Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 17967

 1                           Thursday, 17 October 2013

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.35 a.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone.

 6             Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  This is case

 8     IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

10             The Chamber was informed that there were two preliminary matters

11     to be raised by the Prosecution.

12             MR. GROOME:  Good morning, Your Honours.  The first matter

13     relates to the next witness, Mr. Jeremy Bowen.  He's a witness which we

14     intend to use a number of videos during the direct examination.  Last

15     week during the recess the court interpreters, CLSS, very generously

16     agreed to go through all of those and verify the transcripts of those

17     videos.  So the Prosecution is seeking leave to -- not to play the videos

18     twice in court.  We believe that will expedite the examination.  That's

19     the first matter.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  If they have been verified and if there's no

21     objection from the Defence.

22             MR. IVETIC:  No objection from the Defence.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Then the Chamber grants your request to proceed as

24     you suggested.

25             MR. GROOME:  Thank you.

Page 17968

 1             The second matter, Your Honours, relates to Witness RM280.

 2     Yesterday the Chamber entered a decision denying the Prosecution

 3     application to tender that evidence 92 bis.  It may help the Chamber to

 4     recall that this witness relates to the Skorpion video.  In the Chamber's

 5     decision, the Chamber says:

 6             "Invites the Prosecution to present Witness RM280 as a viva voce

 7     witness or under Rule 92 ter of the Rules."

 8             The Prosecution would like to call the witness as a 92 ter

 9     witness and wants to verify with the Chamber that it -- the Prosecution

10     does not have to file a 92 ter application.  The Prosecution would tender

11     the same material that it had tendered under 92 bis.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objection from the Defence that it's mainly a

13     matter of formality?

14             MR. IVETIC:  No objection.  We talked about this with the other

15     side prior to the trial.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber grants your request.  No separate 92 ter

17     motion has to be filed.  We'll just accept this as an oral application.

18             MR. GROOME:  Thank you.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Then could the witness be escorted into the

20     courtroom.

21             Mr. Lukic, I did understand that you would finish your

22     cross-examination during the first session?

23             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

25                           [The witness takes the stand]

Page 17969

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning, Mr. Riedlmayer.

 2             THE WITNESS:  Good morning, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  I'd like to remind you that you're still bound by

 4     the solemn declaration you've given yesterday at the beginning of your

 5     testimony.

 6                           WITNESS:  ANDRAS RIEDLMAYER [Resumed]

 7             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  And Mr. Lukic will now continue his

 9     cross-examination.

10                           Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic: [Continued]

11        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Riedlmayer.

12        A.   Good morning, Mr. Lukic.

13        Q.   [Interpretation] I'd like to ask you something regarding your

14     testimony before the International Court of Justice.  Is it true that in

15     that case you acted on behalf of the interests of the Bosnian Muslims?

16        A.   Yes, I was called as an expert witness by the plaintiffs.

17        Q.   You are aware that with regard to these proceedings the Serbian

18     representatives in the joint organs of Bosnia-Herzegovina had not

19     provided their consent?

20        A.   I'm not privy to the procedural background.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, and I'm addressing you as well,

22     Mr. Riedlmayer, the previous question was whether:

23             "It is true that in that case you acted on behalf of the

24     interests of the Bosnian Muslims."

25             Your answer was:

Page 17970

 1             "Yes, I was called as an expert witness by the plaintiffs."

 2             THE WITNESS:  [Overlapping speakers] --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  That is inconsistent to the extent that a witness is

 4     a witness of truth and not -- you're not acting on behalf of the interest

 5     of the Bosnian Muslims.  I do not know --

 6             THE WITNESS:  I was acting on behalf of the state of

 7     Bosnia and Herzegovina which was [overlapping speakers] --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me --

 9             THE WITNESS: [Overlapping speakers]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me interrupt you there for a second

11     [overlapping speakers] --

12             THE WITNESS:  Sorry.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  You are again using "acting on behalf of," whereas

14     the Chamber understands a witness or an expert witness not to act on

15     behalf of the party that called that witness, but once being called by

16     that witness acts in order to give testimony of the truth.

17             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  And that is something different from acting on

19     behalf of a party.  When you said:

20             "Yes, I was called as an expert witness by the plaintiffs," do I

21     properly understand that your commitment was to perform your duty as an

22     expert witness rather than to act on behalf of one of the parties?

23             THE WITNESS:  Please excuse the sloppy phrasing.  In fact, I was

24     an expert witness, and as such testified in court to the best of my

25     knowledge.  But it was the plaintiffs who called me.

Page 17971

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That is clear.

 2             Mr. Lukic, you more or less putting this question to someone who

 3     may not be that much involved in legal matters is at least asking perhaps

 4     for confusion.

 5             Then your second question - and let me look at that for one

 6     second - you referred I think in your second question -- yes, had not

 7     provided a consent.  May I take it that they had not provided their

 8     consent to do what?  To bring the case before the ICJ?

 9             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Then we understand it.  But to give consent

11     could be in any respect.

12             Please proceed I -- one second.

13                           [Trial Chamber confers]

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, my colleagues informed me - although I

15     didn't notice it myself being focused on what I was doing - that

16     Mr. Mladic communicated to the public gallery in an unacceptable way.

17     He's hereby warned that he should not do that again.  Please proceed.

18             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19        Q.   Mr. Riedlmayer, is it true that in some of your papers you had

20     claimed that Serb nationalists in Republika Srpska passed anti-racial

21     laws prohibiting the mixture of genes, which means that every non-Serb

22     who would marry a Serbian woman or engage in sexual intercourse with a

23     Serbian woman would be deemed to have committed a crime?

24        A.   This is something that has come up in previous

25     cross-examinations.  It is true that in 1993, while the war was still

Page 17972

 1     going on, I wrote a short pamphlet on a web site which reflected a news

 2     report to this effect.  I later learned that this was not true, that in

 3     fact, like so many news reports, it misstated the actual situation.  It

 4     is true, as has come out since the war, that people in mixed marriages

 5     were encouraged to leave; but it is not true that mixed marriages were

 6     prohibited.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, your question was whether the witness had

 8     claimed this and this and this.  Now, for the -- it certainly would

 9     assist the Chamber in order to better assess the testimony of the witness

10     whether there was a personal claim or whether there was just a reference

11     to a -- in that pamphlet to reports given by others.  So it certainly

12     would assist the Chamber to see what personal commitment was given by the

13     witness on that, but you have not put it to the witness.  The Chamber is

14     unaware of the pamphlet and the content of it.

15             MR. LUKIC:

16        Q.   Mr. Riedlmayer, you heard His Honour Orie.  Can you explain what

17     kind of pamphlet was that and what was your role in writing the same?

18        A.   It was a posting on a web site which has long since vanished from

19     the web, but I believe you can probably find a copy of it somewhere.

20        Q.   Can you tell us more now?

21        A.   Okay.  It was called:  A short history of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  It

22     was seven pages long.  It was not a formal publication, had no footnotes

23     and no references, and it dealt with the war only in its last page or so.

24     Subsequently I have published formal publications that deal with the same

25     subject which have gone through a proper editing process and which are

Page 17973

 1     properly sourced.  I stand by those.  They are listed on my CV.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Did you put that -- put a claim, as was part of the

 3     question -- did you at least present it --

 4             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  -- as being a fact or did you say:  Well, I read

 6     this and this and this in that report?

 7             THE WITNESS:  I no longer remember the exact phrasing, but given

 8     that it was not a formal paper, nothing was footnoted according to

 9     source --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And you --

11             THE WITNESS:  -- I think back, I don't know whether I said

12     "alleged" or not.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So, okay, so then we don't know at this moment

14     whether or not --

15             THE WITNESS:  It was 20 years ago, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  It was 20 years ago.

17             Mr. Lukic.

18             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19        Q.   You yourself said that it was in 1993, which means while the war

20     was going on; is that correct?

21        A.   That's correct.

22        Q.   Is it also true that, for example, you had stated that Serbs

23     persecuted both the gypsies and the Jews in the papers that you wrote?

24        A.   I don't think I said that.  Gypsies, yes, but I -- what it refers

25     to is that Jewish heritage was also damaged in the war.

Page 17974

 1             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have 1D1334, please.

 2        Q.   It's an excerpt from this short paper entitled:  The brief

 3     history of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 4             MR. TRALDI:  I don't know that I have an objection, but I just

 5     observe this wasn't on the -- I don't think this was on the exhibit list

 6     we received.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic.

 8             MR. TRALDI:  Sorry, we've -- I'm looking at the video on the

 9     screen which doesn't match --

10             MR. LUKIC:  It's not --

11             MR. TRALDI:  But I'd withdraw my comment.

12             MR. LUKIC:  The document is on the list.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  It's on the list.

14             Please think about it before you raise, Mr. Traldi.

15             MR. LUKIC:  And we need page 8, last paragraph and last sentence.

16             THE WITNESS:  Okay.

17             MR. LUKIC:

18        Q.   I will read so we have it in the transcript:

19             "The dwindling number of non-Serb inhabitants remaining in the

20     zones under Serb control have been barred from employment in the public

21     sector and are required to display white flags on their places of

22     residence.  Denied police protection by the nationalist authorities,

23     non-Serbs (Muslims, Croats, Gypsies, and Jews) remaining in Banja Luka

24     and other occupied Bosnian towns have been subjected to vicious attacks,

25     including robbery, murder, and rape, carried out with impunity in broad

Page 17975

 1     daylight."

 2             [Interpretation] Would you agree with me that this was not only

 3     about the destruction of the cultural heritage, but that you also

 4     asserted that Serbs were attacking Jews as well?

 5        A.   It appears I did and I disavow it.  I no longer believe that; at

 6     the time I must have.  It was 20 years ago.

 7        Q.   Is it true that in fact you personally were involved in the

 8     propaganda war against the Serbs in this manner by attempting to compare

 9     them with the German Nazis and the fascists of Italy?

10        A.   I think that's a loaded question.  I was --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's perhaps start with the factual part, that is,

12     whether you compared them with fascist regimes of the past.  That's a

13     factual question.  The other one --

14             THE WITNESS:  Okay --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  -- is whether you played a role in the --

16             THE WITNESS:  I would have to review the document again to see

17     whether I exactly said that, but I do -- I do believe that I

18     characterised the ideology of extreme nationalism as analogous to the

19     same ideologies during World War II.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, was your question focused on this

21     document or was it a more general sense focused on what the witness

22     expressed as his opinion not necessarily in this document?

23             MR. LUKIC:  Not necessarily only in this document.  We saw that

24     his writing before was about that -- those laws allegedly forbidding

25     marriages between Serbs and others.  And based on this document as well,

Page 17976

 1     where he --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but if you are referring to other documents,

 3     again earlier I said I would like to have a look at that pamphlet.  If

 4     you would have said:  You'll see it in a minute that would have clarified

 5     matters clearly.  Now, for the other sources will we see that as

 6     well, or ...

 7             MR. LUKIC:  I just spoke to Mr. Traldi this morning.  We both

 8     tried to locate something from Seselj trial and it's not easy.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.

10             MR. LUKIC:  Since he never mentions any numbers of the documents

11     or exhibits.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay so --

13             MR. LUKIC:  I have the trace from the first part, I have the

14     trace in the transcript, and for this one I have the document.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  That's clear.

16             Please proceed.

17             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

18             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Just to make sure that you still have your train

19     of thought, in response to a question by Judge Orie you referred to the

20     witness alleging forbidden marriages by the Serbs with others.  The

21     question you were talking about was not about marriages any longer.

22             MR. LUKIC:  [Overlapping speakers] --

23             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You were talking about comparison with extreme

24     nationalists and fascists.

25             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

Page 17977

 1        Q.   [Interpretation] You publicly characterised the radical party of

 2     Dr. Vojislav Seselj as being a fascist party; is that correct?

 3        A.   Okay.  This also came up in the cross-examination in the Seselj

 4     case.  Back about a few months before that case a friend had written to

 5     me, worrying that the former Yugoslavia was sliding back into war, the

 6     rhetoric was escalating, so I wrote him back an elaborate reply and I

 7     think as part of the reply I pointed out that if the Serbian election

 8     went to the Radicals, that it would be a bad thing.  And in that, I

 9     characterised the ideology of the Radical party as neo-fascist.  That is

10     correct.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Was this a private correspondence or was it --

12             THE WITNESS:  It was a private correspondence, but then he posted

13     it on his blog.  It's the nature of the Internet, unfortunately.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

15             Please proceed.

16             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   You presented your personal views in that letter; is that

18     correct?

19        A.   Yes, it was an informal analysis.

20        Q.   Is it also true that during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina you

21     urged --

22        A.   Excuse me, I have trouble hearing --

23        Q.   -- that the Muslims' embargo be lifted.

24        A.   I've got it.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  There seems to be a technical problem.

Page 17978

 1     Mr. Riedlmayer has difficulties in hearing.

 2             THE WITNESS:  I turned up the volume.  It's all right.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  It's all right now.

 4             Could you please repeat your question now, Mr. Lukic.

 5             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, no problem.

 6        Q.   [Interpretation] Is it correct that during the war in

 7     Bosnia and Herzegovina you personally advocated the arming of the

 8     Muslims, the lifting of the embargo on arms imports into

 9     Bosnia and Herzegovina?

10        A.   Again, and -- I believe this refers to something that had come up

11     in cross-examination.  In the summer of 1995 I was a signatory to an open

12     letter to the Clinton administration urging the lifting of the arms

13     embargo, in which I argued that under the United Nations Charters,

14     Chapter 7, Article 51, Bosnia-Herzegovina, as a member state of the

15     United Nations, retained the right for self-defence.  And the article

16     further says that it has the right to do so until the Security Council

17     can take effective measures to restore peace and security.  By the summer

18     of 1995 it seemed clear to me that, in fact, the United Nations had not

19     succeeded in restoring peace and security.  So I think it was a

20     reasonable view to defend.

21        Q.   Would you agree with me that you have had a pro-Muslim/anti-Serb

22     leanings?

23        A.   I think, again, that's a loaded question.  I am not pro-Muslim or

24     anti-Serb.  I am in favour of a civic Bosnia-Herzegovina and do not

25     believe in ethnic partitions.  However, I'm not a citizen of

Page 17979

 1     Bosnia-Herzegovina so it's obviously not up to me to determine its form

 2     of government.

