1 Tuesday, 21 April 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.22 p.m.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Today we have a video conference link. My own
6 view is that we should proceed immediately with it and deal with other
7 matters later.
8 Mr. Ivetic, do you think otherwise?
9 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours, as long as we have time for other
10 matters later. We did have one filing I wanted to draw Your Honours'
11 attentions to, and that's -- we could do that after.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, let us deal with it afterwards. Let's deal
13 with this. It has technical issues, so let's try and get that out of the
15 Let the witness make the declaration.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
17 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
18 WITNESS: RADOMIR SIMSIC
19 [Witness answered through interpreter]
20 [Witness testified via videolink]
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: You may sit.
22 Mr. Ivetic.
23 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
24 Examination by Mr. Ivetic:
25 Q. Good day, sir. My name is Dan Ivetic, and I'm one of the
1 attorneys for Mr. Milan Lukic in these proceedings. First of all, can
2 you hear me all right, sir?
3 A. I can.
4 Q. Thank you. Now, I'm going to be asking you some questions today
5 to clarify some event for us, so it's important that you listen to my
6 question and try to make sure that your answer is directly related to the
7 actual question. That way we can move efficiently through the small
8 amount of questions that I have. Is that understood, sir?
9 A. Yes.
10 MR. IVETIC: Thank you. Now, for the protection of a witness who
11 has -- another witness who has been given protective measures by this
12 court, I would ask that we go into private session.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
14 [Private session]
11 Pages 7097-7102 redacted. Private session.
7 [Open session]
8 MR. WEBER:
9 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Simsic. My name is Adam Weber.
10 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.
12 MR. WEBER:
13 Q. I will be asking you questions today on behalf of the Office of
14 the Prosecutor. Can you hear me?
15 A. I can.
16 Q. Mr. Simsic, you are not from Obrenovac, Serbia
17 A. Correct, I'm not from Obrenovac.
18 Q. Is it your testimony here today that you have never been known by
19 the nickname of Raso or Rasa?
20 A. Certainly. I assert that, that I never had a nickname like that.
21 I left very early on. I knew the older generation there. I don't know
22 the younger ones, and never did anyone call me Raso or any other
24 Q. Do you know an individual by the name of Ljubisa Vasiljevic?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Do you know an individual by the name of Dusko Vasiljevic?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Do you know an individual by the name of Njegos Ivanovic?
4 A. No.
5 Q. You would have never, then, had any of these individuals
6 introduce you to anyone in Visegrad; is that correct?
7 A. I don't know these people. I don't know who these people are,
8 where they are from. I know nothing of them. I only know the elderly
9 people from the area who died. I don't know their children, and I'd
10 never seen their children either.
11 Q. So with respect to those three people, they could not have then
12 introduced you to someone in Visegrad; correct?
13 A. That's correct. They could not have because I never stayed long
14 there. Even when I went for a vacation while my mother and father were
15 alive, I would only go once a year to see them; and once they died, I
16 never went there again.
17 Q. You mentioned that you did go back to Visegrad in 1992. Do you
18 recall the approximate month that you returned to that area?
19 A. In 1992, I never mentioned that I went to Visegrad then because I
20 didn't. I went in 1991. That was July when my brother was killed, my
21 sister-in-law, and my uncle, and I went for a funeral. I buried them,
22 and I immediately went back.
23 Q. Thank you, sir. I appreciate that clarification.
24 Sir, could you please repeat in open session when was the last
25 date that you resided in the Visegrad municipality.
1 A. Well, that was I think in 1965 or 1966, one of those two years.
2 I'm not exactly sure.
3 Q. And as you said, you were not familiar with any individuals who
4 resided in Visegrad aside from those that were present at the time that
5 you left the area; is that correct?
6 A. Well, you know what? I don't know any younger people. I heard
7 of those last names. Vasiljevic, Lukic, I've heard of those family
8 names, but I left when I was quite young, and I wasn't interested in
10 Q. The Prosecution takes it from your testimony here today that you
11 are not familiar with any groups, para-military groups, or police that
12 were conducting fighting in Visegrad in 1992; correct?
13 A. It is correct that I don't know them because I never stayed long
14 there. I only went for a funeral, and that's all.
15 Q. Thank you, sir.
16 Sir, did you know before today that you were named as one of the
17 -- or someone by your name was named as one of the perpetrators of the
18 murders of five Bosnian Muslim men at the Drina river on 7 June 1992
19 A. Are you referring to me?
20 Q. Correct. Did you know before today that someone by your same
21 name was named -- go ahead, sir. I see that you are saying something.
