks to you and you say to us this

15 morning, as you did, it was obvious to me he was telling the truth, that

16 is not an indicator of bias and we shouldn't so interpret it. Is that the

17 position?

18 A. Once I had observed the contradictions and had asked for

19 reasonable questions from him, yes.

20 Q. We'll come back to that.

21 I suggest that your part in the entire process of the preparation

22 and showing of photo line-ups was deeply flawed. Do you agree or do you

23 disagree?

24 A. Considering the conditions that I was working with, I disagree.

25 Q. I suggest that as far as you personally are concerned, you are

1 someone who is prepared to sign inaccurate statements which purport to be

2 true, to the best of your knowledge and recollection. That is something

3 you have done, is it not?

4 A. No, I'm not prepared to do it. I made a mistake and I did it, but

5 it is not something that I purposely set out to do and say, I'm going to

6 sign false statements against one; no, that is not true.

7 Q. You have done it more than once, haven't you, in relation to more

8 than one subject. As Mr. Mansfield has been dealing with this morning.

9 A. There was two instances in my statement made to the ICTY where I

10 had made the mistake, yes.

11 Q. You do realise, don't you, with particular regard to the case

12 against Isak Musliu, how important identification is?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Do you accept as a proposition that identification procedures

15 during the course of your investigation into this case were - and I

16 quote - "not always followed in the correct way"?

17 Do you accept that as a proposition or not?

18 A. The procedure I used, according to the ones that you stated, or

19 the procedures I used at the time they were in effect at CCIU? I don't

20 understand the question.

21 If the procedures that you're stating, yes, they were incorrect.

22 At the time that I'm following the procedures at CCIU, they were correct.

23 Q. This quotation - and I will come to its source later - can only be

24 referring to activity on the ground in Kosovo at a time when you were

25 present, and the quotation only relating to that can only mean what it

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 says, that the person saying this was of the view that your procedures you

2 and your colleagues were adopting were not always followed in the correct

3 way. Do you accept that or do you reject that as a proposition?

4 A. I'll have to reject that because if the procedures that you're

5 saying are the ones that we were using at CCIU at the time, you know, one

6 minute we had a -- we were told we were under Yugoslavian law and the case

7 would be presented to an investigating judge under Yugoslavian law. The

8 best example I can give this is, when the witness took us to the crime

9 scene, and we saw protruding bones coming out we had to have an

10 investigating judge there to sign the proper paperwork in order to begin

11 even to secure the crime scene. We could not even secure the crime scene

12 because under Yugoslavian law that was left up to the investigating judge.

13 So, there were certain procedures that we were following that

14 where from the Brits, maybe there was some procedures being followed by

15 Yugoslavian law. So there was some confusion on that part, yes, I will

16 admit that.

17 Q. You were there from 2001 through to 2002; correct?

18 A. At CCIU I was. I was in Kosovo from 2000 though.

19 Q. Where were the cases that were the product of all of these

20 investigations being tried?

21 A. Inside Kosovo.

22 Q. Were there any other cases with which you were involved in

23 investigating tried here, in The Hague?

24 A. No. This was the first one I believe.

25 Q. This was the first one.

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. When you got there and took up your investigation into the case of

3 Limaj an others, did you understand - I won't use the word appreciate -

4 did you understand that it was this Tribunal who was going to be trying

5 any case that emanated from your investigation?

6 A. No. We did not know if it was going to come to the Tribunal.

7 Q. You did not know that alleged war crimes against Fatmir Limaj and

8 others were going to come to this Tribunal. Is that your evidence?

9 A. Yes. There was a chance that ICTY might pick it up, but that was

10 not at all a guarantee. We first had approach and begin the investigation

11 under Yugoslavian law. That's how it was explained to us.

12 Q. As far as practice and procedure is concerned, you referred a

13 little earlier on today to there being different guidelines. Do you

14 remember telling us that?

15 A. That is correct.

16 Q. I want to know this, if you can help, please, Mr. Kereakes: Were

17 these guidelines in written form?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Were they, therefore, as a result of formal briefings or informal

20 conversations between colleagues?

21 A. Both.

22 Q. Both. At formal briefings that you participated in

23 regarding "different guidelines," who would conduct that briefing?