 3        Q.   Mostar is not part of the indictment; however, is it correct that

 4     you testified when you testified before the International Court of

 5     Justice, that the Muslim -- the mosques in the city were destroyed by the

 6     Serbs during the siege of the town.  Would you still stand by what you

 7     said then?

 8        A.   It was part of my sworn testimony in the Seselj case as well.

 9     The first siege of Mostar from April through June of 1992 by the Yugoslav

10     national army in fact - as was determined among others by the rapporteur

11     for the Council of Europe - did damage 11 out of 12 mosques in Mostar,

12     and the second siege by Croat forces did not begin until the following

13     spring and only compounded the damage in most cases.  So I think it's

14     fact; it's not something that is open to question.

15        Q.   And regarding the old bridge in Mostar, did you -- you claimed

16     that the JNA destroyed it and would you still stand by that position

17     today?

18        A.   I never claimed that the JNA destroyed the bridge.  It did damage

19     the bridge.  There were a number of impacts on the bridge itself and the

20     two medieval towers on either side of the bridge were seriously damaged.

21     The bridge however was brought down in September -- I'm sorry in

22     November of 1993 by the Bosnian Croat siege.  But neither in my testimony

23     before the ICJ nor in my testimony in the Seselj trial did I claim that

24     the destruction of the bridge was solely the work of the Yugoslav

25     national army.

Page 17980

 1             MR. LUKIC:  Can we have 1D1332 in the e-court, please.  It's

 2     transcript from Seselj trial from May 28, 2008, and we need page 12 in

 3     the e-court and it should correspond to page 7494 of the Seselj

 4     transcript.

 5        Q.   Line 11 you said in your response, and I quote:

 6             "With regard to the Old Bridge, I spoke about it in some detail

 7     during that direct examination, the kind of damage that was sustained by

 8     it, and indeed it is true it was damaged in the JNA siege and it was the

 9     main casualty of the 1993-1994 Croat siege of the old city of Mostar."

10             [Interpretation] When you say that you know that it was the JNA

11     that damaged the bridge, could you tell us, according to what you know,

12     what this damage exactly was?

13             JUDGE MOLOTO:  The witness just told us before you called this

14     document.

15             MR. LUKIC:  Yeah, but he didn't specify what were the damages.

16             JUDGE MOLOTO:  He said the --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  He said --

18             JUDGE MOLOTO:  -- the JNA damaged the points -- all points on

19     either side of the bridge and --

20             MR. LUKIC:  Okay --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  He said a few hits and it damaged the -- destroyed

22     the bridge.  So therefore, if you have any further questions, please ask

23     for further details, but not again in this general way.

24             By the way, Mr. Lukic, if the witness in the quote you gave said:

25     I spoke about it in some detail during the direct examination, then of

Page 17981

 1     course we would have to see the direct examination to know what details

 2     were -- the witness was referring to; otherwise, it's impossible for this

 3     Chamber to further assess what this testimony exactly is about.  Please

 4     proceed.

 5             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   The damage which, according to you, was inflicted by the JNA, was

 7     that of a structural nature and did it threaten the stability of the

 8     bridge or did traffic proceed unhindered over the -- across the bridge

 9     until it was ultimately destroyed by the Croat forces?

10        A.   First of all, the bridge was not one that carried traffic.  It's

11     entirely used by pass -- pedestrians.  Secondly, the damage to the bridge

12     I evaluated from photographs.  I'm not privy to what the internal

13     structure is and how it might have been affected.  The photographs show

14     impacts on the main arch of the bridge, destroying parts of the parapet,

15     and the stonework.  The larger damage was to the two medieval towers that

16     support either end of the bridge.  As for the passenger traffic, the

17     pedestrian traffic continuing unimpeded.  In fact, I have photographs

18     showing the bridge in 1992 which have corrugated iron sheeting on sort of

19     a haphazard framework put over the bridge structure and people scurrying

20     underneath to cross.  So presumably it was dangerous to cross.  These are

21     by international news photographers.

22        Q.   And did you hear that it was actually dangerous to cross the

23     bridge because of the fighting between the Muslims and Croats and that's

24     why it was a danger for the pedestrian traffic moving across the bridge?

25        A.   Your Honours, during the April-June 1992 siege of Mostar by the

Page 17982

 1     JNA, there was no fighting between Muslims and Croats.  It did not begin

 2     until spring the following year.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Going over the material, did you ever come across a

 4     statement or see a document in which General Ratko Mladic urged the

 5     destruction of Muslim cultural monuments or places of worship?

 6        A.   Not in the preparation of my report, no.

 7        Q.   And are you aware that the head of the Serbian Orthodox church,

 8     Patriarch Pavle, addressed the public a number of times, urging restraint

 9     from destroying the religious facilities of the other ethnic groups and

10     communities?

11        A.   Yes, I am.

12        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Riedlmayer.  These are all my questions to you and

13     I complete my cross-examination.  Thank you.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Lukic.

15             Thank you.  Mr. Traldi, any questions in re-examination?

16             MR. TRALDI:  Just briefly, Your Honour.

17                           Re-examination by Mr. Traldi:

18        Q.   Mr. Riedlmayer, I'm going to ask you about a small number of the

19     sites Mr. Lukic asked you about.  Regarding Brisevo Mr. Lukic suggested

20     to you that you had opined Serb -- sorry that Seselj's paramilitaries

21     were responsible for the attack on Brisevo.

22             MR. TRALDI:  If we could have 65 ter 1D01331, page 53, please.

23     Could we have the next page actually.  Thanks.

24        Q.   At the top we see Mr. Seselj introducing this text and then in

25     the next paragraph when he reads it he says:

Page 17983

 1             "Towards the end of the text, you go on to say, it is line 5 from

 2     the bottom, that the Bosnian Serb Army and Seselj's paramilitaries

 3     cleansed at enormous human cost this place Brisevo."

 4             Does that refresh your recollection as to what you wrote in that

 5     text?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7             MR. TRALDI:  Could we have 65 ter 13413, page 1.

 8        Q.   And while that comes up, is that -- is what you wrote there that

 9     the Bosnian Serb army was involved consistent with the information you

10     received beforehand and an opinion you still hold today?

11        A.   Yes.  The information I had was from the parish priest who was in

12     charge and who had been in the area at the time.

13        Q.   Moving south, Mr. Lukic asked you about the destruction of

14     mosques in Banja Luka.  Have you studied those mosques?

15        A.   I have.  They were dealt with within some of my other reports for

16     other cases in this Tribunal.

17        Q.   And if you could take a moment and study the map on the screen,

18     does it accurately set out the Banja Luka mosques?

19        A.   Yes, it does.  There were a total of 16 of them.

20        Q.   Did any mosques in Banja Luka survive the war undamaged?

21        A.   None did.

22             MR. TRALDI:  Your Honours, I tender 65 ter 13413.  I note for the

23     record that 65 ter also includes the Bosnia-wide map we used yesterday.

24     For the record, we have also provided the Chamber a CD of a colour

25     version of that map because the file size of the colour version is too

Page 17984

 1     large for e-court, and we've uploaded a surrogate sheet associated with

 2     that CD.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, any objections against the admission of

 4     this document and the map attached to it?

 5             MR. LUKIC:  Just looking, is that from the list?

 6             MR. TRALDI:  It's --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes --

 8             MR. TRALDI:  -- one of the documents cited in his report,

 9     65 ter 13413.

10             MR. LUKIC:  No objections.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12             Now, yesterday I think we dealt with the same number that was

13     already the --

14             MR. TRALDI:  Yes, I hadn't tendered it at the time, though,

15     Your Honour, so I'm just --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, you are tendering that now.

17             Madam Registrar, 65 ter 13413 receives number ... ?

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Number P2505, Your Honours.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  P2505 is admitted into evidence.

20             MR. TRALDI:  And regarding the Banja Luka mosques, I'd refer

21     Your Honours as well to the evidence of RM99, which has been tendered

22     pursuant to Rule 92 quater and to Exhibit P358, page 156.

23             Could we next have 65 ter 17414, page 5 in the English and 7 in

24     the B/C/S, below what will be a number 4.  This document wasn't on the

25     initial list for the witness but arises out of cross-examination.

Page 17985

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi, one additional question in relation to

 2     13413.  All the text on it, is there an English translation available for

 3     that?

 4             MR. TRALDI:  I'll check over the break, Your Honour.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 6             MR. TRALDI:

 7        Q.   Moving just west of Banja Luka, sir, Mr. Lukic suggested to you

 8     that where mosques were dynamited, that meant civilians had been

 9     responsible.  Do you recall those questions?

10        A.   I do.

11        Q.   This document reads in pertinent part that:

12             "Mosques in Sehovci, Trnova and Skucani Vakuf and a Catholic

13     church in Stara Rijeka have been blown up."

14             It continues:

15             "Some of these 'experts' and perpetrators, some of whom are

16     officers ..." and says that:

17             " ...  cases involving explosives and mines came from army depots

18     and combat sets of subordinate units."

19             Is that your -- is that consistent with your understanding that

20     the destruction of mosques with explosives is consistent with destruction

21     by the military?

22        A.   It is.  I visited all of these sites as well and they show every

23     sign of having been destroyed by large amounts of explosives.

24             MR. TRALDI:  Your Honours, I'd tender this as the next public

25     Prosecution exhibit.

Page 17986

 1             MR. LUKIC:  No objections.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 17414 receives number P2506,

 4     Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we decide on admission, Mr. Lukic --

 6     Mr. Traldi, you introduced the document by saying this document reads,

 7     but what is the document?

 8             MR. TRALDI:  Sorry, if we could turn to the first page.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

10             MR. TRALDI:  It's a report from, I believe, CSB Banja Luka.  And

11     you can see that in the top left on the B/C/S there.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  P2506 is admitted into evidence.

13             Could I urge the parties always if they take a quote from a

14     document, to at least inform the Chamber whether it's a novel, whether

15     it's a historical document, whether it's -- whatever it is because text

16     in itself needs sometimes context.

17             MR. TRALDI:  I apologise, Your Honour.

18        Q.   Next, sir, Mr. Lukic referred to your Krajisnik testimony about

19     the Aladza mosque and at temporary transcript pages 72 and 73 yesterday,

20     he suggested that that destruction was not related to the authorities.

21     Do you recall those questions?

22        A.   I do.

23        Q.   Is the destruction of the Aladza mosque consistent with what

24     happened to the other mosques in Foca?

25        A.   Yes, Your Honours.  Every other mosque in Foca was also

Page 17987

 1     destroyed.

 2        Q.   And in your view, is the destruction of that mosque best

 3     understood in isolation or in context of what you've just described?

 4        A.   I do not believe it was an isolated incident.

 5        Q.   Next, Mr. Lukic asked you yesterday at temporary transcript

 6     page 78 if you had ever seen a document which suggested that the

 7     destruction of mosques was part of a plan.

 8             MR. TRALDI:  Could we have 65 ter 19209.

 9             Mr. President, this is an order from the Drina Corps.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi, just for the record you referred to the

11     pages of yesterday's transcript, which of course does appear -- I see

12     that the Aladza mosque has been introduced in what is now page 17955 of

13     yesterday's transcript, where Mr. Lukic took the witness to paragraph 50

14     of his report.  Please proceed.

15             MR. TRALDI:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I think yesterday's

16     transcript must just have been updated during the session today with the

17     final pages.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm not blaming you for it.  We know that that

19     happens the day after.

20             MR. TRALDI:

21        Q.   Now, this document, sir, as you'll see, is labelled with the

22     Drina Corps command in the top left.  And in the middle, below the word

23     "order" it says:

24             "To use mechanical equipment of the engineering company in your

25     brigade and start immediately with removal of remains of the destroyed

Page 17988

 1     mosque in Konjevic Polje."

 2             In point 2 it says:

 3             "The remains of the mosque are to be dumped at the closest site

 4     for disposal of waste material."

 5             Do you connect that to events you're familiar with from your

 6     studies?

 7        A.   Yes.  The mosque at Konjevic Polje was covered in my expert

 8     report for the Milosevic trial and also for the Karadzic trial, I

 9     believe.  And the mosque was completely destroyed and the only thing left

10     was the foundations.  I believe I submitted a picture of the foundations

11     which were still visible along the tall grass.

12             MR. TRALDI:  Your Honour, I'd tender this document as the next

13     public Prosecution exhibit.

14             MR. LUKIC:  No objections.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Document receives number P2507, Your Honours.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

18             MR. TRALDI:  And, Your Honour, there are three related documents

19     relevant to the logistics of carrying out the task and the requisition of

20     fuel for it.  I'd like to just address those three through the bar table

21     as well if there's no objection from the Defence.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, similar documents.

23             MR. LUKIC:  We should see them.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Logistics.

25             MR. TRALDI:  I propose, since the witness won't have anything

Page 17989

 1     additional to say about them, just providing Mr. Lukic with the numbers

 2     over the break.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  And then --

 4             MR. LUKIC:  [Overlapping speakers] --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  -- we'll hear from you, Mr. Lukic.

 6             MR. TRALDI:  Your Honour, I have two video-clips remaining, so I

 7     think we'll go very slightly past the break and I wonder if it might be

 8     simplest to take the break just a couple of minutes early.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll take the break a little bit early.

10             Could I ask the usher to escort Mr. Riedlmayer out of the

11     courtroom.

12                           [The witness stands down]

13             JUDGE ORIE:  We will take a break and we'll resume at quarter to

14     11.00.

15                           --- Recess taken at 10.27 a.m.

16                           --- On resuming at 10.56 a.m.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber apologises for the late start.  We had

18     to deal with an urgent matter which took us more time than we expected.

19             Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.

20                           [The witness takes the stand]

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi, please proceed.

22             MR. TRALDI:  Thank you, Mr. President.  As I said, I have two

23     clips remaining.  The first is from the Srebrenica trial video, P1147.  I

24     believe translation of the video has been confirmed and so we'll only

25     need to play it once.  And if we can start at 38 minutes, 6 seconds.

Page 17990

 1                           [Video-clip played]

 2             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We only have one

 3     transcript, not two.