22 A. I have never heard that at all because in 1992 I think, I'm not
23 sure, but I think that I was away, away from Belgrade and from Visegrad.
24 I'm not sure about the month.
25 Q. When did you -- when were you first informed that someone by your
1 same name had been named by an individual for committing the murders of
2 five Bosnian Muslim men at the Drina
3 A. I have never heard that at all. I've never heard that name.
4 I've never heard of that Radomir.
5 Q. Sir, that's not my question. When did you first learn that
6 someone by your same name had been named as a co-perpetrator for the
7 murders at the Drina
8 A. This is completely new to me.
9 Q. Are you saying today is the first time that you are hearing that
10 someone with the name Radomir Simsic was named as a co-perpetrator for
11 those murders?
12 A. I've heard it just now from you, but I've never heard that
14 Q. Have you spoken with Defence counsel prior to today?
15 A. I have never seen anyone.
16 Q. Sir, that's not my question.
17 Have you had any communication with Defence counsel before today?
18 A. No.
19 Q. When did you first learn that you would be a witness in this
21 A. Well, was it ten days ago or something?
22 Q. Are you saying on the -- approximately the 25th of March, 2009
23 when you received a subpoena?
24 A. Which year?
25 Q. Ten days ago, sir. Actually, approximately 20 days ago.
1 A. Yes, something like that. Ten, 20 days, I'm not sure.
2 Q. What was the reason that you believed you were being brought to
3 testify here today?
4 A. To tell you the truth, I don't know.
5 Q. Sir, I'm going to read you a portion of the 6 February 2009
6 filing by the Defence requesting a subpoena for you. It is the motion on
7 behalf of Milan Lukic requesting the Trial Chamber to issue a subpoena.
8 For the record, it's paragraph 9. It states:
9 "The Defence has made contact with Radomir Simsic, and he clearly
10 stated that he does not want to testify before the Tribunal due to the
11 fact that there is an ongoing case in Sarajevo related to the murder of
12 his brother."
13 Are you saying that that is not a true statement?
14 A. You know what? I don't know when that was, but I had a telephone
15 call. I don't know who called me, and then they asked me, Do you know
16 something about Milan Lukic? I don't know Milan Lukic, and I don't know
17 anything about that. And as for my brother, yes, there is a case in
19 Q. This individual who called you, was it a male or female?
20 A. Woman.
21 Q. Was her name Jelena Rasic?
22 A. I don't know that. I didn't ask about her name.
23 Q. Did she introduce herself?
24 A. Well, yes, but I forgot. To tell you the truth, I forgot.
25 Q. How long did you speak with her?
1 A. Well, it could have been some four minutes, four to five minutes.
2 Q. Sir, the statement before me that I just read to you indicates
3 that you did not want to testify before the Tribunal. What was the
4 conversation you had with this woman concerning your testimony in this
6 A. None.
7 Q. If you had no conversation with the woman about testifying in
8 this case, then isn't it true that the indication you did not want to
9 testify here is false?
10 MR. IVETIC: Objection, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's non-sequitur. Please ask another question.
12 MR. WEBER:
13 Q. Are you now saying that you did not indicate to this woman that
14 you were unwilling to come and testify?
15 A. I said that I couldn't testify. I don't know when that was, but
16 I said I can't do it now because of my health. I had some check-up
17 scheduled. That's all I said, nothing more than that.
18 Q. Was this during the same conversation that you had with this
20 A. Yes, because I said due to my granddaughter, she is blind, she
21 was supposed to go to Brussels
22 me alone now, I'm distressed because this child needs to go for a
23 treatment; and I told her not to bother me anymore.
24 Q. As you have lived in Belgrade
25 is it that you've heard of Milan Lukic?
1 MR. IVETIC: Your Honour, I object to relevance.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, only in the media.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Ivetic.
4 MR. IVETIC: Yes, Your Honour. I would object to its relevance.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's relevant. Yes.
6 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I ask that the witness's answer stand,
7 that he has heard of Milan Lukic, only in the media.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Please proceed.
9 MR. WEBER: Thank you.
10 Q. And as you've lived in Belgrade
11 magazine called Duga; correct?
12 MR. IVETIC: Now I'm going to have to object. This is beyond the
13 scope of direct. The Prosecution is again trying to bootstrap in its own
14 legal arguments that they're trying to get this article in now I believe
15 for the fifth time in these proceedings, I strenuously object. And once
16 and for all, this has to be resolved by Your Honours because they keep
17 doing this again and again. They want this to be a trial by rumour,
18 gossip, and scandalous yellow journalism. That's what they want this
19 case to be, and they're trying at every step of the way to do it. And I
20 don't know if this is the aspect of this being a game that Mr. Groome
21 indicated when I first entered into this case, how he described these
22 proceedings, but I consider this a court of law, and I think legal
23 arguments and legal evidence should be the medium that is before this
24 court of law.
