1 Friday, 30 August 2013
2 [Open session]
3 [Accused not present]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.40 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you and good morning, Your Honours. This
8 is case number IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
10 The Chamber regrets the late start.
11 I put on the record that the Chamber received a form like
12 yesterday, absence from court due to illness, although the attachment
13 says that it's not due to illness. It is dated the 30th of August. It
14 says that Mr. Mladic has discussed his absence with counsel and that he
15 understands his right to be present but that he waives his right on this
16 date and gives consent for the proceedings to continue.
17 There are no --
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ORIE: I refer to the attachment which expresses, signed by
20 the principal officer, that it's not due to illness that Mr. Mladic is
22 Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
23 [The witness entered court]
24 WITNESS: EMIR TURKUSIC [Resumed]
25 [Witness answered through Interpreter]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Turkusic.
2 THE WITNESS: Good morning.
3 JUDGE ORIE: I'd like to again remind you that you're still bound
4 by the solemn declaration that you will speak the truth, the whole truth
5 and nothing but the truth.
6 Ms. Harbour will now put some questions to you in re-examination.
7 Ms. Harbour you may proceed.
8 Re-examination Ms. Harbour:
9 Q. Dr. Turkusic I have two topics to cover with you today, and
10 you've already been here a long time, so I'd like to complete this as
11 quickly as possible although I would likely need 15 to 20 minutes rather
12 than the ten that I estimated yesterday. To complete this quickly, I'll
13 need your help, so I'd like to ask that you please listen carefully to my
14 questions and limit your answers to the information that I ask for.
15 I'm going to start with Markale 2 which you discussed at length
17 But first I would like to provide you with a hard copy of the
18 report that you wrote on the 29th of August, 1995, the day after the
19 Markale 2 incident.
20 MS. HARBOUR: The pages that I would like to give to the witness
21 are found at Exhibit P498 and it's pages 18 through 21 in the B/C/S.
22 Q. Dr. Turkusic, I would like you to take your time to refamiliarise
23 yourself with this report without providing any comments and just let me
24 know when you're ready for my questions.
25 Could we turn to page 19 in B/C/S and 16 in English of Exhibit
1 P498. I would like you to look under "findings." It's the second page
2 of the document you're looking at, Dr. Turkusic. Under findings, in
3 paragraph number 1, could you tell us, does this paragraph relate to the
4 stabiliser fin recovered at Markale 2?
5 A. [Interpretation] Yes, exactly.
6 MS. HARBOUR: Now could I ask the court officer to hand to
7 Dr. Turkusic the artefact which is 65 ter 22925 in our case and is
8 admitted in the Karadzic case as P1454.
9 Q. Dr. Turkusic, I have some questions for you about this object,
10 but before I ask them, please take time to inspect it without providing
11 any comments. In your report, which is on the monitors, you refer to a
12 steel part on which one fin was marked with number 1, with a waterproof
13 felt pen. Is the stabiliser in your hand marked with number 1?
14 A. Yes. I see it.
15 Q. Could you please hold up the stabiliser and indicate for the
16 Chamber where this marking is.
17 A. [Indicates]
18 Q. May the record reflect that the witness has held up the
19 stabiliser and indicated a fin.
20 In the same paragraph, you describe ten fins, welded by twos, and
21 you provide several other detailed descriptions. Does this stabiliser in
22 your hand match the descriptions in your report?
23 A. Yes. This stabiliser has five pairs of fins which makes a total
24 of ten fins, and they are welded on to the body of the stabiliser, as you
25 can see.
1 Q. In the last sentence of this paragraph we've been looking at in
2 your report, you indicate that printed on this object was MK M74, and
3 KB 9307. Do you see those markings on the object in your hand?
4 A. The markings are clearly visible and undamaged.
5 Q. Could you please hold up the stabiliser and indicate for the
6 Chamber where those markings are?
7 A. [Indicates]
8 Q. May the record reflect that the witness held up the fin and
9 indicated on the bottom part of the stabiliser.
10 Does the part of the stabiliser in your hand that bears those
11 markings, does that rotate? Feel free to actually touch that part and
13 A. Yes. It is mobile, it can be turned. And in the picture that we
14 saw yesterday, the two clearer ones, these two dimples were turned this
15 way by some 30 degrees or so. That can be confirmed by looking at those
16 images again. Here, in the primer, which is made of brass, I believe,
17 I see a mark left by a pointed object. Here in this central circle,
18 there is the primer or the detonator. And if we draw a line downward,
19 there is a marking of a sharp --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you've answered the question already. I
21 don't know whether this was what you were intending to elicit from the
22 witness, Ms. Harbour.
23 MS. HARBOUR: This wasn't. I didn't stop the witness because it
24 actually relates to the next question I have for him, but I'll ask that
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MS. HARBOUR:
3 Q. And Dr. Turkusic please bear in mind and given the limited time
4 that you should keep your answers to what I ask.
5 Can you tell from looking at that whether the mortar has been
7 A. Judging by the aspect of the detonator and the imprint in the
8 centre, I can tell that the explosive has been activated. If there had
9 been no dent, if there were no dent, I would be able to tell that it did
10 not explode. The detonator contains the primer, which then activates the
12 Q. Now, while you still have this object, I would like to bring up
13 the two stills from the video that the Defence showed you yesterday.
14 MS. HARBOUR: And these are from Exhibit D352 MFI and the time
15 codes of the stills are 52:44 and 53:03. The stills are at 65 ter 30257.