 4             MR. TRALDI:  Your Honour, I've been informed the interpreters

 5     have only one transcript.  That, of course, is for the other video.  This

 6     video the transcript's on the screen and I've been told the subtitles are

 7     visible to them.  I apologise if I'd misunderstood that, but that's what

 8     I'd been informed.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  So you're inviting the interpreters to use the

10     verified subtitling as ...

11             MR. TRALDI:  I think just clarifying further, I would invite them

12     to do that, but we I think don't always rely on the booth for -- to read

13     the subtitles since they've already been confirmed and are part of

14     evidence and so I'd ask the witness to look at this as well.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  I don't know whether this is acceptable for the

16     various booths.

17             THE INTERPRETER:  The only concern is that the subtitles are

18     removed too quickly sometimes.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then what we perhaps should do, play it in

20     portions or ...

21             MR. TRALDI:  I -- I think if the witness is comfortable reading

22     the subtitles and the other Anglophones in the room are also comfortable

23     reading the subtitles then we could work on that basis, as I believe we

24     have before.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi, I was consulting with one of my

Page 17991

 1     colleagues, so I missed -- I took off my headphones.

 2             MR. TRALDI:  I apologise, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me first do that.

 4                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 5             MR. GROOME:  Your microphone's on.

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, first of all, in order to have a complete

 8     transcript, we need words spoken which are then transcribed.  We can't

 9     just rely on text written as subtitles on the video.  I suggest the

10     following, that we re-start playing the video but that we take -- I take

11     it that Ms. Stewart is in charge of it being played -- and that we stop

12     now and then for just a few seconds so that interpreters and

13     transcription can follow us.

14             MR. TRALDI:  Mr. --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Traldi, you were on your feet before.  I

16     missed what you said.

17             MR. TRALDI:  I apologise.  I am -- I'm being informed that we

18     haven't previously had the booth interpret portions of this video while

19     it was being played, and I wonder if I might give the transcript pages

20     from the transcript that's been admitted as an alternative.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  You mean that we have -- in the previous testimony

22     of the witness portions of --

23             MR. TRALDI:  No.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  No?

25             MR. TRALDI:  For instance, in the testimony of expert Butler, I

Page 17992

 1     think at T16415, a portion of this was played and my recollection is that

 2     there wasn't interpretation over the video.  We simply used the video.

 3     Now, it hasn't been played with one of my witnesses before, so

 4     Your Honour's memory may be more specific than mine, but my understanding

 5     is that's how we proceeded in the past.

 6             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Is this video already in evidence?

 7             MR. TRALDI:  Yes, yes, Your Honour, this is P1147 -- this is a

 8     portion of P1147.

 9             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Can we give it a try to see whether we could have a

11     complete transcript.  If we fail to do that, then we would still -- is it

12     a long portion you are playing now?

13             MR. TRALDI:  It's approximately three minutes, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Approximately three minutes.  Then I suggest that we

15     stop after every 20 or 25 seconds and see whether we are on track.

16             MR. TRALDI:  That works for me, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

18             MR. TRALDI:  If it works for Ms. Stewart.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, and if it works for the interpreters and for

20     the transcriber.  Let's give it a try.

21                           [Video-clip played]

22             THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Under aviation and under air force

23     strikes towards -- and to tell you frankly, cards on the table, I went on

24     the asphalt road Jadar, Kozlje, Rajine, Petrica and saw a minaret

25     reaching the sky.  I think already this morning it has been flattened, it

Page 17993

 1     should have been this morning.  Trust me, I only looked towards our

 2     church spire and some wish of mine carried me on to get to that point as

 3     soon as possible.  Because I grew up there.  And believe me, in my

 4     documents it says Easter 1995, even officially it is called differently

 5     in our documents, but I wrote it down in my documents that this is

 6     Easter.  Why Easter, because it should have been Easter 1993 because

 7     Easter is eternal, meaning we met it.

 8             "On my way to Srebrenica I saw the most Turkish mosque you can

 9     imagine, a very Turkish mosque, and I guess our enemies wanted it to be

10     higher than the church and therefore they took down half of our

11     bell-tower to make the minaret a bit higher.  However, I was asked this

12     morning:  'General, has this famous mosque been finished?'  I told them:

13     'I think that they finished it this morning.'  So I said that it was

14     'finished' this morning.  Well, let me tell you some more, the town as

15     such was not crowded with residents as they said over whose ever

16     Motorolas.

17             "No, no, no, it was not like that.  They had fantastic weaponry

18     in Motorolas and scared gullible Serbs, you know.  It is best to listen

19     to the Turks as little as possible and one should not listen to some of

20     the less good Serbs either.  Simply, take the sword in your hand and go

21     ahead!  Our army started out powerfully towards Potocari.  Yesterday

22     evening forces were introduced from the police force in Bratunac towards

23     Potocari.  One wing of our army went towards Viogor, Viogor is the crest

24     of the hill towards Milici and Srebrenica and so, God willing, we will

25     get to Derventa from Srebrenica.  This is our task.  Yesterday at

Page 17994

 1     dusk ...

 2             "No, from Milici to Derventa.  From Srebrenica to Derventa.  Yes,

 3     from Srebrenica to Derventa.

 4             "Let me tell you that with yesterday's dusk any organised Muslim

 5     life to the left of the Jadar ceased existing."

 6             MR. TRALDI:

 7        Q.   And, sir, I have only one question for you in relation to this

 8     video.  Did any of the mosques in Srebrenica survive the war undamaged?

 9        A.   [Microphone not activated] -- I -- none of them survived.  I

10     recognised two of the mosques referred to by Mr. Mladic in this video.

11     One is the Petric Mahala mosque which can also be seen on the

12     Zoran Petrovic video and for which I have formatted entry.  The other one

13     which he says is the unfinished mosque in the town square is the

14     Carsika [phoen] mosque.

15        Q.   And, just --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mladic, please remain seated.  First of all I

17     can imagine that your counsel wants to put further questions to the

18     witness.  I can imagine that.  They're aware of their task and they may

19     do so.

20             Please proceed.

21             MR. TRALDI:

22        Q.   Just to clarify the record, I believe the witness may have

23     misspoken and said it was General Mladic speaking.  It is in fact

24     General Zivanovic --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  You shouldn't give evidence.  If this witness says

Page 17995

 1     it is Mr. Mladic, then you can ask him if he identified Mr. Mladic.  You

 2     should not tell him who was speaking, Mr. Traldi.

 3             MR. TRALDI:  I wasn't intending to, Your Honour, but he has

 4     identified in a transcript which has been admitted into evidence.  So

 5     there is evidence that identifies the speaker.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  I know that, but in order to test the reliability

 7     and the credibility of this witness, you should not whisper in his ear

 8     that he made a mistake and then qualify it as an error.  It may be that

 9     it's misjudgement.  Now --

10             MR. TRALDI:  I hadn't intended to do so, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  No, I accept that you intended to do it, but you

12     shouldn't have done it.  You identified Mr. Mladic as the speaker.

13             THE WITNESS:  It's a very fuzzy video.  I was acting on an

14     assumption and not as an identification.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but you didn't present it as an assumption.

16     You presented it as Mr. Mladic speaking.

17             THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry, Your Honour --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  No, you don't have to apologise.  It's what you did.

19             THE WITNESS:  You know, as I say, it looks a bit like him.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it means that to establish a fact requires more

21     than some [overlapping speakers] --

22             THE WITNESS:  I should have said the speaker.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi.

24             MR. TRALDI:  And, Your Honour, I have one more clip, if we could

25     have 65 ter 22885A.  And this is a clip from a speech at the

Page 17996

 1     34th Session of the Republika Srpska Assembly.  I'd refer Your Honours to

 2     65 ter 02382 as well, which is the transcript of the session.  This one

 3     we've provided the booth that portion of the transcript from the session,

 4     and I'd be in Your Honour's hands as to whether it's best to play it

 5     twice under those circumstances.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Has the transcript been verified before?

 7             MR. TRALDI:  It's a CLSS transcript of this Assembly session, but

 8     it hasn't been -- outside of the Prosecution's work it hasn't been

 9     matched up with the video.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, any need to play it twice under those

11     circumstances or would you accept -- you can also leave it to after the

12     first round, asking the interpreters to read the transcript, and if

13     there's any inconsistency that we could play it again.

14             MR. LUKIC:  I have to admit that I don't have the transcript with

15     me right now, so it's not possible for me to compare.  I have to follow

16     either one or the other channel.

17             MR. TRALDI:  I can provide the English page reference in that

18     65 ter, but I'm afraid I can't provide the B/C/S.  It might be --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's play it twice.  First round.

20                           [Video-clip played]

21             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.  We have to stop it at this moment.

22     Apparently the B/C/S volume is insufficient to follow what is said.

23     That's at least how I interpreted your body language, Mr. Lukic.

24             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  I cannot follow in B/C/S.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.

Page 17997

 1             Can we put the volume up and start playing it again?

 2                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 3             MR. TRALDI:  Your Honour, I'm told there may be a problem with

 4     the volume, but it's not something that we can resolve further.  It can't

 5     be turned up higher essentially than it is at the moment.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  And this is already in evidence?

 7             MR. TRALDI:  The video is not.  The transcript is, I believe,

 8     going to be part of our agreement with the Defence about Assembly

 9     sessions.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you have a text so that you can read out the

11     words spoken by Mr. Mladic so that we at least know what we are talking

12     about?

13             MR. TRALDI:  It comes on page 72 of the English of 65 ter 02382.

14     The clip included longer portion for context.  There's only, however, one

15     relevant sentence, and I could simply read that and forego the clip, if

16     that suits.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I would suggest that you read that sentence as

18     you say audible on this video as spoken by Mr. Mladic.

19             MR. TRALDI:  Could -- it might be best I think to have page 72 of

20     65 ter 02382 up.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  On our screen.

22             MR. TRALDI:  That's page 72 of the English.  And the clip would

23     have started with the words "Mr. President," but several lines below it

24     includes:

25             "We cannot allow leaving the mosques with two minarets there."

Page 17998

 1        Q.   Now, sir, this is describing an area near Tesanj as we can see

 2     slightly before that.  That is not an area you have studied, is it?

 3        A.   It is not.

 4        Q.   But does this perhaps clarify for you what Mr. Lukic asked you

 5     about earlier today, whether General Mladic had ever given a direction

 6     targeting a particular mosque?

 7        A.   Well, as I answered Mr. Lukic, I had not seen anything like that

 8     before, but now it appears I have.

 9             MR. TRALDI:  Your Honour, I think given the technical difficulty

10     with the video, it might be best simply to mark for identification the

11     transcript of the Assembly session pending our agreement with the

12     Defence.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, any objection against MFI-ing the -- if

14     you want to consult first --

15             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, please.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  -- with Mr. Mladic, you have an opportunity to do

17     so, at least if it's short and if it's not aloud.

18             MR. LUKIC:  We do not object to have this document MFI'd and we

19     can work further.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, the number under which this

21     document would be ... ?

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 02382 receives number P2508,

23     Your Honours.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  P2508 is marked for identification.

25             Mr. Traldi.

Page 17999

 1             MR. TRALDI:  That completes my examination, Your Honour.  The

 2     only remaining thing I should put on the record is that this portion of

 3     the Srebrenica trial video, P1147, the transcript began on page 60 of the

 4     English and 55 of the B/C/S.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for that information.

 6             Mr. Lukic, as the re-examination triggered any need for further

 7     questions to be asked?

 8             MR. LUKIC:  Actually it did.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please.

10             MR. LUKIC:  We'll go through the documents first.  If we can see

11     P2506 on our screens just mentioned by the Prosecution.

12                           Further cross-examination by Mr. Lukic:

13        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Riedlmayer, have you seen this document

14     before?

15        A.   Yes, just earlier today.

16        Q.   I mean before, not today during the hearing but while you were

17     preparing for your testimony.  I mean, is it the first time that you're

18     seeing this document here today?

19        A.   It is.

20        Q.   Thank you.

21             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we now look at page 4, please.

22     [In English] I'm sorry, it's 5, and we need number 4 on page 5.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  In English as well --

24             MR. LUKIC:  English, yes.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Or just in English?

Page 18000

 1             MR. LUKIC:  I didn't follow B/C/S.

 2             MR. TRALDI:  I think it may be page 7 in the B/C/S, sir.

 3             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Here under item 4 we can see that the CSB, or rather, the police

 5     station in Sanski Most states:

 6             [In English] "Explosive devices are solely obtained from military

 7     sources ..."

 8             [Interpretation] Does this actually indicate that someone else is

 9     obtaining this material, the army would not be obtaining material from

10     the army.  Does that mean that somebody else is obtaining these

11     explosives from these sources or perhaps you're not able to comment on

12     this at all?

13        A.   I'm not able to comment on that.  I would have to conjecture.

14        Q.   Thank you.

15             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we now please look at P2507.

16        Q.   This is also a document which was just shown to you during the

17     redirect.  Did you see this document before today?

18        A.   I have not.

19        Q.   Would you agree that you cannot see from this document who it was

20     who demolished the mosque?

21        A.   The document talks about the removal of the ruins.  It does not

22     talk about the actual destruction of the mosque.

23        Q.   Do you know whether the mosque fell or the ruins of the mosque

24     fell on the road and blocked it, or are you not aware of this?

25        A.   I'm not aware of it; however, having been to the site I know that

Page 18001

 1     the mosque was in a field set back from the road.  I am also aware that

 2     at least in other trials there was some evidence presented about how the

 3     mosque was destroyed by somebody who was an eye-witness.

 4        Q.   Thank you.

 5             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we now look at P1147, please.

 6     Perhaps Ms. Stewart could help us with this.  It's the same clip at

 7     36 minutes, 6 seconds.  We just need to look at a clip from the video.

 8     We don't actually need the volume.  So we just want to remind the witness

 9     what this is about.  We just need to look at the image.

10        Q.   You remember this; right?  You remember the speaker?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   We will not go into who this is.  The Prosecution did not tell

13     you that the video was recorded on the 12th of July, and the speaker here

14     says that the mosque was demolished.  Would you agree that according to

15     your report the mosque that he's talking about was destroyed on the

16     19th of July, 1995?

17        A.   I believe from my recall here is that he's talking about two

18     separate mosques.  The Petric mosque is the one that is near the southern

19     entrance of Srebrenica.  It's not the same as the one that was discussed

20     in my evidence, which is the market mosque in the centre of town.