24 A. Our commander or possibly even the International Prosecutor.

25 Q. Would you be good enough to identify the names of anyone you can

1 remember conducting such a briefing, please.

2 A. Yes. Dennis Sherman, and also Brian Cox, CCIU commanders. Also

3 International Prosecutors, Michael Hartman, and a couple of the other

4 names escape me for now, but they could be found in a -- my supplemental

5 report.

6 Q. Would there be any written hand-outs given by the briefers to the

7 briefees at these meetings?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Did you make notes about what --

10 A. Excuse me. I believe in a couple of instances there could have

11 been a hand-out given. From now on we will, in order to exhume mass grave

12 you must have an investigating judge --

13 Q. Mr. Kereakes, sorry to interrupt you. As I said at the beginning

14 I'm focussing, please, on photo line-ups, practice and procedure.

15 A. That's correct.

16 Q. All I'm going to be talking about for the next 20 minutes or

17 thereabouts.

18 A. Okay.

19 Q. So in that regard only if you wouldn't mind focussing.

20 Do you recollect any written hand-outs by way of a guideline

21 regarding practice and procedure on photo line-ups or spreadsheets?

22 A. No.

23 Q. No. Did you make any notes yourself of these briefings that you

24 attended on this subject?

25 A. No.

1 Q. Very well. Why did you volunteer for this work in Kosovo? Why?

2 A. Why did I go to Kosovo to work?

3 Q. Yes.

4 A. I wanted to try something different. I had been in Chicago for

5 the last ten years, and I thought that it would be kind of a challenging

6 to go to a different country and attempt a different type of line of

7 police work.

8 Q. You didn't know where Yugoslavia was? On the map. Is that right?

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. Your name is Greek.

11 A. That is correct.

12 Q. You have family in Greece?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. You're aware of the ancient and historical association between

15 Greeks and the Serbs?

16 A. As far as?

17 Q. Just general sympathy is concerned, Mr. Kereakes.

18 A. No. I was not aware that -- of any sympathies of Greeks and

19 Serbs.

20 Q. And you certainly didn't have any particular sympathies yourself

21 for either side in the conflict when you went there. Is that what you're

22 telling us?

23 A. That is correct.

24 Q. Utterly objective and open-minded?

25 A. That is correct.

1 Q. When dealing with surviving crime victims as a serving police

2 officer in the United States, would you call them witnesses or victims?

3 When you dealt with them?

4 A. Victims.

5 Q. Victims. What about witnesses to crimes, who may not have

6 themselves been victims? What do they get called in your vocabulary when

7 you're dealing with them?

8 A. Witness.

9 Q. There is a certain difference between someone who is a witness and

10 someone who is a victim?

11 A. That's correct.

12 Q. As far as familiarity with the events that you were dealing with

13 and the investigation that you were in due course to become a member of a

14 team with, regarding that aspect of the matter, February 2001 you joined

15 the team investigating this case. Yes?

16 A. That's correct.

17 Q. Did you take steps to familiarise yourself with the case thus far?

18 A. Yes, I did.

19 Q. Did you take steps to familiarise yourself with the identities of

20 the known suspects at that point, February 2001?

21 A. Yes, I did.

22 Q. Was Isak Musliu a suspect in February 2001?

23 A. When I took the case over and I read the initial statement, yes,

24 he was.

25 Q. Was Fatmir Limaj by name a suspect?

1 A. I don't remember if the other witnesses who had already been

2 recorded if their name had ever been mention; no, I can't remember that.

3 But I know from witness A's statement that name had not been mentioned,

4 that is correct.

5 Q. His was not the only witness, was he? Even in February 2001.

6 Mr. A.

7 A. That's correct.

8 Q. Are you telling us that the only name that you became aware of in

9 those early days of reading the papers, looking at reports, familiarising

10 yourself with the file, the only named suspect you can recollect was Isak

11 Musliu? Is that your evidence?

12 A. No. I don't recall if the other suspect's name, or at least one

13 of the other suspect's name -- no, there was actually another suspect's

14 name in that case. I don't know if I can say it or not.