16 Your Honours, I apologise. These haven't yet been uploaded into e-court
17 but they will be momentarily, and in the meantime if I could ask
18 Ms. Stewart to bring up the image on Sanction.
19 Q. Dr. Turkusic, please only answer this question, if you can. Can
20 you tell whether the stabiliser that is shown in these photos is the same
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just for clarity, Madam Harbour, when you say same
23 stabiliser, do you mean are 12 and 13 one and the same thing or are you
24 saying are 12 and 13 similar to what he has in his hand?
25 MS. HARBOUR: Thank you for asking for clarification.
1 Q. What I mean, Dr. Turkusic, is can you tell whether 12 and 13 are
2 the same stabiliser? Please for now only focus on the photographs and
3 not on the stabiliser in your hand.
4 A. I must say by way of introduction that these two photographs were
5 taken from different angles. It seems to me that in the left-hand
6 photograph, it can be seen more clearly that this part of the stabiliser
7 differs from the temperature of melting iron. It hangs down here. And
8 that cannot be seen on the right-hand side because these parts of molten
9 steel have parts that protrude downward.
10 Q. I would just like to make it clear for the record that when
11 you're pointing to a part of the stabiliser, you're pointing to the far
12 end of the stabiliser on the opposite side from the fins.
13 Please continue.
14 A. That is correct.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do we understand the short answer to be you can't
16 tell whether they are the same thing?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot confirm that this is the
18 same object.
19 MS. HARBOUR:
20 Q. And again, only if you can, please only answer this question if
21 you can. Can you tell if the object in your hand is the same as either
22 of the ones depicted in the photos? And please only answer this if you
24 A. It looks very much like these. But holding this stabiliser in my
25 hand and looking at these two images at the same time, I'm inclined to
1 say that there is a difference, because in the pictures, these two
2 stabilisers that we see, one of the fins, both on the left and on the
3 right, closest to the ground, is some distance away from these flattened
4 fins, which I cannot observe on the part I hold in my hand. The fin that
5 is most clearly seen, that is next to the tarmac, is at a distance from
6 the two fins above that are flattened but they are very near each other,
7 and I cannot observe this detail looking at this stabiliser I'm holding
8 in my hand.
9 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honours this concludes my questions about the
10 stabiliser. In light of Dr. Turkusic's answers, perhaps the Chamber and
11 the Defence would like to inspect the stabiliser. In the meantime
12 I would like to tender it into evidence.
13 I understand that for administrative reasons, since the artefact
14 is in evidence in the Karadzic case as P1454, the Registry cannot also
15 mark it as evidence in our case. Thus we have uploaded photos of the
16 object -- in view of the physical object as 65 ter 22925, and although
17 normally the Chamber does not consider items that are not in evidence in
18 its deliberations, I would request a ruling that in light of these
19 exceptional administrative, purely administrative circumstances, that the
20 Chamber would consider this physical object as if it were evidence and
21 that it is in the Registry's possession and available for inspection at
22 any time.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, the latter part of the request of
24 Ms. Harbour, that it is evidence, although only photographs will be in
25 our file, but the object still will be available for inspection at any
2 MR. LUKIC: We have no problem.
3 JUDGE ORIE: No problem with that. Then the Chamber will
4 consider whether it agrees or disagrees with that an object cannot be in
5 evidence in two cases. So therefore, we will ask Mr. Registrar to assign
6 a number which certainly does -- is linked to the photographs, but
7 whether it also is linked to the object itself, we'll think about that.
8 Mr. Registrar.
9 MR. LUKIC: Only one question before.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. LUKIC: Which, if we can be guided, which of these -- from
12 which this photo corresponds to from the stabilisers from our exhibit,
13 1D1224? If the Prosecution can tell us.
14 MS. HARBOUR: Sorry, I don't understand your question.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Could we have a look at the exhibit Mr. Lukic is
16 referring to?
17 MR. LUKIC: 1D1224. If you remember those four pictures of
18 stabilisers with red dots, without red dots. Is it left or the right
19 one, if they can be precise.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Could we have a look at it again?
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Lukic, they only can determine that if they
22 are of the view that they are different, that they depict different
23 objects, which is not clear until now. This is --
24 MR. LUKIC: If they cannot, that's fine. If they can say that's
25 the same with the both that's fine.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Okay.
2 MR. LUKIC: If they can just guide us what they claim.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
4 MS. HARBOUR: Our position is that these are the same stabilisers
5 and that the object, the artefact that we've tendered, is the same as
6 both of these.
7 JUDGE ORIE: What I understand from what we see on our screen now
8 is that the photographs to the right -- one second, please. That the
9 photographs to the right, L2 above and L2 down, are pictures taken of the
10 artefact which is in the possession of the Prosecution. And that the
11 left photographs are photographs taken by the investigators at the time
12 of the event. Therefore, I do understand that the pictures which are
13 presented now by the Prosecution as replacing more or less the artefact
14 itself are pictures of the artefact which is in the possession of the
15 Prosecution and therefore certainly is the same as L2 above and L2 down,
16 and that it's the Prosecution's position that it's also the same as the
17 two L1s on this exhibit. Is that a correct understanding? And that
18 whether it's the same or not, that is in dispute.
19 MS. HARBOUR: That is absolutely correct, Your Honour. And in
20 addition, just for clarity, it is also our position that on the stills we
21 presented as 65 ter 30257, the two photos depict the same stabiliser and
22 that is also one and the same as the artefact we tendered.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's the position of the Prosecution.
24 Mr. Lukic, is everything clear?
25 Then the photographs of the artefact replacing the artefact
1 itself or perhaps the artefact being covered by the exhibit number,
2 Mr. Registrar, would be what number?
3 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P3053 [sic], Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And is admitted into evidence. The Chamber
5 will consider whether it includes the artefact itself.