21             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Lukic, you asked for the still at 36 minutes

22     and 6 seconds.  We are looking at 38 minutes and 6 seconds.

23             MR. LUKIC:  Maybe I misspoke, but Ms. Stewart put the right frame

24     on the screen.

25             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  This is not a surprise.

Page 18002

 1             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   You say that you did not process that second one.  Was it still

 3     standing when the first one that you worked on was destroyed on the

 4     19th of July, that you can see on the frame that you talked about?

 5        A.   I don't know actually when it was destroyed.  It was still

 6     standing in one of the Petrovic videos, but as I understand they were

 7     taken over a period of more than one day.

 8        Q.   Do you have any information that any of the mosques was

 9     demolished or knocked down on the 12th of July, 1995?

10        A.   I don't have an exact date of the footage of the market mosque I

11     believe has date stamps.  Some of the other footage does not.  I know

12     from DutchBat photographs that all the mosques in Srebrenica were still

13     standing before the fall of the city, and the Petrovic video shows four

14     of the five and they still all had minarets at that point.

15        Q.   And what is the date of the Petrovic video, if you can just tell

16     us once again for the transcript, please.

17        A.   I --

18        Q.   I think it was the 13th and the 14th of July, and you can correct

19     me if I'm wrong?

20        A.   I believe so.  As I said, the one of the market mosque was the

21     14th because it had a date stamp.

22             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We have finished with this video and

23     so now we need to look at the transcript in the e-court.  This is

24     65 ter 2382 that the Prosecution showed before.  We will need to look at

25     page 72.  Page 72, please, in the English version at least.  [In English]

Page 18003

 1     Just one second.

 2                           [Defence counsel confer]

 3             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Mr. Riedlmayer --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, before you continue, 65 ter 2382

 6     meanwhile is P2508 MFI'd.  Please proceed.

 7             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

 8        Q.   [Interpretation] Here we can see -- it's not clear to me what

 9     exactly this is about, but we can see that Tesanj is mentioned.  So what

10     is General Mladic talking about?  In the B/C/S it's the one line but last

11     on the page that we can see on the screen.  You told us that you did not

12     deal with Tesanj.  However, would you agree with me that Tesanj was never

13     held by the Army of Republika Srpska during the war, it was never under

14     the control of the VRS?

15        A.   As far as I'm aware, it was not.

16        Q.   Thank you.  These were all my questions for you.  Thank you.

17             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Actually, just one more thing.  I

18     apologise, with the permission of the Chamber, this is not something that

19     arises from the cross but it's my error.  I would just need to show one

20     photograph for the purposes of clarification.  This is a photograph which

21     was said to be a photograph of a pig's head.  I could not locate it

22     because it was made later as a shorter version.  I think Ms. Stewart can

23     perhaps find the Kukavica mosque.  I know that when I was going through

24     it, as far as I can tell, that head had horns on it.  So the bones

25     actually could not be those of a pig.  So perhaps we can all look at this

Page 18004

 1     just so that we can all check what this is exactly about, of course with

 2     the Trial Chamber's permission.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  You would suggest that we look at the picture again

 4     and see whether any horns are visible and then ask the witness, if

 5     visible, whether that has any impact on his testimony.

 6             MR. TRALDI:  I wouldn't object.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you assist in getting the right thing to the

 8     screen or are we there already?

 9             MR. TRALDI:  I think Ms. Stewart, rather than myself, already has

10     assisted.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, now, Mr. -- could we try -- no, we couldn't

12     enlarge it -- no, we can enlarge it, but with difficulties from what I

13     remember.

14             Yes.

15             THE WITNESS:  I don't see -- the resolution isn't very good but I

16     don't see what he's referring to.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, could you assist where --

18             MR. LUKIC:  In the middle of the picture this gentleman described

19     yesterday there was a skull --

20             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

21             MR. LUKIC:  -- described as a --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I see that.

23             MR. LUKIC:  -- pig's skull.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  But where are the horns because that's what you're

25     referring to?

Page 18005

 1             MR. LUKIC:  I see it on the upper left side of the skull.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Upper left side of the skull.

 3                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, usually what is left and what is right is --

 5             MR. LUKIC:  [Overlapping speakers]

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  -- usually taken from the position of the person or

 7     the animal.  Do you mean it's on the right side of the skull of this

 8     animal?

 9             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, and on the left side of the picture.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we ask someone who uses the pointer to move it

11     in the direction of -- is that the horn you had on your mind, Mr. --

12             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  Yes, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, the horn is coming from the cheek then, more or

14     less.  Is that --

15             MR. LUKIC:  Mmm --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, at least form the middle of the --

17             MR. LUKIC:  No, it's the end of the skull.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  You have drawn our attention to that.

19             MR. LUKIC:  Okay.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, looking at it more closely and to that extent

21     I'm grateful for you, Mr. Lukic, that you made us look at the picture

22     again.  Earlier we had -- the problem was "skull" or "skulls."  Now, I do

23     see something a little bit left and a little bit lower to the skull, we

24     have paid attention to there, which seems to be a skull as well --

25             THE WITNESS:  Which is upside down.

Page 18006

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Which is upside down, yes.  That's perhaps why we

 2     didn't recognise it.  I just draw the attention of the parties to it,

 3     that having a closer look at the picture you might see a second skull.  I

 4     have not looked any further for a third and fourth ones.  But I can even

 5     imagine that to the right, and could the pointer move to the right,

 6     further to the right just below the box where there is a glass there, it

 7     seems that that may be part of a skull as well because it seems to me

 8     that there are two rows of dent -- of teeth.

 9             THE WITNESS:  Yeah, with a jaw missing.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So looking at it for a longer period of time,

11     we detect more and more.

12             THE WITNESS:  Yeah.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  What can be skulls, but still what kind of skulls.

14     I just put this on the record so that the parties should not be surprised

15     by our observations on what we see in this picture.

16                           Questioned by the Court:

17             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  May I put a question to Mr. Riedlmayer in this

18     respect.

19             I asked you yesterday on which basis you established that it was

20     the skull of a pig.  Did you discuss with your colleagues or experts on

21     that issue what they see and what is now shown to us by Mr. Lukic?

22        A.   I went to the museum of comparative zoology and I went to look at

23     the displays of skulls.  I asked one of the staff members to confirm my

24     identification.  I think what Mr. Lukic is pointing to is not a horn.

25     Horns -- and I'm not a skull expert.  I'm not a paleontologist.  To my

Page 18007

 1     knowledge, horns come out of the forehead of most animals, not from the

 2     cheek.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now I have one additional question in this

 4     respect as well.  Yesterday asked about the plural or the singular,

 5     skulls or skull.  I think, but I would have to check it, but perhaps you

 6     remember as well that you said must be a typo or --

 7        A.   Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  -- that was a rather superficial explanation.

 9        A.   It -- well, let me [overlapping speakers]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  I can find it for you, if you --

11        A.   I know what you mean.  It was simply that the discussion of

12     skulls was with -- derived from a talk with Mr. Kello, who took this

13     picture in June of 1996, and he mentioned bones, and, you know, when I

14     saw the picture, I didn't see the additional skulls right now until you

15     pointed them out, sir.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but if I read from yesterday's transcript.

17        A.   Mm-hmm.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  You said something about skulls and then I said a

19     question of detail.  The description of the photograph says skulls and

20     you talked about a skull.  You said:

21             "Okay."

22             I then said:

23             "Is there -- do we miss something?"

24             And you said:

25             "No, that's a typographical error.  There's one skull."

Page 18008

 1             So apparently you did not observe it very carefully because we

 2     have --

 3        A.   Well, actually, if you look at the caption, it has plurals on

 4     both "skulls" and "pigs."

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  No, I see that --

 6        A.   Yeah.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  -- but yesterday you talked about a skull.  I asked

 8     you --

 9        A.   [Overlapping speakers]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, please.  You talked about a skull.  Then

11     I asked you:  "The photograph says 'skulls, now you talk about a

12     "skull.'"  And you had an immediate answer to that, saying that is a

13     typographical error which it now most likely turns out not to be.

14        A.   Well, sir, until you pointed out the other ones, I had focused on

15     the skull in the middle, and therefore when I saw that the picture as I

16     initially perceived it did not match the text, then I figured it must be

17     a mistake in the caption.  I --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, then you came with another explanation that you

19     just copied what that person had written down.  Now, I'm asking you this

20     because you jumped very quickly to conclusions yesterday which now turn

21     out not perhaps to be very solid.

22             Mr. Traldi, you're on your feet already for a while.

23             MR. TRALDI:  Yes, Your Honour, I would just for context refer the

24     Chamber to the remainder of that discussion, particularly at lines 13 and

25     14, where the witness says:  There may have been other skulls outside of

Page 18009

 1     the photo.  And at line 15 when Your Honour, Mr. President, you ask him

 2     whether it is a typo or not is unclear, and the witness says:  It is

 3     unclear in other words.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  So we have within half a page we have two or three

 5     explanations which are all not -- I think I established already yesterday

 6     that it is not very solid and that is now confirmed.

 7                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Judge Moloto has a question in relation to this one.

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  And my question is to you, Mr. Lukic.  Are you --

10     is it an assertion you are making that the object we see above that head

11     is a horn?

12             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE MOLOTO:  That's an assertion you are making?

14             MR. LUKIC:  That's how I see it.  Of course I'm not an expert but

15     what I see here is horn.  We just checked skulls on the Internet --

16             JUDGE MOLOTO:  We are all looking at the picture.

17             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

18             JUDGE MOLOTO:  My question to you is not what do you see and say.

19     Are you making that assertion?  In other words, you are not asking the

20     witness whether that could be a horn.  You are telling him that is a

21     horn, and I just want to make sure what your position is.

22             MR. LUKIC:  And if he agrees with that.  I tried to ask the

23     question, of course --

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  No, you didn't.  You made a statement to him.

25             MR. LUKIC:  I can ask the question now then if --

Page 18010

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  The question -- the question --

 2             MR. LUKIC:  [Overlapping speakers]

 3             JUDGE MOLOTO:  The witness disputed your assertion earlier.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  That at least has been clarified whether it

 5     was in response to a question, yes or no.  I think that since we had a

 6     lengthy discussion on the matter that we should have everything clearly

 7     on the record.  Therefore, I suggest that the -- perhaps with the

 8     assistance of whomever is competent to do that, to make markings on this

 9     photograph as it appears on our screen now and I would like to give short

10     instructions as to how they should be marked.

11             Now, Madam Registrar, if it's not the witness who marks, whom

12     else could mark -- well, we could -- we could ask the witness to mark it.

13             Mr. Traldi, is that a possibility or do we have technical

14     problems?

15             MR. TRALDI:  We can try.  I've been informed it might be a

16     problem because it's in Sanction, but it might not.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Okay.  Let's see whether it works.

18             Could the usher assist the witness.

19             Witness, would you please very carefully listen to my

20     instructions as to markings.

21                           [Trial Chamber confers]

22             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll see whether a technical solution can be found,

23     if not within one or two minutes then we'll deal with it in a different

24     way.

25             It seems that technical problems -- could we then have the

Page 18011

 1     picture again on our screen in Sanction.  Yes, there we are.  For the

 2     record we focused initially on what seems to be a skull of an animal in

 3     the very centre part of the picture.  Later we paid attention to what

 4     seems to be a part of a skull which is slowly -- slightly lower,

 5     approximately at one-fourth of the left.  And when I said "slightly

 6     lower," slightly lower in relation to the first skull I described.  We

 7     then focused as a third possible skull on what is seen at the right lower

 8     corner where between a box with a glass and an umbrella and a very small

 9     box with a red stripe on it there seems to be part of a skull.  The

10     Defence has declared its position in relation to the horn and pointed at

11     a feature which comes from the central skull at the back end of the head

12     being bent slightly upwards and originating from approximately the

13     middle, in terms of top and bottom, of the skull.

14             Does this describe in sufficient detail for the parties what we

15     discussed and where it is to be found on this photo taken in June 1996 by

16     Lucas Kello?  Then we leave it to that.

17             Any further -- now I'm a bit lost as to where we were.

18     Mr. Lukic, you said I would like to look at the picture again.  Now we

19     have done that to say the least.

20             Has this triggered any further need for questions?

21             MR. TRALDI:  No, Your Honour, I have several documents, including

22     the report, to tender of course.  But that's all I have left.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  And we don't need the witness for that I take it.

24             Then, this concludes your testimony, Mr. Riedlmayer.  I'd like to

25     thank very much for coming a long way to The Hague and for having

Page 18012

 1     answered all the questions that were put to you by the parties and by the

 2     Bench.  And I wish you a safe return home again.

 3             THE WITNESS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  You may follow the usher.

 5             Can we briefly deal with the outstanding exhibits.

 6             MR. TRALDI:  Yes, Your Honour, the first is MFI P2503, the

 7     report, which I would tender into evidence.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic.

 9             MR. LUKIC:  We objected in our written submission.  If you want

10     me, I can repeat, but I think that we have --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  You can refer to it --

12             MR. LUKIC:  Then I'm referring to our --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Anything in addition what is in your written

14     submissions?

15             MR. LUKIC:  No.  Just whatever we put --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

17             MR. LUKIC:  -- in our written submissions from 7th of June, 2013.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

19                           [Trial Chamber confers]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  P2503 is admitted into evidence.  The objection is

21     overruled.

22             MR. TRALDI:  Then, Your Honour, there are six related documents

23     that have 65 ter numbers.  I'll go one by one with the 65 ter and a brief

24     description, if that suits the Chamber and Defence.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please proceed in that way.

Page 18013

 1             MR. TRALDI:  65 ter 28814 is appendix 1:  Elements of a Bosnian

 2     mosque.  I would tender that document.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, any --

 4             MR. LUKIC:  We objected to the report so we object to any

 5     addition to the report.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  The new situation now is that the report is

 7     admitted into evidence.  Does that change your position as to --

 8             MR. LUKIC:  No, it does not.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  It does not.

10             MR. TRALDI:  I would request just that if Mr. Lukic has a

11     separate objection to one of these documents, he let me know; otherwise,

12     of course, I wouldn't seek to make arguments.  But if he has a separate

13     objection, then I'd like it on the record so the parties can be heard.

14                           [Trial Chamber confers]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, a number to be assigned to

16     65 ter 28814?