15 MR. TOPOLSKI: Well, not in open session you can't.

16 MR. NICHOLLS: Can I just try to clarify. I think there might be

17 a mistake. There's been talk of the witness taking over this

18 investigation in February 2001. I believe his testimony was July 2001,

19 when he began working on the case we're interested in.

20 MR. TOPOLSKI: Well, of course, Mr. Nicholls can give the evidence

21 if he want, but this witness has just accepted it was February 2001.

22 Q. So which is it, Mr. Kereakes, February or July?

23 A. Well, sir, I'm confused if you're talking about a particular

24 statement or a particular time that I had been working on the case.

25 Q. I'm sorry if my English isn't plain enough for you. I asked you

1 when you started to take up work in the investigation of this case, and I

2 suggested February 2001 and you agreed with me. Would you like to change

3 that now?

4 A. Yes, I would.

5 Q. When?

6 A. I know I was assigned at CCIU -- or July -- or February of 2001,

7 but that doesn't mean that I took over the case in February of 2001. I

8 would have to look at my notes, and I could tell you the exact time I

9 began reading this case file, but I believe that when you mentioned that

10 date, you were referring to the different cases when I first began

11 February of 2001 in CCIU.

12 Q. Let's move on.

13 When looking at the question of the compilation of photo line-ups

14 and the like, did you investigate whether there were any contemporary

15 video footages available of any of the people you were investigating?

16 A. No. I did not find any video footage of the people I was

17 investigating.

18 Q. Did anyone look for it, that you are aware of?

19 A. No, not that I recall.

20 Q. Did anyone do a search of newspaper archives like, for example,

21 Koha Ditore, looking for photographs of people who were known or suspected

22 of being involved in these war crimes?

23 A. No.

24 Q. I'm not going to take you through the evidence you've given

25 already and the answers you've already given to Mr. Mansfield on a variety

1 of topics concerning practice and procedure. I want to move on to deal

2 with the specific sheet behind our tab 1, if you would be good enough,

3 please, Mr. Kereakes.

4 This is Isak Musliu?

5 A. Correct.

6 Q. When did you first appreciate that Isak Musliu, throughout the

7 entirety of the war, was bearded?

8 A. In a couple of the statements it was mentioned that he was

9 bearded.

10 Q. Were you aware of those statements before you showed witnesses

11 photo line-ups of him?

12 A. I don't remember the exact time.

13 Q. Would you agree with me it would be an utterly valueless exercise

14 in showing a witness a line-up of an utterly clean-shaven Isak Musliu if

15 you knew he would be bearded at the time we are dealing with? Worthless,

16 I suggest.

17 A. No. No. I wouldn't say it was worthless.

18 Q. What would you say about it then?

19 A. If no pictures were available of the suspect wearing a beard in

20 our database or at other times, I think it is very valuable to show a

21 picture of the -- in a photo line-up of him clean shaven if that's the

22 only one available. We didn't have, you know, access to him with a

23 picture with a beard.

24 MR. TOPOLSKI: Could the witness please be shown Prosecution

25 Exhibit's number 81. Could we put it on the ELMO, please. That's it.

1 Q. There's an arrow pointing to a gentleman there; I'm not interested

2 in him. The man behind him, over his right shoulder, that's Isak Musliu.

3 Have you ever seen this photograph before?

4 A. No. I haven't.

5 Q. Do you agree he has a beard and a rather significant one in that

6 photograph, if that be him? Do you agree?

7 A. Are you saying the subject to the left or to the right?

8 Q. The left of the photograph as you look at it. Over Fatmir Limaj's

9 right shoulder; your left as you look at it.

10 A. Okay.

11 Q. The little chap. With the gun across his chest. That's Isak

12 Musliu. Do you see he has a beard?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Never seen this photograph before?

15 A. Never.

16 Q. Thank you very much. You were asked a number of questions about

17 your dealings with the witness A, and I too ask you, please, Mr. Kereakes,

18 and I know it is difficult, be careful about no name.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Would you take it from me that the date you showed this particular

21 witness the photo line-up of Isak Musliu was the 17th of August, 2001.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Did anyone, throughout any of your time at the CCIU in Kosovo

24 investigating these matters, with regard to identification procedures,

25 ever talk about the possibility of identification parades as opposed to

1 line-ups of photographs? Anyone talk about that?