6 Mr. Lukic, would you like to inspect the --
7 MR. LUKIC: I don't think that I'm qualified enough.
8 Dr. Turkusic confirmed that that part is moving. That's all we can
9 inspect and it was already confirmed.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber would like to inspect the
11 artefact, and if possible, would like to have the previous picture, that
12 is the stills, on the screen when we inspect the --
13 MS. HARBOUR: I've been informed that it has now been uploaded in
14 e-court, 65 ter 30257.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, P1353 seems to be a bit of a low
16 number for this case for the photographs of the artefact.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that is Exhibit P2053.
18 JUDGE ORIE: 2053.
19 THE REGISTRAR: And the 65 ter number is 22925.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber has inspected [Microphone not
23 activated] --
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Judge, please.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'm sorry. The Chamber puts hereby on the record
1 that we have inspected the artefact in some detail and have compared it
2 with the photographs, the stills, from the video showing number 12 and
3 13, time on the stills 12.55 and 13.00.
4 Ms. Harbour.
5 MS. HARBOUR:
6 Q. I'll turn to my second topic now, Dr. Turkusic. You've been
7 asked many questions about a sketch that was included in the
8 Simon Bolivar incident investigation file. And you testified at
9 transcripts page 15808 and 15843 that you did not create this sketch.
10 Now, I would like us to look at the cover page and the legend that
11 accompanied this sketch.
12 MS. HARBOUR: So if we could please have Exhibit P2043 and page
13 14 in the B/C/S and the English.
14 Q. This cover bears the name of Miralem Sarvan and this is the cover
15 for the drawing of the scene which is the sketch that you were asked
16 about. In the CSB report for this incident, which is in evidence as
17 P2017, this individual, Miralem Sarvan is listed as the criminal
18 technician for CSB Sarajevo who was present for this investigation. In
19 your experience, were the criminal technicians who gathered evidence and
20 took photos at an investigation site, were they responsible for
21 determining the direction of fire?
22 A. I don't think so, because their job during the war in numerous
23 cases was not to establish the direction of fire. In this instance it
24 was our duty to establish the direction of fire and to measure all the
25 elements required for that determination. So our team, and I was part of
1 that team, independently of the sketch and the details contained there,
2 we did our own measurements of the height of the building, the distance
3 of the impact horizontally and vertically, and we calculated all the
4 angles regardless of what the sketch says.
5 Q. Just for clarity, since you've referenced the height of the
6 building, here we are talking about the Simon Bolivar school shelling in
7 Dobrinja, not about Markale 2. I just want to make sure that you
8 understand that that was the question. And really my question was
9 limited to whether or not criminal technicians are involved in
10 determining direction of fire.
11 A. The establishing of direction of fire was established by the KDZ,
12 of which I was a member. That was our task. Criminal investigation
13 technicians did other things, made sketches, marked trace evidence found
14 on the ground and at the scene, but they did not get themselves involved
15 in determining direction of fire because the final report on the
16 direction of fire came from our source.
17 MS. HARBOUR: If we could now turn to the next page of this
18 document, which is the legend for the sketch.
19 Q. Now, Dr. Turkusic, please keep your answer very closely only to
20 what I ask of you. Does this legend indicate that the sketch contains a
21 marking for the azimuth?
22 A. Azimuth is not mentioned here at all, and there is no indication
23 of it, no marking of it, in the legend that we can see.
24 Q. If a crime scene technician in his sketch mislabels the direction
25 north on his crime scene sketch, would this impact the KDZ team's
1 determination of the direction of fire?
2 A. Not at all. Independently of any markings in the sketch and the
3 legend which we are looking at, independently of all these data and
4 facts, we established our own data and facts as a team and by applying
5 the procedure I ascribed yesterday. If you have more people acting
6 independently, you can make more comparisons in order to avoid errors.
7 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honours, this concludes my redirect for this
8 witness, although I do have some documentary issues to bring up, but that
9 doesn't need to be done with the witness.
10 JUDGE ORIE: If it's not to be done with the witness, we'll
11 postpone that.
12 Questioned by the Court:
13 JUDGE ORIE: I have one question.
14 Witness, we have looked at two tail-fins, one with a 12 next to
15 it, the other with a 13. You said you can't confirm that these are the
16 same. We also saw that nowhere in the report a second tail-fin is
17 mentioned. Do you have any explanation for a tail-fin with number 12 to
18 it which at least looks very much the same as a tail-fin with number 13,
19 where no two tail fins are described? Do you have any explanation for
20 the -- for that part of the report which is somewhat confusing perhaps?
21 A. I'm confused as well, Your Honours. This part of the job, i.e.
22 the marking with numbers, the details that were later photographed and
23 numbers attached to them, had been done before our arrival. In addition
24 to that, we were not interested in that aspect of job. I don't know what
25 kind of error took place here. In order to confirm whether these two
1 stabilisers are identical or not, I am still at a loss because if you
2 take photographs from different angles and different distances, this
3 considerably changes the whole picture. It substantially changes the
4 reality that a photograph is purporting to portray.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: One follow-up question on that. What was the
7 rule during that time? If the photographer takes pictures from different
8 angles, remain the number put next to such an object the same or it would
9 be the number changed for the next photograph on the same object but from
10 a different angle? I'm referring to number 12 and 13. But in general
11 terms, can you help me with that?
12 A. No, I cannot because I don't know. This process of marking and
13 photographing and possibly changing the numbers for different angles is
14 something that I'm not familiar with; therefore, I can only speculate and
15 this is not consistent with the way I am giving evidence.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you for that answer.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, have the questions in re-examination and
18 the questions by the Bench triggered any need for further questions?