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Document receives number P2509, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  The objection against admission is overruled.  P2509

19     is admitted into evidence.

20             MR. TRALDI:  The next is 65 ter 28816.  These are the formatted

21     records addressing specific sites.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Same position by the Defence?

23             MR. LUKIC:  Same position.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 28816 receives number P2510,

Page 18014

 1     Your Honours.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  P2510 is admitted into evidence.

 3             MR. TRALDI:  The next is 65 ter 28817, that's the searchable

 4     database which contains records for each site of the municipalities

 5     covered by the report.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Same position, Mr. Lukic, I take it?

 7             MR. LUKIC:  It's pretty big document as -- we have the same

 8     position to this document as well.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 28817 receives number P2511,

11     Your Honours.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  P2511 is admitted.

13             MR. TRALDI:  Next, Mr. President, 65 ter 30417, that's the

14     slide show of images from the formatted entries.

15             MR. LUKIC:  That's not on the list.

16             MR. TRALDI:  As discussed yesterday, this is the slide show.

17     Each slide is composed of images from either the formatted records or the

18     database, and I've put on the record what page of the formatted records

19     each -- each site that's covered corresponds to.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  You say it's an extract.  There's nothing new in it

21     which is not covered by the material which is on the list?

22             MR. TRALDI:  That is a much better way of putting what I said,

23     Mr. President.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, in view of this, that is, that all the

25     material in the slide show is part of what was on the list.

Page 18015

 1             MR. LUKIC:  Still we have the objection.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Madam Registrar, the number would be ... ?

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 30417 receives number P2512,

 4     Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  P2512 is admitted into evidence.

 6             MR. TRALDI:  And then there are two other documents in the --

 7     used in the witness's examination and put on his exhibit notification

 8     related to his conclusions.  The first is 65 ter 30375, that's the

 9     spreadsheet of all the sites that he's studied throughout Bosnia.

10             MR. LUKIC:  We do object to this one as well.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 30375 receives number P2513,

13     Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

15             MR. TRALDI:  And then 65 ter 30376, the responsibility chart.

16             MR. LUKIC:  And in relation to these last two documents, 30375

17     and 30376, we have to emphasise that we received them very shortly before

18     the testimony of this expert witness and we think it's -- the disclosure

19     of these documents was late and is not in accordance with the rules and

20     we do object to the last one as well.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Traldi.

22             MR. TRALDI:  Yes, Your Honour, as set out in our -- in the

23     exhibit list we circulated for this witness, both of these were completed

24     last month.  They are -- include information drawn solely from his

25     previous reports, which has been noticed to the Defence for a long period

Page 18016

 1     of time.  He testified to the same point.

 2                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, and the -- P2513 was already admitted into

 4     evidence.  The observations made by Mr. Lukic do not trigger the Chamber

 5     to reconsider it.  Now, for the last one, the responsibility chart,

 6     Mr. Lukic, any other objection apart from the one you mentioned, that is,

 7     late disclosure?

 8             MR. LUKIC:  We objected to the work of this expert witness --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

10             MR. LUKIC:  -- so we object to this one as well.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  So it's covered in general by objections against

12     this witness.

13             Madam Registrar.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 30376 receives number P2514,

15     Your Honours.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

17             Finally, before we take a break, I'd like to put on the record

18     the following.  There has been -- there have been some questions in

19     relation to what is now admitted as P2506, especially paragraph 4 about

20     explosions.  I didn't ask any additional questions to the witness because

21     he said he couldn't answer such question.  Having read this paragraph, I

22     observe the following and just for purposes of transparency put it on the

23     record that the first paragraph -- the first linea of paragraph 4 deals

24     with fewer explosions, but still be part of everyday life, mainly thrown

25     into the yards of houses belonging to Muslims, three cases were planted

Page 18017

 1     in houses and facilities belonging to Serbs.  The next linea deals with

 2     explosive devices solely obtained from military sources.  Then in the

 3     third linea, apparently a new subject is addressed, that is, over the

 4     past two months, three mosques, having been blown up, and the kind of

 5     explosive used for blowing them up and how these explosives were

 6     transported and an accompanying shoot-out.  The next linea deals with the

 7     organs of the organisation that issues this report, that the organ know

 8     some of the experts and perpetrators, some of whom are officers.  And

 9     then that the organ -- organisation believes that the problem should be

10     resolved by competent military organs and commands, especially the cases

11     involving explosives and mines which came from army depots and combat

12     sets of subordinate units.

13             I put this on the record because the parties have picked each the

14     little bits and pieces of this document and I thought that it would be

15     good to make the parties aware that the Chamber reads this paragraph 4 on

16     explosions in its entirety.

17             We take a break and we'll resume at 25 past 12.00.

18                           --- Recess taken at 12.03 p.m.

19                           --- On resuming at 12.31 p.m.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Before the Chamber invites the Prosecution to call

21     its next witness -- could Mr. Mladic speak without raising his voice.

22             Before I invite the Prosecution to call its next witness, the

23     Chamber would like to deliver two decisions -- well, one of them is

24     perhaps not a real decision.

25             I start with delivering the decision on the Defence requests for

Page 18018

 1     extensions to respond to the 40th and the 41st 92 bis motions.  For the

 2     second, intercept bar table motion and the bar table motion related to

 3     the Siege of Sarajevo.

 4             On the 11th of October, the Defence filed a request for a 30-day

 5     extension to respond to the Prosecution's 40th 92 bis motion, citing as

 6     good cause for the request the fact that the Prosecution has been filing

 7     its 92 bis motions at will, in direct contravention of the Chamber's

 8     guidance, as well as the concurrent dead-lines issued by the Chamber and

 9     other obligations of the Defence.  The Defence also seeks clarification

10     of the Chamber's guidance with respect to the timing of the Prosecution's

11     filings.

12             On the 14th of October, the Defence filed three more requests for

13     extensions to respond:  A request for 30 additional days to respond to

14     the 41st 92 bis motion; a request for 30 additional days to respond to

15     the second intercept bar table motion; and a request for 44 additional

16     days to respond to the bar table motion related to the Siege of Sarajevo.

17     The Defence cites as good cause for additional extension its current

18     heavy workload and the complicated and serious nature of the

19     Prosecution's bar table motions.

20             The Chamber notes that the Prosecution's standing submission that

21     it will not object to reasonable requests for extensions.

22             As a preliminary matter, the Chamber notes that its original

23     guidance with respect to the timing of 92 bis and quater motions was that

24     the Prosecution should make such filings two or three weeks apart in

25     order to prevent the Defence and Chamber from being flooded with these

Page 18019

 1     kinds of motions.  However, the Chamber modified this guidance over a

 2     year ago when it stated clearly on the 12th of October, 2012, that the

 3     Prosecution could file its 92 bis and quater motions once they were ready

 4     and that the Defence could request more time if it felt that it was

 5     flooded with such motions and did not have adequate time to respond.

 6     This can be found on transcript pages 4057 to 4058.  For these reasons,

 7     the Chamber finds meritless the Defence claims in relation to the 40th

 8     92 bis motion that the Chamber's guidance has been unclear or abandoned

 9     without reason by the Chamber.

10             With regard to the Defence submission that it was unable to

11     respond in a timely manner to the 40th 92 bis motion because it was

12     facing simultaneous dead-lines as a result of the Chamber's orders, the

13     Chamber considers that there was only one other response dead-line set

14     for the 11th of October, the response to the Prosecution's second

15     UN bar table motion, and that dead-line was set after the Chamber granted

16     the Defence an additional 30 days in which to respond.  The Chamber also

17     considers that the 40th 92 bis motion is brief and uncomplicated,

18     concerning only one witness and comprising only 27 redacted transcript

19     pages and a single photograph.

20             With regard to the Defence request for a 30-day extension to

21     respond to the 41st 92 bis motion, the Chamber considers that the motion

22     is extremely brief and uncomplicated, concerning only a four-paragraph

23     statement of a single witness.

24             With regard to the Defence request for an extension to respond to

25     the second intercept bar table motion, the Chamber considers that the

Page 18020

 1     motion is relatively brief, concerning only 13 intercepts and a small

 2     number of notebook pages.  The Chamber also notes the Prosecution's

 3     submission that most of the tendered intercepts are substantially similar

 4     to those already in evidence and are only being offered to establish the

 5     date of such admitted intercepts.

 6             With respect to the Defence request for an extension to respond

 7     to the bar table motion related to the Siege of Sarajevo, the Chamber

 8     considers that the motion relates to a substantial number of documents

 9     which appear to concern, inter alia, the acts and conduct of the accused

10     as charged in the indictment.

11             The Chamber recalls that its guidance with respect to the timing

12     of Prosecution 92 bis and quater filings and the granting of reasonable

13     requests for extensions to respond to these filings was based on its

14     concern that the Defence not be inundated with such motions to the point

15     where it did not have adequate time to respond.  For the

16     40th and 41st 92 bis motions at issue, however, the Chamber does not

17     consider that the Defence has been flooded with such motions or that the

18     length or complexity of these motions warrant an additional 30 days to

19     respond.

20             With regard to the Defence's general submissions that it cannot

21     cope with its current heavy workload, in part due to response dead-lines

22     ordered by the Chamber, the Chamber notes that the dead-lines it has set

23     have been a result of granting, in full or in part, the very extensions

24     sought by the Defence.  The Chamber further notes in this respect that in

25     the last two months it has granted, in full or in part, all 16 of the

Page 18021

 1     Defence's requests for extensions, allowing nearly 400 additional

 2     response days.

 3             Lastly, the Chamber notes that the Defence team is staffed and

 4     funded at the highest levels afforded by the Tribunal and absent a

 5     showing of good cause the Defence is expected to keep up with the normal

 6     filings dead-lines and should not expect last-minute extensions to be

 7     granted as a matter of right where it has not shown a reasonable basis

 8     for them.

 9             For the foregoing reasons the Chamber decides as follows:

10             For the 40th 92 bis motion:  The Chamber grants the request in

11     part, allowing an additional 14 days in which to respond and setting the

12     new dead-line of 25th of October [Realtime transcript read in error

13     "September"].

14             For the 41st 92 bis motion:  The Chamber grants the request in

15     part, allowing an additional 14 days in which to respond and setting the

16     new dead-line of 28th of October.

17             For the second intercept bar table motion:  The Chamber grants

18     the request, allowing an additional 30 days in which to respond, setting

19     the new dead-line of 14 November.

20             For the bar table motion related to the Siege of Sarajevo:  The

21     Chamber grants the request in full, allowing an additional 44 days in

22     which to respond, setting the new dead-line of 28 November.

23             And this concludes the Chamber's decisions.

24             MR. LUKIC:  I'm sorry for interruption, Your Honour.  I think

25     there is a mistake and it can affect us.  Page 54, line 18, it says

Page 18022

 1     25th of September.  I think you said 25th of October.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  I hope I said 25th of October.  I don't remember --

 3             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  You did.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I did.

 5             Well, then it only shows how exceptional mistakes by

 6     transcriptionists are, which the Chamber is always aware of that it is a

 7     difficult task.

 8             And then I would like to deal with another matter, that is the

 9     remaining evidentiary motions during the Prosecution's case.

10             Last week, the Prosecution provided an informal update in

11     relation to its remaining evidentiary motions to be filed during the

12     Prosecution's case.  The Chamber understands that generally no further

13     Rule 92 bis or quater motions will be filed.  In relation to bar table

14     motions, the Chamber understands that one such motion remains to be filed

15     and that motion will contain approximately 10 to 20 miscellaneous

16     documents in addition to 15 excerpts of Republika Srpska Assembly

17     sessions.  This motion should be filed no later than the 31st of October.

18     The Chamber will address the proposed further tendering of some 500

19     documents in a second.

20             In relation to the proposed tendering of excerpts of RS Assembly

21     sessions, the Chamber notes the Defence's position that it would not

22     object if the whole sessions were tendered.  The Chamber reminds the

23     Defence that if it wishes to have certain portions added to any excerpts

24     for contextualisation, it should request so in its response.  The parties

25     are urged to tender only excerpts or to clearly explain why entire

Page 18023

 1     sessions are needed.

 2             The Prosecution states in its correspondence that approximately

 3     500 documents cited in the remaining expert reports will be tendered in

 4     the final written bar table motion because, according to the Prosecution,

 5     the Chamber has expressed its inclination to, and I quote, "restrict the

 6     Prosecution's ability to tender documents during the testimony of expert

 7     witnesses."  First of all, the Chamber understands this issue to mainly

 8     refer to the documents underlying the Theunens report.  Secondly, the

 9     Chamber has not expressed an inclination to restrict the Prosecution from

10     tendering documents during the testimony of witnesses.  The Chamber's

11     guidance has always been that documents should be used with witnesses in

12     court as opposed to tendering them from the bar table or as associated

13     exhibits.  With regard to expert witnesses, the Chamber additionally gave

14     guidance that documents underlying expert reports should not be tendered

15     as a matter of fact because a proposed expert report should be clear

16     enough in relation to describing and drawing conclusions from the

17     underlying documents, so as to make the additional tendering of certain

18     source and underlying material unnecessary.  If certain documents are not

19     covered by the expert report, they are of course not technically

20     underlying documents, and thus the Prosecution may tender them into

21     evidence.  The Prosecution should in such cases clearly explain why such

22     documents are tendered.

23             As the Chamber previously held, it is not inclined to accept a

24     bulk of tendering of many hundreds of underlying documents, neither

25     during the examination-in-chief nor from the bar table.  The way the

Page 18024

 1     Prosecution should proceed is to limit its examination-in-chief,

 2     including the tendering of documents, to matters of central importance to

 3     its case which are likely to be controversial and which require further

 4     explanation, clarification, or illustration in terms of how the expert

 5     witness reached his or her conclusions or opinions.  Further, as

 6     indicated at transcript page 17609, the Prosecution should analyse after

 7     the cross-examination of the expert, whether certain conclusions have

 8     been challenged by the Defence which now would require tendering of some

 9     of the underlying documents.

10             In its correspondence in relation to Witness Tabeau, the witness

11     states -- the Prosecution states, and I quote:

12             "Should the Chamber find she is an expert and admit her POD

13     expert report, it's not the Prosecution's intention, as a general rule,

14     to tender documents related to victims which are not specifically

15     challenged by the Mladic Defence.  Absent a specific challenge, the

16     Prosecution considers tendering the underlying documents may, in most

17     cases, be unnecessary."