2 A. You said identification parades?

3 Q. Do you know what they are?

4 A. No. I'm sorry.

5 Q. In American, they're called line-ups.

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Yes. You've seen the movie The Usual Suspects?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Line-ups. Anyone talk about line-ups as a possibility of a method

10 of identification?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Were there any?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Was there a particular reason for that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Namely?

17 A. I at the time did not want to bring in the suspects. I didn't

18 have the facility to secure the safety of my witnesses nor did I have a

19 room where I could secure the witness on one side without exposing him to

20 language assistance, security guards, so that way they will be able to

21 tell that here you are bringing in this suspect and the witness together,

22 so I felt that would jeopardise, because the biggest common denominator we

23 had was the fear that the witnesses felt of the suspects.

24 Q. Well, Mr. Kereakes, of course not. You're not going to put Mr. A,

25 right in front of -- physically in front of in touching distance --

1 A. No. But I didn't have a room for that at CCI --

2 Q. Are you telling this Court that nowhere in the former state of

3 Yugoslavia was an identification suite where a witness could be brought

4 behind a frosted glass to look through to see a suspect in a line-up? Is

5 that the -- is that the case?

6 A. I can tell you that there was no place at CCIU or even a special

7 operations compound that we were provided that I could do that.

8 Q. Because you see, at the time you showed Mr. A the photo line-up of

9 Isak Musliu, 17th of August, 2001, he was a serious suspect, Musliu,

10 wasn't he?

11 A. At that time is when the witness A gave me the information, but I

12 had already read previous statements on him. So that's when I had

13 identified him. As far as him being a serious suspect he was a suspect in

14 the case.

15 Q. No. I used the word serious advisedly, Mr. Kereakes. He had been

16 interviewed three months before that in May. He had been arrested and

17 interviewed by UNMIK. You knew that, didn't you?

18 A. I didn't find that out till later.

19 Q. Are you seriously telling us that you're conducting these

20 procedures with witnesses like A, and you're not even aware as an

21 investigator on the team that Musliu had been arrested and interviewed?

22 A. If their particular arrest report had been in my -- a file at

23 that time. I don't remember that being there.

24 Q. Well, here is the witness statement. I hold it in my hand of the

25 interview on the 24th of May of 2001. Where, other than in the files you

1 were dealing with, would this document be?

2 A. Could I see that, please?

3 Q. Of course you can. 03231634, I think. My client's interview with

4 UNMIK, May. Three months before you are with Mr. A, showing him photos.

5 Do you see that?

6 A. Yes, I do.

7 Q. Right. So he was a serious suspect, wasn't he?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Thank you very much. May I have that back?

10 Two more matters. Were you involved in the investigation of the

11 case that brought a man called Agim Murtezi to this Court?

12 A. Yes. His name had been mentioned in several witness statements.

13 Q. Would you agree with me his case represents one of the greatest

14 possible failures of identification procedures?

15 A. I didn't have anything to do with those.

16 Q. Ah.

17 A. I wasn't involved in that arrest or actually --

18 Q. Because of course they brought the wrong man here, didn't they?

19 A. I don't know.

20 Q. Don't you?

21 A. No, actually I don't.

22 Q. I said I would come back to the question of the reference you make

23 regarding a particular person who was obviously to you lying. Remember I

24 said I would come back to it and I do, Mr. Kereakes.

25 You spoke in evidence when Mr. Nicholls was asking you questions

1 this morning of the purpose, as you saw it, in confronting one witness

2 with another.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Physically bringing them into a room together to, as it were,

5 thrash it out between them?

6 A. I would never have used the word "thrashed."

7 Q. Well, I don't mean it to have physical connotations, Mr. Kereakes.

8 I don't -- this is not a arm wrestling contest. To bring them face to

9 face, to quote you, so the truth would somehow come out.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Isn't that what a court is for?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Do you think it is an appropriate thing for a police officer to be

14 doing with witnesses?

15 A. At that time I felt it was something that should be done

16 considering the fact that he knew -- the witness A knew this particular

17 witness that was not being truthful or had many contradictions. So, yes,

18 at that time I felt there was -- I thought maybe the scene of the -- of

19 witness A, and maybe recalling some of it could actually have the truth

20 come out.