19 MR. LUKIC: Just two or three short ones.
20 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic:
21 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Turkusic, here I am again but I'm not going
22 to bother you for too long. I know you're keen to go home. This part
23 that you just saw that is revolving or rotating, is it true that, in
24 fact, during the assembly it is glued by a very strong glue that cannot
25 be affected by any explosion so as a result all these parts remain firmly
1 fixed even after the detonation?
2 A. I believe that the special key is used during assembly that these
3 parts are tightly screwed, and I think it's impossible to unscrew it
4 during detonation. It can only be torn into parts, but the rotation
5 force cannot remove these parts.
6 Q. Just briefly, relating to the Simon Bolivar sketch, as a matter
7 of practice, are you using the sketches and the material provided by your
8 colleagues who were at the scene? I'm talking about other cases. Did
9 you rely on their documentation?
10 A. Well, on a case-by-case basis. If a CSB provides something and
11 seeks our opinion and analysis, they precisely list the materials
12 provided by them and on the basis of that we give our opinion on every
13 item contained in their request. I don't recall that that was exactly a
14 common practice for them to send sketches. Rather, they asked us to come
15 to the scene and determine the determination, or if not, we just wanted
16 our opinion about the material that they provided us with.
17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Doctor. I have no further
18 questions for you.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
20 Further Questioned by the Court:
21 JUDGE ORIE: I have one additional question. You did not fully
22 answer Mr. Lukic's question. Is this central detonation part in the fin,
23 is that glued or is it just screwed in? You can see we saw that you can
24 easily screw entirely out. Is it glued in any way, to your knowledge?
25 A. I believe that it's just screwed. If you can unscrew it with the
1 hand, that means --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Can the witness please repeat the last part of
3 his answer?
4 JUDGE ORIE: You started saying and the interpreters couldn't
5 follow you. You said if you can unscrew it with the hand, that means,
6 and could you resume from there?
7 A. If now one can rotate it with the hand, I believe that it has
8 been loosened by some kind of key after being found, because never before
9 had I an opportunity, and we inspected a lot of stabilisers, to rotate
10 this part that we were able to do here in terms of screwing or
11 unscrewing. So before assembly, this part had been tightly screwed in
12 and there is no force directed in such a manner that, during a
13 detonation, it can be unscrewed in terms of rotation. The middle part
14 where the detonator is, this part is inserted by pressing it into the
15 central part, and you need to use a force to press it into it and
16 therefore place it firmly in that location, and I'm talking about the
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Turkusic, this then concludes your
21 examination. I'd like to thank you very much for coming to The Hague and
22 for having answered all the questions that were put to you by the parties
23 and put to you by the Bench, and I wish you a safe return home again.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Fiat
25 justicia et pereat mundus.
1 JUDGE ORIE: You may follow the usher.
2 [The witness withdrew]
3 JUDGE ORIE: Is the Prosecution ready to call its next witness
4 who will testify in closed session and with pseudonym? But perhaps we
5 first deal with administrative matters.
6 MS. HARBOUR: Yes to both, please, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The administrative matters first.
8 MS. HARBOUR: We've reviewed the video that was MFI'd yesterday
9 as D352, and we've determined that this video was provided to the
10 Prosecution by Witness RM105. In the clip that the Defence played it is
11 clear from the time stamp that five minutes of video are missing between
12 the moment that the stabiliser is shown in one place with placard 12 and
13 the moment that it is shown in another place with placard 13, and that is
14 as we received it from the witness. We do not have any footage to
15 account for these five minutes.
16 We've agreed with the Defence that the entire 13 minute clip of
17 the Markale 2 investigation should be provided to Your Honours in order
18 to provide as much context as possible for this video, and for your
19 information, in the clip a UN team is visible measuring the stabiliser in
20 a location different from where it was originally found during the
21 investigation, and a second videographer filming this measuring is
22 visible. And we would direct Your Honour's attention to Exhibit P446,
23 already in evidence, at time stamp beginning 606, where the footage of
24 this second videographer of the UN team measuring the stabiliser is
1 MR. LUKIC: I have to object now, this is closing argument. It's
2 not something we need for admission of the evidence.
3 MS. HARBOUR: I was simply attempting to provide some context for
4 the Chamber but I will defer to Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I think what you are doing, you are stressing the
6 importance of certain elements of that evidence, whereas at this moment,
7 the primary thing to do is to decide on admission.
8 Mr. Lukic, any -- are we having new -- or are you now referring
9 to what we should look at? Because let's see --
10 MS. HARBOUR: The Defence had agreed with us that 13 minutes of
11 the video --
12 MR. LUKIC: Yes, we agreed, and there is no need for any further
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, perhaps --
15 MR. LUKIC: We agreed to have it [overlapping speakers] --
16 JUDGE ORIE: -- but not at this moment.
17 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's the difference.
19 MS. HARBOUR: And that the surrogate sheet for that 13 minute
20 clip to be tendered as Exhibit D352 has been uploaded as 65 ter 30256.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, for the whole of the 13 minute clip
22 the number would be?
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, that will be Exhibit D2054.
24 JUDGE ORIE: D2054 is admitted. D20- or P2054?
25 THE REGISTRAR: I mean P2054, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: P2054.
2 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honours, with all due respect this was marked
3 for identification as D352 pending an agreement between the Prosecution
4 and Defence, so I would request that --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Therefore D352 is ready to be admitted into evidence
6 because both parties agree on it. And the other number, Mr. Registrar,
7 you just mentioned can be vacated. It's -- so there is -- where the
8 transcript reads D2054 but where it was supposed to be P2054, both
9 numbers are free at this moment.