18             Based on this, the Chamber understands that the Prosecution will

19     proceed in accordance with the Chamber's guidance with respect to

20     Witness Tabeau.  With regard to the Prosecution's reference to wanting to

21     tender 2.000 documents with Witness Tabeau, the Chamber then understands

22     that this is only so if the Defence specifically challenges the expert's

23     finding in relation to each victim.

24             The Prosecution did not give a similar indication that it will

25     proceed in accordance with the Chamber's guidance for other expert

Page 18025

 1     witnesses; however, the Chamber expects the Prosecution to do so.

 2             The Prosecution also sought guidance on the Chamber's approach to

 3     evaluating the evidence alluding -- to evaluate the evidence alluding to

 4     a verification process conducted by the Stanisic and

 5     Zupljanin Trial Chamber.  The Chamber cannot at this stage provide any

 6     clarification on how it will evaluate the evidence, once received, and

 7     whether it will engage in a similar exercise as the mentioned

 8     Trial Chamber.  In terms of assisting the Prosecution in its

 9     determination of what material should be tendered, the Chamber considers

10     that the instant statement serves as sufficient guidance.

11             Lastly, the Prosecution requested that a Rule 65 ter meeting be

12     held to help clarify what issues related to Witness Tabeau's report are

13     in dispute.  While the Chamber always encourages the parties to meet and

14     clarify what matters are in dispute, it is not inclined to get involved

15     in this -- these meetings at this stage.  In addition, whether something

16     is challenged or not will further only crystalise during

17     cross-examination.

18             And this concludes this statement by the Chamber.

19             If the Prosecution is ready, the next witness could be called,

20     that's Mr. Bowen.

21             MR. JEREMY:  Good afternoon.  That's correct, Your Honours.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.

23             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, while the witness is being brought in,

24     the Prosecution had estimated an hour in the examination-in-chief of this

25     witness.  I will try and conclude it in an hour, but it may be that I'll

Page 18026

 1     need an additional ten minutes or so.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  If you limit it to ten minutes, Mr. Jeremy, that

 3     would be appreciated.

 4             MR. JEREMY:  Thank you, Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  But still preferred to finish in one hour.

 6                           [The witness entered court]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bowen, if you would put on your headphones --

 8             THE WITNESS:  Oh, sure, yeah, yeah.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bowen, before you give evidence, the Rules

10     require that you make a solemn declaration.  The text is handed out to

11     you.  May I invite you to --

12             THE WITNESS:  Sure.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  -- make that solemn declaration.

14             THE WITNESS:  Roger that.  I solemnly declare that I will speak

15     the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

16                           WITNESS:  JEREMY BOWEN

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Please be seated, Mr. Bowen.

18             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bowen, you'll first be examined by Mr. Jeremy.

20     Mr. Jeremy's counsel for the Prosecution.  You'll find him to your right.

21             THE WITNESS:  Okay.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  You may proceed, Mr. Jeremy.

23             MR. JEREMY:  Thank you, Your Honours.

24                           Examination by Mr. Jeremy:

25        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. Bowen.  Could you please state your full name

Page 18027

 1     for the record?

 2        A.   Jeremy Francis John Bowen.

 3        Q.   Do you recall providing a written statement to the

 4     Office of the Prosecutor dated 10 August 2009?

 5        A.   Yes, I do.

 6             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, can the Court Officer please display

 7     65 ter 30389.  This is the witness's statement.

 8             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the speakers please remember to pause

 9     between question and answer.  Thank you.

10             MR. JEREMY:

11        Q.   Mr. Bowen, can I ask you to view the first page of the English

12     version on the right-hand side of the screen before you and ask whether

13     you see your signature at the bottom of the page?

14        A.   Yes, I do.

15             MR. JEREMY:  Can I ask we go to the last page of this statement.

16        Q.   And when we get there, Mr. Bowen, do you recognise your signature

17     on that page?

18        A.   Yes, I do.

19        Q.   Have you had an opportunity to read and review this statement in

20     preparation for your testimony here today?

21        A.   Yes, I have.

22        Q.   And I understand that you wish to make a couple of corrections to

23     your statement as follows.

24             MR. JEREMY:  Firstly, if we can go to paragraph 11, which is page

25     4 in the English, 6 in the B/C/S.

Page 18028

 1        Q.   In paragraph 11 I understand that your visit to Bijeljina was, in

 2     fact, in 1994 rather than 1993?

 3        A.   Yes, that's correct.

 4        Q.   And therefore, where it says "this happened in 1993," it should

 5     be "1994."  And when it says "more than a year after many towns in

 6     Bosnia," it should be "more than two years after many towns in Bosnia"?

 7        A.   Yes, that's correct.

 8             MR. JEREMY:  Could we go to e-court page 13 in the English and

 9     page 17 in the B/C/S.

10        Q.   Focusing on paragraph 44, I understand that your report about the

11     shelling of the football game in Dobrinja was, in fact, June 1993 and not

12     July 1993; is that correct?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   With these corrections, do you affirm the truthfulness and the

15     accuracy of your statement?

16        A.   I do.

17        Q.   And if you were today asked similar questions as you were asked

18     in the making of that statement, would you provide the same answers in

19     substance?

20        A.   Yes, I would.

21             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, I'd tender that statement as the next

22     Prosecution public exhibit.

23             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours, the Defence would object and refer

24     Your Honours to our very extensive and detailed filing of

25     25 September 2013, setting forth in detail the objections to this

Page 18029

 1     statement.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  No further objections apart from we find in the

 3     response?

 4             MR. IVETIC:  None further than the response, Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, thank you.

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, could you assign a number for this

 8     statement which will be MFI'd by the Chamber.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 30389 receives number P2515,

10     Your Honours.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  P2521 [sic] is marked for identification.

12             MR. IVETIC:  2515, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  2515 is marked for identification.  I apologise.

14             MR. JEREMY:

15        Q.   Mr. Bowen, did you also testify in the case of the

16     Prosecutor versus Karadzic on the 13th and 14th of January, 2011?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And have you recently had the opportunity to review the

19     transcript of your evidence in that case together with certain of the

20     associated video-clips?

21        A.   Yes, I had that chance.

22        Q.   Is there a correction that you wish to make to one of the

23     reports, 65 ter 22879A, which is a report on the sniping of Bosnian

24     Muslim school children on a bus leaving government-controlled territory

25     in Sarajevo?

Page 18030

 1        A.   Yes, there was an error in that report.  The error was that I was

 2     standing in front of the "Oslobodjenje" newspaper building in Sarajevo

 3     and I said that the shots came from there, when they didn't.  I was newly

 4     arrived in Sarajevo, I wasn't quite sure of some of the geography, and,

 5     in fact, it was -- looking at my piece and looking at the pictures that

 6     were used in it, and particularly the picture of the bus leaving the

 7     final Bosnian check-point to move towards Ilidza, there was no way that

 8     the shooting could have come from there.  So, yes, that was a mistake,

 9     that's an error.

10        Q.   And this incident, is that something that you discuss in your

11     statement in paragraph 37?

12        A.   I'd like to just review paragraph 37, if I could.

13             MR. JEREMY:  That's e-court page 11 in the English and 14 in the

14     B/C/S of 2515, MFI.

15             THE WITNESS:  Yes, that's the -- the account of -- of what we

16     covered essentially in the report.  I did a number of reports about that

17     shooting, from the shooting itself through to the funerals of the dead

18     children.  And, yeah, that's what I was referring to.

19             MR. JEREMY:

20        Q.   And does the error in the broadcast piece that you've just

21     brought to the attention of the Chamber, does that in any way affect what

22     you've written here in paragraph 37?

23        A.   No, it does not.

24        Q.   And with this clarification, do you affirm the truthfulness and

25     accuracy of your testimony in the Karadzic case and the related reports?

Page 18031

 1        A.   Yes, I do.

 2        Q.   And if you were asked the same questions in --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I again ask you to make small breaks between

 4     question and answer --

 5             THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Answer and question.

 7             MR. JEREMY:  Apologies, Your Honours.

 8        Q.   Mr. Bowen, if you were asked the same questions today during

 9     these proceedings as you were asked in the Karadzic proceedings, would

10     you provide the same answers in substance?

11        A.   Yes, I would.

12             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, I tender the extracts of the witness's

13     Karadzic testimony, 65 ter 30390.

14             MR. IVETIC:  And, Your Honours, we stand on the objections as set

15     forth in our 25 September 2013 filing with no further comments.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, 65 ter 30390 receives number ... ?

17             THE REGISTRAR:  P2516, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  P2516 is marked for identification.

19             Mr. Ivetic, just to avoid any confusion, you referred to the

20     filing 25th of September, 2013, whereas the Defence response to the

21     Prosecution 92 ter motion for Mr. Bowen is dated the 27th of September.

22             MR. IVETIC:  I apologise, Your Honours, yes, the

23     27th of September.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

25             Please proceed.

Page 18032

 1             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, as regards the associated exhibits to

 2     the Karadzic testimony, I'll make use of some of those in my direct

 3     examination.  I suspect the Defence team will do the same, and therefore

 4     I would propose the tendering of the remainder until the conclusion of

 5     the witness's evidence, although ideally while he is still here.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Proposal accepted.

 7             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, I'd now like to read a short summary

 8     of this witness's evidence, the purpose of which I've explained to the

 9     witness.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

11             MR. JEREMY:  Mr. Jeremy Bowen has worked as a war correspondent

12     for the British Broadcasting Corporation since 1987.  In this capacity,

13     he has reported on wars in the former Yugoslavia, beginning with the war

14     in Croatia, before being stationed in Sarajevo from July 1992 for the

15     majority of the conflict in Bosnia.

16             In Sarajevo he observed that there was no safe place from the

17     campaign of shelling and sniping against the civilian population.

18     Mr. Bowen spoke to Bosnian Serb soldiers who were encircling Sarajevo,

19     who confirmed that they were firing into the city.  Mr. Bowen also

20     reported from areas outside of Sarajevo.  In August 1992, he accompanied

21     a UNHCR convoy into Gorazde, where he witnessed desperate people

22     suffering from a lack of food and medical supplies.  He also witnessed

23     the effects of shelling.  He also reported on ethnic cleansing of Bosnian

24     Muslim civilians from various locations throughout Bosnia, which he

25     describes as a major and constant feature of the conflict.

Page 18033

 1             In July 1995, Mr. Bowen reported on events in Srebrenica and

 2     recalls pointing out that in the pictures he took from Pale TV, no men

 3     were shown leaving the enclave.

 4             That concludes the summary of the written evidence, Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 6             MR. JEREMY:

 7        Q.   Mr. Bowen, you arrived in Sarajevo in July 1992, and for the

 8     first half of the examination today we'll focus on your experiences in

 9     Sarajevo between 1992 and 1995.  Now, in your written statement,

10     P2515 MFI, you mention that you got to know a refugee family who was

11     sheltering in the hotel Europa in Sarajevo, in connection with this I

12     would like to show you one of your reports?

13             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, Ms. Stewart will now play

14     65 ter 22510M and this is a clip that has been previewed by CLSS and

15     therefore I hope to play it only once.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Has the transcript been provided --

17             MR. JEREMY:  Yes, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  -- to the booth.  Yes.

19                           [Video-clip played]

20             "The fire was started by four shells which hit the hotel Europa

21     around 7.00 last night.  It took hold rapidly engulfing the top floors of

22     the building.  More than 800 refugees were in the hotel.  Most of them

23     were women and children, most came from suburbs of Sarajevo now

24     controlled by the Serbs.  They've already lost their homes and almost all

25     of their possessions.  As the fire spread through the hotel, they grabbed

Page 18034

 1     what they had left and tried to get out.  The shelling has forced most of

 2     the refugees to spend every night in the basement.  This city has

 3     hundreds of thousands of defenceless people, but the refugees are as

 4     vulnerable as anybody here.  They filed out to what they thought was the

 5     safety of the street, but snipers started shooting as they came out.

 6     Passers-by tried to take people out of the firing line.  Someone managed

 7     to get a few vans to evacuate them from the most immediate danger.  But

 8     it's all relative, there's no such thing as a safe place in this city.

 9     This morning this was all that was left of the top floor.  Until last

10     night it passed as home for scores of refugees.  Small fires are still

11     burning in the roof, downstairs the refugees are moving back in.  They

12     don't want to, but there's nowhere else left.

13             "This woman said her house had been destroyed, she didn't know

14     where to go or what to do.  This young mother is just as dazed, she came

15     to the hotel three days ago because her brother had been killed by a

16     mortar and it seemed safe, now she doesn't know whether to stay or to go.

17     The refugees believe the Serbs attacked their hotel deliberately.

18             "I don't know, they attacked us because they knew we are here.

19             "The 'Europa' is in the old quarter of Sarajevo, an area which

20     has been mortared hundreds of times by the Serbs, whose positions are

21     very close.

22             "Any denials coming from the Serbian side should be treated with

23     the greatest skepticism.  Once again it seems the gunners on the hills

24     around here are treating civilians not just as legitimate targets but as

25     their main enemy."

Page 18035

 1             MR. JEREMY:  And we've paused the clip at 2.28 seconds.

 2        Q.   Mr. Bowen, at the start of the clip there was a black

 3     introduction screen that contained the date 11 June 1992.  Was that, in

 4     fact, a date of this footage?

 5        A.   No, it wasn't.  I'd ignore that.  In those days we didn't have

 6     the technology, the software, when we were moving around in the field to

 7     change the dates on the countdowns.  We of course do now, but back then

 8     if you were outside the head office, you couldn't make those changes.  So

 9     in general in all of these reports, I would ignore the dates on that

10     lead-in because most of the time they're not accurate.

11        Q.   And do you recall the approximate date of this footage?

12        A.   It would have been in July 1992 I'm pretty certain.

13        Q.   And in the footage I noticed a few men carrying weapons.  Do you

14     know whether the hotel Europa was at the time being used for a military

15     purpose?

16        A.   I saw no evidence of that.  I got to know the hotel pretty well

17     after that, because as you said, I got to know a refugee family there who

18     I actually befriended and used to -- they'd tell me what was going on and

19     I used to give them food and things and coffee.  And so I never ever saw

20     any sign of it being used as any kind of a military headquarters

21     throughout the war because people moved back in as you saw in that piece.