25 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I can't sit here silent when such a
1 statement has been made. Can I have the transcript reference where I
2 referred to these proceedings as a game?
3 MR. CEPIC: Yes, sir. It was after the witness -- when you had
4 given us Amor Masovic's stuff late, you came up to me and you said,
5 Welcome to the game, Mr. Ivetic.
6 MR. GROOME: On the record?
7 MR. IVETIC: Not on the record. You would never say something
8 like that on the record, sir.
9 MR. GROOME: I have no recollection of ever saying that to Mr.
10 Ivetic, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, but --
12 MR. IVETIC: Two witnesses.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Ivetic, if that was said to you out of
14 court, I think it is --
15 MR. CEPIC: It was in the courtroom, Your Honour. I apologise,
16 but it was off the record.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, but then you shouldn't be using that as an
18 argument. Let's move beyond that.
19 Mr. Cepic, what is your point?
20 MR. CEPIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I would like to draw into
21 this objection raised by Mr. Ivetic, and also just for the record to add
22 that this honourable Trial Chamber has issued their decision related to
23 this document. This decision is from actually twice during the
24 cross-examination, but in the filing, decision is from, I think, 9th of
25 -- decision is from 9th of April, 2009. Thank you very much.
1 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Cepic, do you have the Trial Chamber's
3 decision on the admissibility of this journal?
4 MR. CEPIC: [Microphone not activated] My assistant --
5 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
6 MR. CEPIC: I apologise. My assistant, he has got in electronic
7 form, so I can print it in one minute. And also, just for the record,
8 OTP has filed their motion for reconsideration related to that decision
9 on Friday, and we responded yesterday related to that issue, not just
10 related to this article but also related to the alleged statement of my
11 client, and that's it.
12 MR. WEBER: Your Honour --
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm asking the legal officer to get a copy of
14 the decision so we can peruse it.
15 Mr. Weber, is it that you are trying to get this article in
16 through another means?
17 MR. WEBER: Well, Your Honour, there's a witness on the stand
18 that says that -- at page 14, line 23, that the only way he knows Milan
19 Lukic is through the media. On top of it, he has testified to a precise
20 fact that is contained in that article in terms of how he knows that
21 Sredoje Lukic was held captive in Visegrad. This is a precise fact from
22 that, so there's an indication now that this witness may have knowledge,
23 and the Prosecution believes that it should be able to put it to that
24 witness if they have knowledge or familiarity with it.
25 MR. IVETIC: And again, Your Honours, it goes to what quality of
1 evidence we're willing to consider in these proceedings. There is a
2 multitude of news that this witness may have been exposed to that may be
3 the source of his knowledge. I believe counsel for Mr. Sredoje Lukic
4 might have more comments, but I believe in this case we've had at least
5 one TV report offered, I believe, by the Prosecution relating to Sredoje
6 Lukic and to the time-period when he was in the custody of the -- of
7 enemy forces, so in essence -- for them to make the leap of faith and
8 leap of conclusion that just because a witness has heard something in the
9 media, he must have heard about this Duga article and to try to back-door
10 in something that Your Honours have two or three times already denied
11 them the ability to bring into evidence, it's really turning these
12 proceedings into a questionable matter.
13 MR. WEBER: If I may, Your Honour, the Prosecution is not making
14 the leap of faith. We're trying to lay a foundation with the witness and
15 ask him if he's familiar with it. We haven't gotten to that stage yet.
16 The nature of counsel's objection is premature. We are trying to
17 establish a foundation with the witness.
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, continue with the foundation.
19 MR. WEBER:
20 Q. Sir, the last question I asked you was whether or not you've
21 heard of the Duga magazine, which is a Belgrade publication.
22 A. I don't read Duga. I read Novosti.
23 Q. Okay. You are aware that Duga magazine is a publication that was
24 being circulated throughout Serbia
25 MR. WEBER: I'm not going to go into it any further. I'm just
1 asking him if he knows that.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well -- yes. Well, he can --
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've heard of it. I've heard of
5 MR. WEBER:
6 Q. It was a magazine that was in circulation throughout Belgrade
7 1992; correct?
8 MR. IVETIC: Assumes facts not in evidence, Your Honour;
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: He can't help you very much with Duga. He
11 doesn't read it. He doesn't consider it worthwhile reading, no doubt.