10 And we have now decided on the 13 minute clip which is now
11 admitted into evidence.
12 There was another matter, I think, Ms. Harbour, about the total
13 investigation of some -- I'm having some difficulties in finding it at
14 this very moment, but --
15 MS. HARBOUR: The Simon Bolivar incident.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 MS. HARBOUR: Yes, Your Honours admitted the entire file, a
18 replaced --
19 JUDGE ORIE: We have done so.
20 MS. HARBOUR: Yes, yesterday. There are several other matters
21 that I need --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Please, take them one by one.
23 MS. HARBOUR: The witness's statement, which is P2009, was marked
24 for identification but has not yet been admitted, so I would tender it at
25 this time.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, any further [overlapping speakers] --
2 MR. LUKIC: We have the same objections as before, that it is
3 more expert testimony, and we maintain same objections as we had in our
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE ORIE: The objection is denied. On the record it's not
7 clear what P number you mentioned. P2009. It is hereby admitted into
9 MS. HARBOUR: And just two brief items during the course of this
10 witness's statement the Chamber requested that we agree with the Defence
11 on several matters. One at transcript page 15834, you requested that we
12 agree on the location of Safeta Zajke street number 43 in reference to
13 the Defence map admitted as D348. We haven't had the opportunity to
14 discuss it but we did upload as 65 ter 13157 a map where we indicate at
15 point 11 the location, and it is consistent with what Mr. Lukic described
16 to the witness during the testimony.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And what you uploaded as 65 ter 13157, would
18 you like to have that admitted into evidence?
19 MS. HARBOUR: We uploaded it simply for reference so that the
20 Defence could note where we contend that this address is.
21 JUDGE ORIE: And do you agree? Because for the Chamber then to
22 adopt that, we would need a document which --
23 MR. LUKIC: We cannot agree because I don't know.
24 MS. HARBOUR: We did send an e-mail to the Defence yesterday
25 morning with this information.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Are you tendering it?
2 MS. HARBOUR: If Your Honours would like --
3 JUDGE ORIE: We would like to see it first.
4 MS. HARBOUR: -- I'm happy to tender it.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I would like to see it first. Could we have it on
6 the screen?
7 MS. HARBOUR: It's point number 11.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if you tender this, Ms. Harbour, may I take it
9 that we are supposed not to rely on any other things like 6 or 12 or 15?
10 It's just 11 where the Prosecution claims the street you mentioned is.
11 MS. HARBOUR: Yes, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Can that be zoomed in on number 11? Thank you.
13 MR. LUKIC: Actually I'm sorry, I thought it's something
14 different. I can agree on this because I had marked on my map at the
15 same spot where we can find this green dot.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So the green dot, 11, reflects a joint view
17 of the parties on where the incident -- and again you had the name
18 Ms. Harbour.
19 MR. LUKIC: Safeta Zajke.
20 MS. HARBOUR: Number 43.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Safeta Zajke, that it's -- first of all, the map
22 gives the name of that street but the green spot indicates, in the shared
23 view of the parties, the location where the incident took place.
24 Mr. Registrar, the number would be?
25 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2054, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: P2054 is admitted into evidence.
2 MS. HARBOUR: And finally, at transcript page 15826, the Chamber
3 requested the parties to agree on -- this is in relation to the
4 Simon Bolivar school incident, to agree on where in photograph number 2
5 was the wall that is depicted in photograph number 3. And these two
6 photographs are in P2043, pages 20 and 21. The Defence would prefer to
7 consult their expert before agreeing. However, in our submission, it is
8 clear from the placement of the water pump and the buckets arranged
9 around the water pump --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps we could have them on the screen for a while
11 so that we are able to follow. Could we have them enlarged?
12 MS. HARBOUR: If we could also have page 21? Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We have seen this now. Mr. Lukic read into
14 the record the text, and I think it referred to the other photograph. We
15 will now -- could you please read that again? Yes. We see photograph 3
16 has a water pipe vertically approximately in the middle of the light part
17 of the photograph.
18 Ms. Harbour, is that where we have to focus on?
19 MS. HARBOUR: Yes, Your Honour. Yes. And the buckets arranged
20 around the water pump.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Buckets arranged around the water pump. I must
22 admit I have to enlarge it to see it properly.
23 MS. HARBOUR: If we could perhaps have the bottom photo on the
24 left enlarged?
25 JUDGE ORIE: There we -- yes. I now better see the buckets.
1 Yes. And could I have now a look again at the next one, number 3? Let
2 me see. Yes, yes. Perhaps together as we had them a second ago.
3 MS. HARBOUR: The Prosecution's submission is that the wall from
4 photograph 3 would be to the far right and barely visible in photograph
5 2, based on the arrangement of the water pump and the buckets.
6 JUDGE ORIE: I'll give it -- one second.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: We might need to give it another look. It is in
9 evidence and at least it's clear what the position of the Prosecution is
10 in this respect.
11 Mr. Lukic?
12 MR. LUKIC: I cannot deny nor confirm. I have to consult with
13 somebody. I really cannot.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we'll hear from you later whether there
15 is agreement on it, "yes" or "no." That was the last administrative
16 matter you wanted to raise?
17 MS. HARBOUR: Yes, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Now we are working on a bit of a different schedule,
19 that is one hour and a half, and then the last portion usually is a short
20 one. I wonder whether we could take the break now but before doing so,
21 Mr. Lukic, you're on your feet.
22 MR. LUKIC: If we can finish with the administrative matters in
23 connection with this witness.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. LUKIC: First of all, we would -- the Prosecution offered
1 today 65 ter 30257, and those are stills of two tail fins. We would
2 offer them into the evidence under a P number as we received that video
3 under our D number.