22     It was used as a place where displaced people, where refugees, were

23     staying.  The men with guns were, I think, various fighters who'd come in

24     to help out.

25        Q.   If we can continue playing the clip, please, to the end.

Page 18036

 1                           [Video-clip played]

 2             "On the other side of the city, nearly a thousand people, mainly

 3     mothers and children, became refugees this morning.  Almost all of them

 4     were Serbs.  Until the war started, they'd lived happily enough alongside

 5     Muslims and Croats.

 6             "Horrible, horrible.  I have to go.  This is my town, I'm born

 7     here, and my child born here, and my father living here.  I have to leave

 8     everything.

 9             "Misery is about the only thing the ordinary people of the former

10     Yugoslavia still have in common.

11             "Jeremy Bowen, BBC news, Sarajevo."

12             MR. JEREMY:

13        Q.   Mr. Bowen, in the second half of this clip, we saw you reporting

14     on Bosnian Serbs leaving Sarajevo.  Were they leaving from

15     government-controlled areas of Sarajevo?

16        A.   Yes, that is my recollection.

17        Q.   And in this clip we see you reporting from both the Bosnian

18     Muslim perspective and the Bosnian Serb perspective.  Was this

19     intentional or incidental to the report?

20        A.   It was always very important to us to try to report from all

21     sides of the conflict of the war.  It wasn't always possible, but we --

22     we did the best that we could in the circumstances, to try to report

23     every side.  Now, I was especially keen to report from the Serb side, but

24     it was very difficult to get access to places which they controlled.  It

25     was particularly difficult to get, for example, Grbavica, which was, as

Page 18037

 1     you know, the part of central Sarajevo which was controlled by the Serb

 2     side.  And despite asking many, many times of the Serb authorities,

 3     Bosnian Serb authorities, in Pale, I think I managed in the course of the

 4     whole war to visit there once.  Only once did I get permission to go

 5     there, and you had to have permission to get in because it was controlled

 6     by the military.

 7        Q.   Do you recall the details of the circumstances of the departure

 8     of the Bosnian Serbs from government-controlled territory?

 9        A.   I believe - and it's more than 20 years ago now - but I believe

10     that what was happening was it was an evacuation that was organised and

11     there were mainly Serbs on the bus because the bus going to head towards

12     Serbia.  I think at that time a lot of people were getting out because of

13     the circumstances of the war.  I think that in July 1992, while there was

14     probably already a little bit of pressure on Serbs there, it wasn't

15     anything like it got to be later on in the war because there -- still the

16     people talked a lot still in Sarajevo at that time of a multi-cultural

17     ethos.  So my -- to the best of my memory, these were people who were

18     getting out because it was dangerous and were unhappy to have to leave

19     because of the danger and feeling that they were being driven out of

20     their homes by the war.

21             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, I'd tender that clip as the next

22     Prosecution exhibit.

23             MR. IVETIC:  No objection.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 22510M receives number P2517,

Page 18038

 1     Your Honours.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  P2517 is admitted.

 3             MR. JEREMY:

 4        Q.   Mr. Bowen, in the clip we just saw, you observed that Serb

 5     gunners were not just treating civilians as their legitimate targets, but

 6     as their main enemy.  In connection with this comment, I'd like to show

 7     you another of your reports.  This is 65 ter 22510D, and it's the

 8     shelling of the graveyard that you reported on and you've already

 9     mentioned today.

10                           [Video-clip played]

11             "No one bothered to tell Svetlana Glavas and her mother Ruza that

12     Svetlana's daughter was being sent to Germany.  No one in authority

13     bothered to tell them that she'd been killed either.  A neighbour who'd

14     heard about Vedrana's murder on the radio broke the news.  This morning

15     as they got ready to go to the funeral, they said that Vedrana lived at

16     the children's home because they couldn't look after her properly in

17     their tiny damp flat.  They said they loved Vedrana though, her

18     grandmother kept one of Svetlana's dolls for her.  Vedrana was two and a

19     half, and they went to see her as often as they could.

20             "She had just begun to walk, she couldn't talk yet.  But she

21     could play with a ball.

22             "Svetlana and Ruza had planed to walk to the graveyard with their

23     neighbours.  But it's at least two miles from where they lived, so with

24     our colleagues from the Reuters News Agency, we gave them a lift.  When

25     they arrived they were told that Vedrana had already been buried, half an

Page 18039

 1     hour early because the graveyard was being shelled by the Serbs.  That

 2     was bad enough but it got much worse.  More shells started falling.  One

 3     landed as the boys and girls from Vedrana's children's home arrived with

 4     their flowers.  As quickly as they could they dropped them on the graves

 5     of Vedrana and the baby boy the sniper also murdered.  It was time to go.

 6     As the family was leaving, the gunners found their range.

 7             "Ruza Glavas, the grandmother, was hit in the arm.  Reporters

 8     tried to stop the bleeding.

 9             "Hurry up!  Another dressing!  Tourniquet, tourniquet!  Tight,

10     tight, tight!  Get the woman's daughter!

11             "Another shell exploded as she was carried to the car.

12             "Her daughter!

13             "The doctors said they could save Ruza's arm but that she might

14     lose the use of it.  She tried to tell her daughter that she was all

15     right.  Svetlana is educationally subnormal and very dependent of her.

16             "At least six mortar rounds landed in or around the graveyard.

17     There were two direct hits just at the time that the children's funerals

18     were due to start.  The shooting isn't always this accurate, but the

19     place is attacked every day.  There is no question that the Serb gunners

20     are targeting the graveyard to kill civilians."

21             MR. JEREMY:

22        Q.   Mr. Bowen, the man in the cream trousers and the blue shirt and

23     flak jacket that we saw attending to Ruza Glavas, the lady that had been

24     shot, was that you?

25        A.   Yes, it was, yeah.

Page 18040

 1             MR. JEREMY:  And, Your Honours, for the record, that's at minute

 2     1.57 of the clip that we just watched.

 3        Q.   Mr. Bowen, do you have any particular comment that you would like

 4     to make about this clip, about your recollection of this experience?

 5        A.   Yes.  I was -- to start with as a human being, I was absolutely

 6     outraged by what had happened that day.  I thought it was despicable.

 7     Killing two children was bad enough, shooting them when they were being

 8     evacuated on a very badly organised evacuation mission, but then shelling

 9     their funeral, I just thought it was grotesque.  Wounding the

10     grandmother, she had a serious wound in her arm, a bill hole, as my

11     colleague Kurt Shaw, and my other colleague who was there who was a

12     doctor, Jasmina Alabegovic, treating her, the big field dressings went

13     right into the hole.  I mean, it disappeared into there.  It was such a

14     big hole in her arm.  You could see the distress of the daughter who was

15     a very needy woman.  So I was -- to start with, I was outraged by what

16     had happened.

17             Second of all, what I got from talking to grave-diggers and to

18     witnesses and to people who were at the cemetery every day, was that it

19     was a regular occurrence, that the graveyard would be shelled quite

20     often.  In fact, it's dominated by a large stone lion, and during the war

21     years, I think it's been repaired now, but during the war years that lion

22     was very badly chipped and pitted because of the amount of shrapnel that

23     had been thrown off by detonations near it in the funeral.  So, you know,

24     one of the things I wanted to find out was:  Was there any chance this

25     might be being done for our benefit because we were there as TV cameras.

Page 18041

 1     And overwhelmingly what I got that day and on previous visits as well and

 2     on subsequent visits to that very cemetery - I went there quite a bit -

 3     was that shelling was a regular occurrence when TV cameras were not

 4     there.

 5        Q.   And you say -- do those comments that you have just provided

 6     provide the basis for the comment that you make in your statement --

 7     sorry, in the clip that we just saw, saying:

 8             "There's no question that the Serb gunners were targeting the

 9     graveyard to kill civilians"?

10        A.   Well, there was a clear line of sight from the graveyard, which

11     is on a raised positions, it's up a hill, in Sarajevo to the hills where

12     Serb army military positions were.  I'm very well aware of the conspiracy

13     theories that the Bosnian government side were shelling themselves and

14     shelling their own people and those were being stated even more or less

15     at that time.  But I never found any evidence of that happening.  The

16     evidence that day seemed to be that the fire was coming from the Serb

17     side -- actually, in the course of my time in Sarajevo, I would have been

18     absolutely delighted to report the story that the Bosnian army was

19     shelling its own people, Bosnian government army was shelling its own

20     people.  Because as a -- you know, as an impartial journalist, I'm keen

21     to report every side and I wouldn't have hesitated in reporting that

22     story if we had found any evidence; we never did.  And I'm encouraged in

23     my belief 20 years on that my call that day was correct because in all

24     the years since then nobody has come forward and said:  Yes, I did it.

25     You'd think that after this amount of time it would be very hard to keep

Page 18042

 1     that kind of thing hidden and it hasn't -- it's never emerged to my

 2     knowledge anyway.  So that day, yes, it seemed to be that there was

 3     already a pattern that artillery positions on the Serb side were

 4     targeting the graveyard in a way that they also targeted other parts of

 5     the city, it has to be said.  And, you know, shelling was -- was -- it's

 6     -- was the daily drum beat there.  You know, you heard shelling almost

 7     all of the time in 1992.

 8             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, I tender that clip as the next

 9     Prosecution exhibit.

10             MR. IVETIC:  No objection.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 22510D receives number P2518,

13     Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  P2518 is admitted.

15             MR. JEREMY:

16        Q.   Mr. Bowen, in paragraph 44 of your statement, you refer to a

17     report that you made on the shelling of a football game in Dobrinja.

18     We've already looked at that paragraph today when you clarified the date

19     was, in fact, June 1993 rather than July.  This is an incident that is

20     charged in our indictment as shelling incident G4, and I'd like to show

21     you that footage now, 65 ter 22510A.

22             MR. JEREMY:  And, Your Honours, this has been admitted into

23     evidence through RM123, pursuant to the Chamber's 24th 92 bis filing on

24     the 2nd of April.  I don't think we've yet had an exhibit number assigned

25     to it, but it is -- it is in evidence.  And I would also note that this

Page 18043

 1     isn't a clip that was provided to CLSS in advance but it is already in

 2     evidence and that was the reason why we didn't do that.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, can you confirm that it has not yet

 4     been assigned an exhibit number, although apparently been admitted --

 5     having been admitted?

 6             MR. JEREMY:  It was admitted pursuant to your decision on the

 7     3rd of October, 2013, transcript page 19974 to 5.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  It was a recent decision, therefore, which may

 9     explain why it has not yet been assigned a number.

10                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  I do understand that Madam Registrar has not

12     received yet a message that everything that needed to be uploaded was

13     uploaded.

14             MR. JEREMY:  Yes, Your Honours, and that will be coming this

15     afternoon.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.

17             Could you reserve a number for it, Madam Registrar.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  The reserved number for document 22510A will be

19     P2519, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  And that will be marked for identification for the

21     time being -- no, it's -- it should -- it's admitted already, although

22     not in the system yet.  So therefore, I'm a bit hesitant what to do at

23     this moment.

24                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  The number is assigned now and it will be dealt with

Page 18044

 1     by Madam Registrar in the near future when assigning numbers to other

 2     exhibits that were admitted.

 3             Please proceed.

 4             MR. JEREMY:  Thank you, Your Honours.

 5             Could we please play the clip, Ms. Stewart.

 6                           [Video-clip played]

 7             "Just after the attack an amateur cameraman went with the wounded

 8     to the clinic in Dobrinja.  Several hundred men, women, and children were

 9     watching football when the first shell landed.  A second exploded a few

10     minutes later, wounding people who'd gone to help victims of the first.

11             "Today we had a very, very sick, a very bad day.  A lot of

12     injured patients, a lot of injured civilians and children.  What can I

13     say now for all world, for civilisation?

14             "Dobrinja is one of the most violent places in Sarajevo.  They're

15     used to shelling, but the make-shift pitch is surrounded by high blocks

16     of flats and they thought the Serbs wouldn't be able to see them.  The

17     people here just wanted to have some fun.  Today is one of the most

18     important Muslim festivals of the year, and a game of football was the

19     only way they had to celebrate it.  'We can't live like animals forever,'

20     one of them said, 'after all, we are human beings.'"

21             MR. JEREMY:

22        Q.   Mr. Bowen, do you recognise this as the report that you filed on

23     the shelling of the football game in Dobrinja in June 1993?

24        A.   Yes, it is.

25        Q.   Thank you.

Page 18045

 1             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, I think we're at the break time.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, we're at break time.

 3             Mr. Jeremy, could you give us an indication, if we would resume

 4     at ten minutes to 2.00, would you then come to your 70 minutes or ... ?

 5             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, I think I won't conclude before 2.15.

 6     I'll do my best.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll take a break after the witness has been

 8     escorted out of the courtroom and we'll resume at ten minutes to 2.00.

 9                           [The witness stands down]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  We take the break.

11                           --- Recess taken at 1.29 p.m.

12                           --- On resuming at 1.52 p.m.

13             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, just while the --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Jeremy.  Yes.

15             MR. JEREMY:  Just while the witness is being brought in, the next

16     clip I'm going to play is 22879G, and just to mention that the transcript

17     of this clip hasn't been provided to the booth; however, the transcript

18     of a longer version of the same clip, 22879E has been and the corrections

19     have been made, and, therefore, on that basis I propose to only play

20     22879G once.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  No objection, Mr. Ivetic?

22             MR. IVETIC:  No objection, although I note I think two numbers

23     have been identified.  I think -- oh, I see, no objections.  We're fine.

24             MR. JEREMY:  And to be clear, Your Honours, the booths have

25     transcripts of both clips, but they've only pre-verified the transcript

Page 18046

 1     of the longer clip and, therefore, their corrections to that transcript

 2     is [overlapping speakers].

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Can you guide them where the shorter clip is in the

 4     larger clip.

 5             MR. JEREMY:  It's -- it's under a separate 65 ter 22879G.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 7                           [The witness takes the stand]

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jeremy, you may proceed.

 9             MR. JEREMY:  Thank you, Your Honours.

10        Q.   Mr. Bowen, in the first of the reports that we viewed today, you

11     stated that -- and that report was in July 1992, one of the first reports

12     you did on your arrival into Sarajevo, you stated that "there was no such

13     thing as a safe place in the city."

