1 Monday, 13 July 1998
2 (The accused entered court)
3 --- Upon commencing at 10.08 a.m.
4 (Open session)
5 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Good morning, ladies and
6 gentlemen. May we have the appearances, please?
7 MS. McHENRY: Good morning, Your Honours,
8 Teresa McHenry for the Prosecution, along with Mr. Jim
9 Cowles, an attorney from the United States who will be
10 helping us in the absence of several of our other trial
11 attorneys and Mr. Huber, our case manager. Thank you.
12 MR. COWLES: Good morning, Your Honours. My
13 name is Jim Cowles. It's an honour to be before Your
15 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much.
16 Welcome to the Tribunal. May we have the appearances
17 for the Defence, please?
18 MS. RESIDOVIC: Good morning, Your Honours.
19 I'm Edina Residovic appearing on behalf of Mr. Zejnil
20 Delalic along with my colleague, Professor Eugene
21 O'Sullivan from Canada.
22 MR. OLUJIC: Good morning, Your Honours. My
23 name is Zeljko Olujic, attorney from Croatia, appearing
24 on behalf of Mr. Zdravko Mucic, along with my
25 colleague, Mr. Niko Duric, attorney from Croatia.
1 MR. KARABDIC: Good morning, Your Honours, my
2 name is Salih Karabdic, attorney from Sarajevo, and
3 along with Thomas Moran, attorney from Houston, I'm
4 appearing on behalf of Mr. Hasim Delic.
5 MS. McMURREY: Good morning, Your Honours.
6 I'm Cynthia McMurrey and I represent Mr. Esad Landzo,
7 along with Nancy Boler from the United States.
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Would you kindly swear
9 the witness, please?
10 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I'm sorry, I do
11 have about a 15-minute opening statement that I would
12 like to make because we've never made one. I promise
13 not to be as long as Mr. Ostberg or Mr. Tupuskovic
15 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: If you want to make an
16 opening statement, go ahead.
17 MS. McMURREY: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Swear him. Swear the
19 witness first. Let him swear
20 WITNESS: DR. A.M.H. VAN LEEUWEN.
21 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will
22 speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
24 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You may proceed,
1 MS. McMURREY: Thank you, Your Honours. I
2 promise not to belabour you with the legal submissions
3 that we all submitted when the Prosecution closed its
4 case, but I'd like to remind the court that all those
5 legal submissions and issues have been carried through
6 the Defence, all the way, Mucic, Delalic, Delic and
7 Landzo intends to carry those legal issues all the way
8 through the Defence case too. But, I come here this
9 morning to speak to you only about the evidence that
10 applies to Esad Landzo. I'm not going to address this
11 court like I would an American jury because I'm not
12 going to insult you that way, but this is the first
13 assertion of an affirmative, special defence in an
14 international criminal forum. It can not be viewed in
15 a vacuum. You're not going to hear a fairytale from
16 me, but you are going to hear about a young man from a
17 small town of Konjic, a young Bosnian boy, who for all
18 his life was basically forgotten. He was sickly. He
19 couldn't go out and play with the other boys and play
20 football. He was ostracised by his peers. His mother
21 would send him to school with a warm towel soaked in
22 goat's fat around his neck to try to help his rest
23 respiratory problems. He became a loaner. He would
24 prefer to stay with stray dogs in the woods than to
25 associate with his peers. But, he had one thing that
1 he excelled in, he was the best artist in his school.
2 And the other children, when they wanted him to draw
3 pictures, then they would want to talk to him. His
4 teacher had this hope that one day he would go to art
5 school and he would return to Konjic and he would
6 replace her as the instructor for art in the Konjic
7 schools. This boy was excepted to art school in
8 Sarajevo and he attended art school for two weeks.
9 Then his father explained to him that the family could
10 not afford the bus tokens to go to Sarajevo and that he
11 had to work and help support his father, his mother,
12 and his four siblings and he had to drop out of art
13 school. So he went to carpentry school, along with the
14 other boys, even though the dust from the carpentry
15 work adversely affected his breathing difficulties, and
16 so he graduated with a carpentry degree and then he
17 went to work for a young entrepreneur in town, as a
18 guard in their warehouse. Then the shelling of Konjic
19 began. Well, that young boy is now six years older,
20 and I would like for Mr. Landzo, would you rise for the
21 Trial Chamber, please?
22 THE ACCUSED: Good morning, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Good morning.
24 MS. McMURREY: The Trial Chamber has said on
25 a number of occasions through the Prosecution's case,
1 let the victim tell his story.
2 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You may sit down.
3 MS. McMURREY: Thank you. And the true
4 victim of the aggression in this case is Esad Landzo
5 and all the Esad Landzos who, through this aggression,
6 have lost their families, their friends, their
7 communities, their dreams and their youth. Now the
8 Trial Chamber has agreed to hear one more victim of
9 this aggression.
10 The evidence in this case, through the
11 Prosecution and the Defence case, has shown that 20.000
12 to 30.000 refugees poured into the Konjic area in April
13 and May of 1992. With each one of these refugees, came
14 their stories of murder, rape, destruction, loss of
15 homes and families, and as they came through, they told
16 this story to Esad Landzo and all the other Esad
17 Landzos in that community. They were apprised of what
18 they thought would happen when the shelling of Konjic
20 You add this atmosphere of panic and fear and
21 anger to an already fragile unstable personality, and
22 the evidence of the psychiatrists and psychologists
23 that are going to testify in this case will explain the
24 state of diminished mental responsibility that existed
25 in Esad Landzo in 1992.