4 JUDGE ORIE: It's the one at time 1255 as shown on the still --
5 MR. LUKIC: And 13.
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- and the other one 1300.
7 MR. LUKIC: Yes, so it's -- because the witness explained the
8 photos, we should see them to be able to understand his testimony.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And I think they were shown in -- they had not yet
10 been uploaded and that was the reason why they were shown in Sanction,
11 I think.
12 MS. HARBOUR: Yes, Your Honours. And now they are uploaded.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Under number?
14 MS. HARBOUR: 6530257, yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: And we would like to have that in evidence.
16 Mr. Registrar, the number would be?
17 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2055, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ORIE: P2055 is admitted into evidence.
19 Mr. Lukic.
20 MR. LUKIC: Thank you. And I also forgot yesterday to offer the
21 documents we discussed with the witness into the evidence, so I would
22 like to do it now. First of all, 1D1198. If you want it can be called
23 on the screen.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Could you perhaps briefly describe it.
25 MR. LUKIC: It's an ABiH Army General Staff of armed forces
1 number 3 production of military equipment during the war.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Any objection, Ms. Harbour?
3 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honours I would like to see this on the
4 screen. If this is the one without a translation --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then it should be marked for identification. It is
6 where the witness testified, commented on that information was not yet
7 confirmed, I think, but Mr. Lukic then said that that's on a different
8 portion of the document. It was production facilities.
9 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: And it was intelligence from the Serb army, from the
11 VRS, Mr. Lukic, if you remember well.
12 MR. LUKIC: This is -- this is -- yeah, this one is from
13 ABH Army.
14 JUDGE ORIE: ABH, yes.
15 MS. HARBOUR: It's pending a translation. If we could --
16 MR. LUKIC: Then MFI it.
17 JUDGE ORIE: But once we have a translation, you have no
19 MS. HARBOUR: I have no idea what the document says or whether it
20 was put to the witness in the correct way, so we would reserve our
22 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Yes. You reserve that position.
23 Mr. Registrar, the number would be?
24 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, 65 ter number 1D1198 will be
25 MFI'd D353.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And we are waiting for a translation.
2 Mr. Lukic.
3 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, the next one will be 1D1201. It's a
4 Google earth map of Simon Bolivar.
5 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honours, I do object to the admission of this
6 one. The witness wasn't able to find anything on it.
7 JUDGE ORIE: The witness indeed said that he.
8 MR. LUKIC: Exactly, I'm sorry. I have it marked here but -- too
9 small letters, I couldn't see it. Yes, we withdraw this.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but I take it that the parties could agree on
11 where the Simon Bolivar school is now at least, whatever shape it may
12 have had at the time, but we have approximately the location. So you're
13 invited to agree on that and this one is not tendered any longer. It's
15 Any further matter?
16 MR. LUKIC: Yes. 1D1221, it's the document just compiled from
17 the CSB books and when we were -- we discussed with the witness
18 regularity of numbers of documents of KDZ and CSB. This will be
19 discussed further for sure, and we will need it [overlapping speakers].
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Discussed further by who?
21 JUDGE ORIE: Other witnesses, is that --
22 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] Yes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Would it then to have it MFI'd so that we know that
24 this witness --
25 MR. LUKIC: Discussed this document.
1 JUDGE ORIE: -- discussed it, although we didn't deal with any
2 detail. He just said, well, whatever happens.
3 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honours, we would object to admission to this
4 document through anyone other than the person who prepared it who can
5 explain what it purports to be.
6 MR. LUKIC: That's our ballistic experts who went through the
7 records, so --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So --
9 MS. HARBOUR: So perhaps once the ballistic experts testify it
10 could be tendered through that individual.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Could it be MFI'd at this moment because the witness
12 commented on it.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And we need a translation.
14 JUDGE ORIE: And we need a translation anyhow.
15 MR. LUKIC: Yes. Then the photo, 1D1224 -- okay, sorry.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE ORIE: The document will be MFI'd awaiting translation, and
18 once translation is there, we still are waiting for further explanation
19 by your experts, Mr. Lukic.
20 The number would be, Mr. Registrar?
21 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. 65 ter number 1D1221 will be
22 MFI'd D354.
23 JUDGE ORIE: And keeps the status for the time being.
24 Any other matter?
25 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour. Next one, 1D1224.
1 JUDGE ORIE: One second, I think the -- could you please repeat
2 the number, Mr. Registrar?
3 THE REGISTRAR: MFI D354, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: D354. Mr. Lukic, next one.
5 MR. LUKIC: Next one is 1D1224, it was a four pictures of
6 stabilisers. We discussed it in lengthy.
7 MS. HARBOUR: We do object to the admission of this. Again,
8 I think -- in our submission, this should be tendered through the
9 individual who created it and who created the line, so perhaps if we
10 could wait to have it tendered for the Defence expert.
11 JUDGE ORIE: But the matter is so simple, Ms. Harbour, the simple
12 matter is that the position of the inner ring is different in relation to
13 the fins and therefore must have been turned, whether it's the same,
14 whether it's a different one, that is the simple matter the Defence
15 wanted to show through this witness, and even the Chamber by its own
16 observation, if we have it in evidence, can see it.
17 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honours, that may be how the document was used
18 with this witness, but the photographs are taken at different angles,
19 parts of the stabilisers depicted in one aren't depicted in the other.
20 There is simply a lot of information in this document that couldn't be
21 spoken about by this witness and wasn't put to this witness.