14             Now, this was in 1992.  Did the city become safer after that

15     time?

16        A.   No, it didn't.  The thing that characterised the government-held

17     part of Sarajevo, the bulk of the centre of the city of course at that

18     time was that there was really -- there was nowhere where you couldn't

19     get shelled and there were many places where you could get sniped.  So

20     there was nowhere safe really in the city out in the open, and in the

21     course of the war, right up to the summer of 1995 when I was still there,

22     that didn't change.

23        Q.   I'd like to show you another of your reports now, 22879G.

24                           [Video-clip played]

25             "This is as dangerous and unstable as Sarajevo has been since the

Page 18047

 1     war started more than three years ago.  Another improvised Serb rocket

 2     hit a block of flats.  Three more people were killed.  Serb attacks

 3     against civilian targets are escalating steadily.  In the last ten days

 4     or so more than 50 civilians have been killed and scores of others

 5     injured.

 6             "Jeremy Bowen, BBC news, Sarajevo."

 7             MR. JEREMY:

 8        Q.   Mr. Bowen, do you recall the approximate date of that clip?

 9        A.   I'm pretty sure it's around July 1995.

10        Q.   And in the clip you referred to another improvised Serb rocket.

11     Can you explain what you meant by improvised Serb rocket?

12        A.   Well, to -- well, to start with, that incident followed on from

13     an attack on the TV station which is more or less in the same time-period

14     which is why I said "another."  And by improvised, by the information

15     that we were getting was that there were rockets which had been designed

16     for another purpose but which were being -- they improvised ways of using

17     them as a ground attack weapon and they were powerful which was why when

18     they hit that building people were killed and also the building you just

19     saw, and also when one hit the TV station there was also a lot of damage

20     and some injuries too.

21             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, I'd tender that clip as the next

22     Prosecution exhibit.

23             MR. IVETIC:  No objection.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Document receives number P2520, Your Honours.

Page 18048

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  P2520 is admitted.

 2             MR. JEREMY:

 3        Q.   Mr. Bowen, in paragraph 24 of your statement you state:

 4             "The dead and wounded in Sarajevo were not caught in the

 5     cross-fire between two warring armies.  Instead, between 1992 and 1995

 6     they were subjected to an organised campaign of shelling and sniping by

 7     Bosnian Serb forces encircling the city."

 8             Now, this is rather a strong statement.  Can you provide the

 9     basis for your making of this particular statement?

10        A.   Sure.  The confrontation lines barely changed --

11             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the speakers please slow down for the

12     benefit of the interpreters.  Thank you.

13             THE WITNESS:  Sorry about that.

14             The confrontation lines didn't -- I'm getting the B/C/S now.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  I think if we move on --

16             THE WITNESS:  Okay --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  -- it will be better.

18             THE WITNESS:  -- it will go away.

19             The confrontation lines didn't really changed except in one or

20     two places in the course of the -- of the entire 1992 to 1995 period.  So

21     in other words, what I'm saying is there was a war going on between the

22     two sides and they all knew where each other's positions were.  But

23     consistently, throughout the war, there were attacks which seemed to me

24     to be sometimes targeted and sometimes pretty random on the city.  You

25     know, you'd be driving along -- and I saw with my own eyes shells

Page 18049

 1     exploding, hitting buildings in -- in parts of the centre of the city.

 2     And that's what made me believe that they weren't caught in the

 3     cross-fire because people clearly didn't live in the places where there

 4     were military positions, they'd moved out of those.  But there were right

 5     through the war and we filmed it, there was other photographic evidence,

 6     I saw it, I saw civilians lying on streets, in the centre of Sarajevo,

 7     with -- killed through with sniper rounds to the head.  I -- there was

 8     right next to the Holiday Inn where we stayed, the Holiday Inn hotel

 9     where the journalists stayed, there was a bit of open ground, in fact, it

10     was the car park of the hotel and now is the car park again, but then it

11     was abandoned because there was a direct line of sight into Bosnian Serb

12     positions which were only a few hundred yards away, maybe 400, 500 yards

13     maybe.  And I remember once being in the restaurant looking out, as I'm

14     having my lunch I'm looking out and I saw a man trying to cross that

15     ground, people would sprint across it and he was hit in the leg and he

16     fell over and I actually went down to the garage of the hotel and got my

17     armoured Land Rover and drove it out to try to pick him up because when

18     I -- I could see him lying there.  By the time I got there, only a couple

19     of minutes later he had dragged himself away.  And that was typical.  And

20     also I saw many, many civilian casualties and I spoke to many, many

21     civilians who talk about being in their homes having breakfast with their

22     families and then the place would be shelled and people would get killed.

23     One of our translators had a tank shell going through her parents'

24     apartment.  Luckily it didn't explode and so nobody was hurt.  But it

25     went right through it from the front window to the back window.  You

Page 18050

 1     know, and I could go on.  And also I spent -- I was a regular visitor to

 2     the morgue in -- the morgue at Kosevo hospital because it was very hard

 3     to get accurate casualty figures and one of the ways that we did it was

 4     to go and count bodies ourselves and I could tell when there was activity

 5     on front lines because you'd see they'd put the bodies in there, they

 6     wouldn't strip them, they'd just be in their clothes.

 7             And you could see men in military uniforms when there was

 8     fighting going on around the city, but at other times there would be

 9     elderly women there or children or sniper victims with head wounds and

10     chest wounds.  So that's what -- it was really the evidence which I saw

11     with my own eyes over three years which made me say that I felt it was an

12     organised campaign of shelling and sniping.  It didn't -- it happened so

13     often, it could not possibly have been coincidental.  There was an

14     intelligence behind it.

15             MR. JEREMY:

16        Q.   I'd now like to move to your evidence relating to ethnic

17     cleansing, and in paragraph 9 of your statement you -- you say that you

18     learned about ethnic cleansing in Bosnia because you saw it happening.

19     Now, can you provide the Chamber with the working definition that you

20     apply when using this expression "ethnic cleansing."

21        A.   Well, by "ethnic cleansing," I mean the forcible eviction of

22     people from their homes, from their villages, from their towns, and their

23     deportation, again always -- often but not always at gunpoint

24     deportation, and that was happening on grounds of their ethnicity.  In

25     other words, they were being kicked out of their homes by force because

Page 18051

 1     they were from the wrong ethnic group, with the intention of trying to

 2     create an ethnically pure area.

 3        Q.   Now, in paragraph -- in your statement in 1992 --

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the speakers please slow down for the

 5     benefit of the interpreters.

 6             MR. JEREMY:  Apologies.

 7        Q.   In 1992 in central and Western Bosnia in your written evidence,

 8     you provide news reports on Bosnian Muslim refugees, overwhelmingly women

 9     and children, that you observed arriving in Travnik, in Karlovac, from a

10     number of different municipalities in Western Bosnia.  You also reported

11     from Trnopolje camp and your words from this report are included in your

12     Karadzic testimony, now in evidence as P2516, MFI.  At transcript page

13     T10097 you state:

14             "As far as hard-line concerns -- Serbs are concerned, a camp like

15     this is a success for the policy of ethnic cleansing."

16             Can you explain the basis for your belief why in 1992 there was a

17     successful policy of ethnic cleansing?

18        A.   Well, I said it was a success by its own lights, by it's -- the

19     intentions of the people who framed the policy because a very large

20     number of people were expelled from their homes and the process of

21     changing the ethnic balance was -- was going ahead.  And that, therefore,

22     was for them a success.  It meant that people who they didn't want to

23     have near them were being moved out, forcibly, and that men who were of

24     military age were being put into detention camps, where presumably the

25     reasons -- one of the reasons for that were quite obvious, they didn't

Page 18052

 1     want to push over men of military age into Bosnian-government-controlled

 2     territory where they could be taken on by the army and carry a gun

 3     against the people who had kicked them out of their homes.  I saw, for

 4     example, in Travnik large numbers, in the thousands, of Muslim people

 5     being -- who were arriving there who had been expelled from their homes

 6     and there were the vast -- well, all of -- there were no young men.  They

 7     all -- all the women and the older men there came out with the same

 8     stories about young men, men of fighting age, and boys as well,

 9     teenagers, being taken away and separated away from them and taken off.

10     So yeah, ethnic cleansing was happening on a scale that to me it seemed

11     clear that it was happening under orders.  It wasn't happening

12     spontaneously.

13             And so therefore, there was a political, strategic intention

14     behind it.  And I said it was a success story because it was happening

15     and nothing was being -- nothing was happening to stop it.

16        Q.   Moving to -- from central and Western Bosnia to Eastern Bosnia,

17     you went to Gorazde as part of a UNHCR convoy in 1992, and you discuss

18     this in your statement and we don't need to discuss that further now.

19     But still in Eastern Bosnia and moving to 1993 in Cerska, you were again

20     part of a UNHCR convoy that was trying to gain access to Cerska.  And in

21     your statement, paragraph 63, you describe passing through a series of

22     roadblocks before being stopped by Bosnian Serb military personnel in

23     Zvornik.  You state in paragraph 64:

24             "As it turned out, we ended up staying on the side of the road

25     for three or four nights while the Serbs busied themselves taking over

Page 18053

 1     Cerska."

 2             Now, in connection with this I'd like to show you a document.

 3             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, could we see 65 ter 01027.  This is a

 4     letter from the European Community Monitoring Mission to General Mladic

 5     dated 2 March 1993 regarding the treatment of the Bosnian Muslim

 6     population in Eastern Bosnia.

 7        Q.   Mr. Bowen, referring to the document on the screen before you in

 8     paragraph 1 in the second sentence we see the words:

 9             "Although promises have been made to allow regular humanitarian

10     aid into the pockets no progress has so far been made to improve the

11     situation for the suffering of the civilian population."

12             In paragraph 7 goes on to say:

13             "We strongly urge you to allow the planned convoys free and safe

14     passage into the pockets, where the population is desperately needing

15     food."

16             Now, do the letters that I -- do the words that I've read out

17     from this letter to General Mladic comport with your own experience of

18     trying to gain access to Cerska during a similar sort of time?

19        A.   Yes, I can absolute corroborate from my own personal,

20     on-the-ground experience that that was happening.  I went with the UNHCR

21     convoy, which was protected by people from UNPROFOR by men from the

22     French Foreign Legion, to -- which we were -- they were intending to get

23     to Cerska and we were stopped in Zvornik for a few days until they gave

24     up and turned around because we went there not on -- not speculatively.

25     We went there because the UNHCR - and I was -- I had a very good

Page 18054

 1     relationship with the man who was in charge of the convoy,

 2     Larry Hollingworth, the UNHCR had had assurances from the Bosnian Serb

 3     side that they would be allowed to get into Cerska.  In fact, Larry had

 4     said to me:  You should come along because I'm absolutely certain that we

 5     can get in.  We've had cast-iron assurances from the Serb side that we

 6     will be able to get into Cerska.  So why don't you come just as you came

 7     to Gorazde last year.  So that's why I was with them on their particular

 8     mission.

 9        Q.   Now, you mention in paragraph 67 of your statement that you were

10     able to eventually gain access to Cerska and you do provide some details

11     about what you were able to view once you did.  My question is:  Were you

12     able to see any Bosnian Muslim civilians in Cerska once you gained

13     access?

14        A.   What struck me very strongly when we were finally by -- allowed

15     just after that period, allowed by the Bosnian Serb army to go to Cerska

16     was -- well, there's a couple of things.  First of all, Cerska isn't one

17     place.  It's an area with a number of hamlets within it.  And what's --

18     really struck me.  I thought to myself:  Well, where have all the people

19     gone?  Where are the people?  Because the place was empty.  It had become

20     a ghost town.  There was no sign of any sort of habitation.  The Bosnian

21     Serb officers who were with us took us to a mass grave that was being

22     exhumed, it had, I think, a few bodies in, and they said that these were

23     people from their side who'd been killed by the Muslim side, as they

24     called it.  Some of the UNPROFOR people and UNHCR people who I was with

25     said that there was also evidence that these people had been killed in

Page 18055

 1     fighting, looking at the kind of bodies that there were and the sort of

 2     wounds that they had.  But the Bosnian Serb side claimed strongly that

 3     their people had been tortured, subjected to atrocities, and they had had

 4     to step in to try to put an end to all of this.  But, you know, equally

 5     there were no civilians; they'd all gone.  So there was no one there for

 6     me to talk to.

 7        Q.   And at the time, did you have any idea about where those

 8     Bosnian Serb civilians who were in Cerska had gone?  Did anyone make you

 9     aware of that?

10        A.   Yeah, well the assumption -- the assumption was that they had

11     fallen back towards Srebrenica, that the pocket there, the enclave, was

12     getting more and more people coming in from outlying places like Cerska

13     and in other words that the front line was shrinking back.  And so they

14     were going into that particular area.  So as it turned out, in fact,

15     quite a few of the people that were in Srebrenica had already been

16     displaced from other parts of Eastern Bosnia in the course of the war

17     because of the military pressure of the Bosnian Serb army and its various

18     auxiliaries.

19             MR. JEREMY:  Your Honours, I would next move to a video, but

20     perhaps it's --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps it's better --

22             MR. JEREMY:  -- we could do it tomorrow.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you give us an estimate on how much time you

24     would still need tomorrow?

25             MR. JEREMY:  I've used 55 minutes, Your Honours, and I think I

Page 18056

 1     will need to use the full one hour, ten minutes that I requested.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  So another --

 3             MR. JEREMY:  Another 15 minutes.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Another 15 minutes.

 5             Then we will adjourn, but not until after I have instructed you,

 6     Mr. Bowen, not to speak or communicate with whomever about your

 7     testimony, whether that is testimony you gave today or whether it's

 8     testimony still to be given tomorrow.  We'd like to see you back tomorrow

 9     morning at 9.30 in this same courtroom.  You may now follow the usher.

10             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

11                           [The witness stands down]

12             JUDGE ORIE:  We adjourn for the day and we'll resume tomorrow,

13     Friday, the 18th of October, at 9.30 in the morning, in this same

14     courtroom, I.

15                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.15 p.m.,

16                           to be reconvened on Friday, the 18th day of

17                           October, 2013, at 9.30 a.m.