12 MR. WEBER:
13 Q. How did you learn, sir, that one of the Lukics had been tortured?
14 MR. CEPIC: Objection. First of all, there is no base that they
15 are brothers; and secondly, I don't see any foundation about that because
16 this witness clearly explained position in relation to that issue; and
17 also, we have admitted video-clip from Belgrade TV station, so I don't
18 see any foundation now to examine this witness about that issue.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Weber, what is the basis for putting this to
20 the witness? Where is the evidence that relates this to this witness?
21 MR. WEBER: I believe this witness testified that what he knew of
22 the Lukics included that Sredoje had been tortured, here today.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: He said so where? In examination-in-chief?
24 MR. WEBER: Page 8, line 2.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm having that checked.
1 Yes, that's correct. Yes. Go ahead.
2 MR. WEBER:
3 Q. Sir, I will repeat my question to you. How is it that you knew
4 that one of the Lukics had been tortured?
5 A. I'll explain it to you. TV and radio broadcast that, and there
6 was some footage, Sredoje Lukic half-naked, and they showed his bruises,
7 and that's what people were saying. They were telling how he had been
8 tortured. The whole world could see that.
9 Q. Was it after this, then, you then also heard Milan Lukic through
10 the media?
11 A. Later on, I heard about Milan Lukic. When it was, I don't know.
12 It was later. I don't know which year that was.
13 Q. What did you hear --
14 A. I guess in 1992. Well, I heard that he was from that town, and I
15 didn't know that he existed at all. I knew his father.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Ivetic. Just a minute, please, Witness.
17 Just a minute.
18 MR. IVETIC: Well, Your Honours, if newspaper accounts have been
19 ruled by this Trial Chamber to be inadmissible, I don't think asking the
20 witness what he has heard in the media about Milan Lukic is appropriate
21 for the Prosecution to be bringing at this late stage in the case.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Ivetic, I can't remember the Chamber making
23 such a ruling because we do take in hearsay, but of course, if it is
24 hearsay upon hearsay upon hearsay, then it is has very, very little
1 MR. IVETIC: Well, specifically with the Duga article, Your
2 Honours, that was ruled by this Trial Chamber to be inadmissible on two
3 or three occasions.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, but is this coming from the Duga magazine?
5 MR. WEBER: No. And Your Honour, I'd submit that that's not an
6 accurate statement as to the circumstances surrounding the Duga and this
7 application pending.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let's move on.
9 MR. WEBER:
10 Q. Sir, I put it to you that you are not the same Radomir Simsic
11 named as the individual being present at the Drina river on 7 June 1992
12 since you are not from Obrenovac; your nickname is not Raso or Rasa; that
13 you do not know either Ljubisa or Dusko Vasiljevic; and you do not claim
14 to be a part of Milan Lukic's group. What do you have to say about that?
15 A. Well, I'm not Rasa. I'm not from Obrenovac. I was not in a
16 group with Milan Lukic. I only learned of Lukic through the media.
17 That's all I have to tell you, nothing more than that.
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Ivetic.
19 MR. IVETIC: Just for the record, Prosecution counsel has
20 interjected. In part of Milan Lukic's group, there has been no
21 discussion, no evidence, no testimony today about that whatsoever, and
22 again, the Prosecution is trying to back-door in their own arguments and
23 wishful thinking.
24 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, that's not the case. That's reflective
25 of the testimony of the individual who named him.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Can I ask you, Witness, when did you first meet
2 or get to know Milan Lukic's parents?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The first time I met them, and
4 prior to that I hadn't seen them for a long time, was when they came to
5 express condolences for my brother. That's when I saw the father. And I
6 didn't even know that he had a son named Milan because I had left the
7 area and I didn't even know that he existed. So the father came and also
8 his mother. They expressed condolences to my brother, and that was when
9 I saw him.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: That was in 1992, then?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In 1991.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: 1991, yes. That's the first time you met
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I knew them before the war. I
15 knew of them because we are about same age, so I knew him by sight. We
16 were not friends. We just knew each other by sight.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: What I wanted to find out was for what period of
18 time prior to 1991 did you know them, the parents?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, you know what? I was born in
20 1945, and when I lived there, I lived there until I was 18 or 19, and it
21 was then that I knew them. And later on, I didn't see them at all until
22 they came to express condolences. I never saw them in the meantime.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: I have a clearer picture now, yes.
24 Mr. Weber.
25 MR. WEBER:
1 Q. Sir, you do not know an individual by the name of
2 Miodrag Mitrasinovic, do you?
3 A. No.
4 Q. You have no knowledge of the events that occurred at the Drina
5 river on the 7th of June, 1992; correct?