22 JUDGE ORIE: The document will be MFI'd.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, 65 ter number 1D1224 will be
24 MFI D355.
25 JUDGE ORIE: D355 keeps that status for the time being.
1 Mr. Lukic.
2 MR. LUKIC: We proposed one for admission, one rule of mortar,
3 82-millimetres. It's a pretty short one and now we have translation as
4 well. It was translated pretty swiftly by CLSS, so it's 1D1205.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Harbour?
6 MS. HARBOUR: For this, the Prosecution would like to receive the
7 entire manual for the 82 mortar from the Defence, and if it would be
8 possible to agree on portions from the manual that could be tendered. In
9 addition, the Prosecution has a manual for the 120 mortar, 122-millimetre
10 mortar which perhaps we could also agree on experts to be admitted with
11 the Defence.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Is it 122-millimetre mortar or 120-millimetre?
13 MS. HARBOUR: 120. Your Honours, I apologise for the lapse in my
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ORIE: This document will be MFI'd and that the parties are
17 invited to report to the Chamber the result of their further
18 conversations on context.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, 65 ter 1D1205 will be MFI D356.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And keeps the status for the time being.
21 Any other matter, Mr. Lukic?
22 MR. LUKIC: Yes, 1D1230 -- 1D1231. That's the sketch placed on a
23 Sarajevo map with those angles.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MS. HARBOUR: We object to this one. The witness wasn't able to
1 say anything about it. And if Your Honours recall, this is the one about
2 which Mr. Lukic appeared to be offering us expert testimony with a little
3 more said about the document. So we could object to this, again it would
4 be best tendered through the Defence expert.
5 MR. LUKIC: No, I was asked by Ms. Harbour to explain --
6 MS. HARBOUR: Yes.
7 MR. LUKIC: -- I explained, and the witness was testifying based
8 on this document. Whether he confirmed or not, this is the document used
9 in this trial to cross-examine the witness. We will discuss it with our
10 experts but now it can be admitted easily.
11 MS. HARBOUR: The witness said very little about this document.
12 The witness wasn't able to say anything.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 MR. LUKIC: Before you decide, he confirmed the angle of fire on
15 this one although today maybe he testified differently.
16 MS. HARBOUR: If I could please have a transcript reference for
17 that, Mr. Lukic?
18 MR. LUKIC: Now?
19 MS. HARBOUR: If --
20 MR. LUKIC: I'll give it to you later.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then we'll MFI it until this has been
22 resolved and then we can continue the discussion on admission on from
23 then or whether it remains MFI'd.
24 Mr. Registrar, the number --
25 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: -- number under which it will be marked for
2 identification is?
3 THE REGISTRAR: It will be MFI D357, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And keeps that status for the time being.
5 Mr. Lukic, anything else?
6 MR. LUKIC: And we only owe you to replace with -- as
7 I understood it, with the correct drawing of angle of 160 degrees, on
8 351, D351, but now it's part of P498, page 23. I would just ask to get
9 some clear guidance how to do this, if it's not part of --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Could we have a look at it to start with. These are
11 [overlapping speakers] --
12 MR. LUKIC: P498 should be page 23.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: But D351 was already admitted.
14 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And this is the marked one.
16 MR. LUKIC: Yes. Only by [overlapping speakers] --
17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Marked by the witness.
18 MR. LUKIC: Honourable Judge Orie told me that I should have a
19 precise drawing done by somebody probably.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, that. Yes, now I do remember that. You have
21 uploaded the precise 160?
22 MR. LUKIC: Not yet.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Not yet.
24 MR. LUKIC: Because it has to be done by somebody who can do
25 precise drawing.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Well, this is -- this is what the witness did.
2 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: And I would say everyone can on a spare Saturday
4 afternoon, add, if he likes, the proper 160 degree --
5 MR. LUKIC: I can have it on Saturday, this Saturday.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You have a spare Saturday afternoon, Mr. Lukic, I do
7 understand, which I hope you'll enjoy. Let's -- yes, you'll understand
8 what my problem is and it is --
9 MR. LUKIC: Only now it's P. Now it's P498.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Is this as marked or is this unmarked by the
12 MR. LUKIC: This is the --
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The P number is unmarked. The marked number is
15 MR. LUKIC: So we just replace D351.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Why?
17 JUDGE ORIE: Well, we can keep it and you add.
18 MR. LUKIC: Add.
19 JUDGE ORIE: You add one where you have -- with the precision of
20 Saturday afternoon have drawn that 160 [overlapping speakers] --
21 MR. LUKIC: That was all we had, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's all what you had.
23 Ms. Harbour, nothing on your part?
24 MS. HARBOUR: This doesn't give rise to any new issues.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Weber?
1 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, the Prosecution does have a number of
2 other matters that we can deal with throughout the course of the day
3 whenever it's most convenient for the Chamber. I can start on some now
4 if you like or --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I suggest that if you can do one or two in
6 three minutes, then we start with that, and then take from 11.00 to 11.30
7 the break if that's possible. And please start with the urgent ones.
8 MR. WEBER: With -- the most urgent one is at this time the
9 Prosecution requests a short extension of time with respect to the --
10 sorry, I'm just going to the most urgent one -- Prosecution is seeking a
11 one-week extension to file its 92 quater motions for Milan Babic and
12 RM251. We're --
13 THE INTERPRETER: Kindly slow down, thank you very much, and
14 please repeat from the beginning.
15 MR. WEBER: Thank you. The Prosecution is seeking an extension
16 of one week to file its 92 quater motions for Milan Babic and RM251.
17 Right now we are in the process of further reducing and focusing --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Slowing down means slowing down, Mr. Weber.