21 Can I turn on my video monitor in case I'm talking too

22 fast, my monitor.

23 Q. Yes.

24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me. I find myself in a bit of an awkward

25 position. But I'm going to have to object to the last answer because,

1 once again, there is no basis for his conclusion the witness was not being

2 truthful, which was the same thing I objected to before when Mr. Nicholls

3 raised the issue.

4 JUDGE PARKER: I don't think it is the fault of the question.

5 It's the direction the answer took but...

6 MR. TOPOLSKI:

7 Q. Did you have serious personal problems with CCIU commander Dennis

8 Sherman?

9 A. Yes. At one point I did.

10 Q. Were those problems so severe that you became aware that he was

11 ordering people not to talk to you? Colleagues?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Was this an operation involving a search of a TMK location that

14 you were involved in?

15 A. At the time I was told this was national security, so I don't know

16 if I'm allowed to speak about this, so...

17 I don't know if at that time it involved certain intelligence

18 agencies, and I don't know if I'm allowed to speak about it at this time.

19 Q. I won't pursue it. I just wanted to establish the basis of the

20 suggestions I was making regarding Mr. Sherman.

21 Just finally this: Do you agree that all of the witnesses that

22 you were dealing with in these photo line-up exercises, as well as the

23 suspects themselves, all came from the same geographical area south-west

24 of Pristina?

25 A. Yes.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 Q. Do you agree that some of the witnesses with whom you were dealing

2 knew the suspects from before the war?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Do you know that the five photographs of the gentleman I have

5 shown you on -- behind tab number 1, the Musliu tab, were all serving

6 police officers in Ferizaj, as was Mr. Musliu? Did you know that?

7 A. That all of them were police officers in Ferizaj. This I did not

8 know. I knew they were all KPS officers. But that they were serving in

9 Ferizaj, I didn't know that.

10 Q. Would that have concerned you to put six five men, plus Musliu all

11 from the same area, all in the same job, all on the same line-up sheet?

12 Would you have done that if you had known what I just suggested to you?

13 A. I would have tried to get KPS officers probably from all different

14 parts of Kosovo, but I didn't think of it as -- I didn't know at that time

15 when we pulled these pictures they were all from Ferizaj.

16 Q. I suggested at the outset of my cross-examination that you were

17 careless in the proper meaning of that word throughout this entire

18 investigation and your part in it. Do you agree or do you disagree?

19 A. Considering the conditions I had, I would have to disagree.

20 MR. TOPOLSKI: That's all I ask.

21 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Topolski.

22 Yes, Mr. Nicholls.

23 MR. NICHOLLS: I'll be very quick, Witness, we only have a few

24 minutes.

25 Re-examined by Mr. Nicholls:

1 Q. You've been asked repeatedly on cross-examination whether you ever

2 instructed witnesses when you were showing them a photo line-up, U-1 or

3 U-2, whether you told them that the suspect might not be in the photo

4 line-up.

5 Now the flip side: Did you ever tell any witness that a suspect

6 was included in the photo line-up?

7 A. No. I just never instructed them on that.

8 Q. Could we go into private session for one moment.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Private.

10 [Private session]

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 5096-5100 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 [Open session]

1 MR. MANSFIELD: Forgive me, Witness. I realise we are pressed for

2 time, or you are.

3 THE REGISTRAR: We're in public session.

4 Further cross-examined by Mr. Mansfield:

5 Q. I asked you if you remember a question indicating that when the

6 matter was investigated, after you had left the investigation, no officer

7 could find any line-up relating to Fatmir Limaj, the U-2 line-up, in which

8 he was placed at number 3. All right?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. In other words, where witnesses claimed to have picked him out of

11 position 3 - there are two, I'm not mentioning their names - there are at

12 least two, no copy of that photo line-up has ever been found, and no other

13 line-up done in preparation for these processes has ever been found. Do

14 you follow? That's the position.

15 A. Yes, I follow what you're saying.

16 Q. Yes. Right. Now, on the back of that, you were asked by

17 Mr. Gregor Guy-Smith, who sits to my right here, a fellow American, he

18 asked you what the positions were in very clear terms, in which Fatmir

19 Limaj was placed. And the answer you gave then was that apart from

20 positions 1 and 6, that you did not have Fatmir Limaj in any other

21 position. You gave a very clear answer to that.