6 A. I don't know anything about it.
7 Q. Sir, I put it to you that it is possible another individual by
8 the name of Radomir Simsic came from Obrenovac at the end of May 1992 --
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the value of that question?
10 MR. WEBER: I'm putting it to this witness. It's the
11 Prosecution's theory that this witness was not the witness named by Mr.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: That's not for him to comment on. I don't think
14 there's much value in his answer to that question, Mr. Weber.
15 MR. WEBER: Okay.
16 Q. Sir, as you were not in Visegrad in 1992, you do not know if
17 another individual could have come there with your same name; is that
19 A. I don't know. I'm telling you for the tenth time that I don't
20 know anything.
21 MR. WEBER: No further questions.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Ivetic.
23 Re-examination by Mr. Ivetic:
24 Q. Sir, one question just to make it abundantly clear to everyone:
25 Based on your knowledge of the Simsics hailing from Visegrad, is there
1 any individual hailing from Visegrad whether living in Serbia or
2 otherwise that has the same name as you, Radomir Simsic?
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Weber.
4 MR. WEBER: Objection, foundation. This witness has testified
5 that he only lived there until 1966 and doesn't know of anything after
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Ivetic, I believe these matters have been
8 sufficiently dealt with by the witness, and the Chamber will now have to
9 assess the evidence.
10 MR. IVETIC: Agreed.
11 Thank you, sir.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Witness, that concludes your evidence. We thank
13 you for giving it, and you may now leave.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
15 [The witness withdrew]
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: I have two decisions to give.
17 On the 17th of April, 2009, the Defence for Sredoje Lukic filed a
18 motion requesting the admission of a report dated 17th March, describing
19 the --
20 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Private session, please.
22 [Private session]
10 [Open session]
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: On the 17th of April, 2009, the Defence of Milan
12 Lukic filed a motion to strike from the record the original and modified
13 versions of Exhibit P119 and the testimony of Ewa Tabeau relating
14 thereto. The Defence submits inter alia that it has raised the
15 possibility that persons named as victims in the exhibit are in fact
16 alive. The Trial Chamber has discretion to determine the weight of any
17 evidence on the record. The alleged deficiencies of Exhibit P119 and
18 Dr. Tabeau's evidence are issues which properly fall within the context
19 of the Chamber's discretion. The Defence motion is therefore dismissed.
20 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Ivetic, did you have a matter to raise?
22 MR. IVETIC: Yes, Your Honours. I wanted to draw the Court's
23 attention to the filing that we'd filed last night or early this morning,
24 I should say. That is, I see now it is just finally arrived on the web
25 mail as being filed. It's a serious filing that we've made that
1 Mr. Alarid has detailed in it the problems that he has and that our
2 Defence team has with the current schedule for the closing arguments.
3 It's the Defence request for additional time for final briefing, closing
4 argument, and notice of non-availability. We set forth in there and
5 document the unavailability of lead counsel to even appear for the
6 scheduled closing arguments that are now currently set for the 27th of
7 April, and we would beg and urge the Trial Chamber to consider this
8 filing, which sets forth in significant detail the hardships and problems
9 that we have that have prevented us and will prevent us from complying
10 with the schedule to have a professional job done for our client within
11 the time period that has been granted, in particular with the date for
12 closing arguments that has been set of the 27th of April. And given the
13 impending dead-lines that we have, et cetera, I just wanted to bring that
14 to Your Honours' attention since it was just filed early this morning,
15 late last night, and --
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the reason for the non-availability of
18 MR. IVETIC: There are several reasons, Your Honours, including
19 the engagement of counsel in cases before judges in New Mexico wherein
20 the Judges the cases have been previously continued at the mercy of the
21 trial schedule for this case in The Hague and for which he has to appear.
22 He cannot be in two places at one time, Your Honours, and this is a
23 matter where the Judges have bent over backwards to accommodate the
24 schedule, and you'll see one case I believe that's cited there has been
25 continued ten times in order to accommodate the scheduling that
1 Mr. Alarid has had here in The Hague
2 a final trial setting. So in order to be ethically and professionally
3 dutiful to his clients, Mr. Alarid's attendance at that trial has to be
4 considered, and there's also the personal issues --
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: My own view is that that is not a good enough
6 reason. Mr. Alarid should have considered all those matters when he
7 accepted to be counsel in this case. But the Chamber will consider the
8 application and give its ruling shortly.
9 Mr. Groome.
10 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, could I just ask for private session.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Private session.
12 [Private session]
11 Pages 7122-7124 redacted. Private session.
10 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.30 p.m.
11 to be reconvened on Monday, the 27th day of
12 April, 2009, at 2.15 p.m.