19 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Judge.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Not repeating at the same speed.
21 MR. WEBER: We're in the process of reducing the volume of the
22 materials and further focusing our submissions, and we believe that with
23 the additional week we will be able to submit improved submissions than
24 if we were to submit them today, so we are respectfully requesting a one
25 week extension.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, any position on that?
2 MR. LUKIC: We never object to this requests for extension of
3 time as the Prosecution never objects to our requests.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and if it results in a reduction of the
5 material the Chamber grants --
6 MR. LUKIC: I'm sure that Ms. Harbour would object that one also.
7 JUDGE ORIE: That's -- okay.
8 The leave is granted, Mr. Weber.
9 MR. WEBER: Thank you very much, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: By the way there is one other urgent matter that is
11 the request for reinstatement of the protective measures for the next
12 witness to appear, which is Witness RM021. The Chamber has considered
13 it. The Chamber has also considered that there is no objection from the
14 Defence. And I think I alluded already earlier to the decision of the
15 Chamber; that is, that the protective measures which were applied earlier
16 and then rescinded, that is closed session and pseudonym, are reinstated.
17 Mr. Weber, unless there is a very urgent matter, it's 11.00.
18 MR. WEBER: We just have to address one other witness and we can
19 actually do that in closed session, if you would like, after the break.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We will then do it after the break. We take a
21 break and we will resume at 11.30.
22 --- Recess taken at 11.00 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 11.33 a.m.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, there were a few matters, I would rather
25 not lose too much time with the witness but if you can deal with them.
1 MR. WEBER: I'll be quick but speak slowly.
2 There are two matters the Prosecution has regarding the
3 Prosecution's Rule 92 bis notice for Mr. Ewan Brown which was filed this
4 past Monday. The first one, the Prosecution would like to put on the
5 record that the B/C/S translation of Mr. Brown's Manjaca report has been
6 completed and has been disclosed to the Defence this morning. (redacted)
3 Any other matter, Mr. Weber?
4 MR. WEBER: No, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then is the Prosecution ready, Ms. D'Ascoli, to call
6 its next witness, which is RM021 if I understand you well?
7 MS. D'ASCOLI: Yes, we are, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Then we move into closed session.
9 [Closed session]
11 Pages 15951-15995 redacted. Closed session.
14 [Open session]
15 JUDGE ORIE: This was a shared operation by Defence, Prosecution
16 and Registry.
17 THE REGISTRAR: We are now in open session, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
19 I don't think that there is -- Mr. Lukic?
20 MR. LUKIC: I'm sorry, I see that we have couple more minutes.
21 I just want to inform you, Your Honours, that we put some translations
22 into the system.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. LUKIC: It's first for D356 which was MFI'd. It's rule on
25 mortar 82 millimetres. It's not full version, only the version we put
1 into the system. We agreed with the Prosecution that we will see if they
2 want to add something into it but maybe we should just connect the
3 translations so they can follow what's inside already.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So we -- it's a first step where other steps
5 may follow later for D356.
6 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: For the portion used until now, Madam Registrar,
8 the --
9 MR. LUKIC: Yes. It has doc ID 1D060637.
10 JUDGE ORIE: And that translation may be attached to D356 and
11 we'll later hear whether any further context is required.
12 Madam Registrar.
13 Yes, before taking any further steps we wait until the parties
14 have met and see what portions are still needed.
15 MR. LUKIC: And one more document, although I still don't know if
16 it's a separate document or it's part of the larger document now. It's
17 photo documentation I was reading into the transcript.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. LUKIC: Now we have a translation since we sent it.
20 JUDGE ORIE: That's the photo documentation of --
21 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: -- of the school --
23 MR. LUKIC: School, yes. Simon Bolivar.
24 JUDGE ORIE: We now have I think the whole of the -- the whole of
25 the documentation is now uploaded.
1 MR. LUKIC: I don't know if there is translation.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Could I hear --
3 MR. LUKIC: Before it was 1D1199.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The question is whether that is now part of a
5 broader -- and I also do not know whether the entire documentation,
6 whether that contained already English translations.
7 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I'm checking Exhibit P2043 right now to
8 see if it includes the photographs.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And whether it also includes translations.
10 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I can confirm starting on e-court page
11 20 of the original P2043, the photographs are included. With respect to
12 the translations, there are translations for those photographs that start
13 on the e-court page 19 of the English version of P2043.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that, and could we just look at the
15 following page and see whether the subtitles of the photos -- it seems
16 that they are. Yes. It seems that all the subtitles -- there is only
17 one thing I think for photograph 3, that the first part is words
18 illegible. It's my recollection that you read the whole of the title,
19 Mr. Lukic. I admire your skills to read the illegible but it is on the
20 record. Perhaps we could --
21 MR. LUKIC: Semi-blind people can do that sometimes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps the Prosecution could look at whether the
23 illegible parts can -- are now legible or at least read by Mr. Lukic.
24 Anything else, Mr. Lukic?
25 Yes, that's -- therefore is no need to change anything because
1 it's now in evidence.
2 Anything else, Mr. Lukic?
3 MR. LUKIC: I can tell you that I can read this easily again.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So therefore, the English translation should
5 be checked against the original to see whether the declaration of
6 illegibility, whether that is a valid one or whether we could have a
7 better translation.
8 MR. LUKIC: I have nothing further, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Nothing further. Prosecution nothing further.
10 We will then adjourn for the day and we'll resume Monday, the 2nd
11 of September, at 9.30 in the morning but in Courtroom I.
12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.15 p.m.,
13 to be reconvened on Monday, the 2nd day of
14 September, 2013, at 9.30 a.m.