22 Now, are you wanting to change that?

23 A. What I would like to change is, if that's what I said, is that

24 it's possible he was 1 or 3, or maybe even another position, because at

25 the time when we had these created I had told -- I had instructed the

1 photo guy to try to put him in different positions. And those were placed

2 in a sheet under U-2 or U-1. So it is possible that he was in a different

3 position and not just 1 and 3.

4 Q. Well, of course, anything is possible, but when you were asked the

5 question, it's very clear - we have it on screen at the moment - the

6 question was: Apart from positions 1 and 6, you had him in no other

7 position, did you? You placed him in no other position in your photo

8 spreads, did you?

9 MR. NICHOLLS: Sorry, could I have a line reference, please.

10 MR. MANSFIELD: Yes, certainly. Line 15 on 104. 104, line 15 is

11 the question through to 17 and the answer is 18.

12 MR. NICHOLLS: Thank you.

13 MR. MANSFIELD:

14 Q. In other words, you made no qualification that, oh, well, maybe

15 you had to put him in another position just in case witnesses passed in

16 the corridor or anything like that. In other words, would it be fair to

17 say you have no recollection, at all, of putting Fatmir Limaj in

18 position 3, do you?

19 A. No. That's not true. I didn't tell you about passing the people

20 in the corridor and the reason for that, I wasn't asked. But, is it

21 possible that he was placed in a different position? Now that I think

22 about -- yes, it is possible, because the photo line-ups that were

23 developed by someone else, I had specifically asked them to, you know,

24 take -- take the position of the suspect move them around so that way

25 there is no way that one witness is telling the other witness, Hey, pick

1 number 4, or pick number 2.

2 Is it possible that another witness -- I mean, is it possible that

3 another line-up was underneath? Yes, it is. It is very possible.

4 Q. Well, anything is possible. But do you understand that the matter

5 has been thoroughly investigated and there is no example of any sheet

6 compiled by anyone in relation to Fatmir Limaj in which he's at

7 position 3.

8 A. Yes. But I'm missing my photo line-ups also. They're not here.

9 They're also not here.

10 Q. Yes. Those are the ones attached to the statements?

11 A. That's correct.

12 Q. Two of them. In fact, there are no none attached to statements

13 that have survived. You can't explain that?

14 MR. NICHOLLS: I think we're getting passed the re-cross that was

15 opened up by His Honour --

16 JUDGE PARKER: I hadn't discerned that yet, Mr. Nicholls. But the

17 time will bring it to an end shortly, if nothing else.

18 MR. MANSFIELD:

19 Q. Yes. See the point I'm reaching is: Never mind the ones that

20 have all gone missing that were supposed to be attached to statements, you

21 can't help us about that.

22 A. That's correct.

23 Q. What I'm now dealing with is your suggestion that the possible way

24 in which Fatmir Limaj may have reached position 3 is that you would have

25 prepared examples of that ready for a witness if you needed to use it. Do

1 you follow?

2 A. Yes, I do.

3 Q. Right. No examples of prepared line-ups, unattached to

4 statements, have survived. Do you follow?

5 A. Yes, I do.

6 Q. And I'm going to suggest to you, therefore, there were no line-ups

7 prepared by you in which he was other than in position 1 and 6. And that

8 is what you told Mr. Gregor Smith.

9 A. That's correct. But thinking about it, it is very possible that

10 line-ups were created with a different number, just like I can't remember

11 every number that Isak Musliu was also too.

12 MR. MANSFIELD: I have no further questions.

13 JUDGE PARKER: Is there anything you would want to take it further

14 with?

15 MR. GUY-SMITH: Nothing further. Thank you.

16 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

17 Mr. Nicholls?

18 MR. NICHOLLS: No.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Kereakes, that concludes the questions to be

20 asked of you. We've run over time. So I can't delay now, but thank you

21 for your attendance and you're now free to return to your other

22 activities.

23 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

24 JUDGE PARKER: We will resume on Monday at 2.15.

25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.00 p.m.,

1 to be reconvened on Monday, the 4th day of April,

2 2005, at 2.15 p.m.

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25