1 This trial chamber has refused to define the
2 Defence provided for in Rule 67 of the Rules of
3 Procedure and has stated that the criteria to be
4 applied will be clear in the verdict.
5 The Defence is faced with the danger of
6 putting on evidence that they have no idea what is
7 really relevant to the Defence without a definition.
8 The accused is exposed to the risk of a speculative
9 trial, or worse, as stated in the Tadic case, that the
10 perception could be that the Judges are working the
11 other way around, that they come to guilt first and
12 then they decide what the law is they will apply.
13 The most commonly accepted doctrines on
14 diminished responsibility are based in the English
15 homicide act of 1957, although no definition has been
16 provided for the Defence of what the Defence must prove
17 to the Trial Chamber, this is the definition that is
18 going to be relied on in asserting this Defence.
19 THE INTERPRETER: We ask counsel to slow
20 down, please.
21 MS. McMURREY: Yes, of course.
22 Where a person kills or is a party to a
23 killing of another, he shall not be convicted of murder
24 if he was suffering from such an abnormality of mind,
25 whether arising from a condition of a rested or
1 retarded development of mind or any inherent causes or
2 induced by disease or injury as substantially impaired
3 his mental responsibility for his acts and omission in
4 doing or being a party to the killing.
5 The Defence evidence will show that one of
6 the most horrendous experiences that any person could
7 experience, happened to this 18-year-old boy. When he
8 was 18, he and a friend tried to leave Konjic and find
9 work in Croatia, and in the meantime, they were
10 inducted into a Croatian military training facility
11 where they not only were taught horrible murderous
12 torturous kinds of killing by videotape, but while they
13 were in this instruction room, a Serb woman was brought
14 into the room and the proper way of slitting a throat
15 was demonstrated in front of these young boys.
16 This Trial Chamber must recognise that, in
17 order to fulfil the burden of proving an accused
18 suffered from diminished mental responsibility at the
19 time of the allegations set forth in this indictment,
20 all the evidence regarding his mental state at that
21 time is relevant. Not only is the evidence relevant,
22 but the succession of events leading to the fragile
23 personality that existed in April, May, June, July of
24 1992 is relevant evidence.
25 The scientific evidence is not a luxury for
1 us. The case law says that in order to raise the
2 defence, the scientific evidence must support the
3 defence asserted. The scientific experts that are
4 coming forward will describe various conditions, and
5 these various conditions are a psychological condition
6 called DMS-IV which includes personality disorders,
7 schizoid personality disorder, antisocial personality
8 disorder, narcissistic personality disorder, and
9 post-traumatic stress disorder.
10 Because Esad Landzo existed in such a
11 diminished mental capacity at that time, he was ripe
12 for exploitation. He was exploited by the Croatians,
13 by the Serbs, his own leaders, and by force of
14 circumstance at the time.
15 Our evidence will show that Esad Landzo was,
16 since infancy, a very sick boy. He suffered from a
17 very serious breathing problem with his asthma, and he
18 could never go out and play with the other children.
19 If he exerted himself he couldn't wreath. The evidence
20 will show that he was involved in an incident in 1991
21 which severed the fourth and fifth digit of his right
22 hand rendering those digits deformed and useless. This
23 testimony will be supported by two Dutch doctors that
24 will come testify. The Trial Chamber and the most of
25 the rest of us have been here for going on two years,
1 and the trial began on March 10, 1997. The Prosecution
2 took one full year to present their case. We listened
3 to the Prosecution witnesses. The Prosecution
4 witnesses came here to tell their stories. They had
5 six years to prepare their stories. They moved on to
6 different locations. They read about the charges.
7 They saw Esad Landzo being arrested before the news,
8 they read about the charges against him. They met with
9 his --
10 MS. McHENRY: Your Honours, may I object? I
11 don't believe this is opening statement. This is
12 closing argument, discussing the Prosecution case.
13 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, this is a Defence
14 that we are relying on that because Esad Landzo was the
15 only one here as a guard, the only person identifiable,
16 that these Serb witnesses, these Prosecution witnesses
17 tailored all their testimony to support the one person
18 on trial here in The Hague and that's Esad Landzo.
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: What the Prosecution did
20 is not an opening speech.
21 MS. McMURREY: Pardon?
22 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: What the Prosecution did
23 before the indictment is not an opening speech. The
24 opening speech leads to what evidence you lead in
1 MS. McMURREY: I think the evidence will show
2 that because he was the only one here --
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Go on that line, what
4 you will tell the Trial Chamber about the defence of
5 Esad Landzo.
6 MS. McMURREY: Our evidence will show that,
7 and I'm not going to walk over to the model right now,
8 but, the Judges know that because Esad Landzo was
9 stationed, most of the time as the guard in front of
10 hangar number 6, the building where the majority of the
11 Serb detainees were held, he was the only name they
12 knew. When they needed contact with the outside world,
13 everyone, the 250 detainees in that hangar, they sent
14 their representatives to the door, and they said Esad
15 Landzo, Zenga. He answered their calls for food. He
16 answered their calls to solve their problems. He slept
17 right there. He didn't sleep in the administration
18 building with the rest of the guards. That little hole
19 that you see, that dugout on the hill, right over
20 hangar number 6 door, that's where Mr. Landzo stationed
21 himself and he stayed there with his dog, that he took
22 care of, there in Celebici.
23 Because of that fact, he was the person most
24 contacted. He became the symbol of everything that
25 happened in that arena. He was the token guard, and
1 the Serb witnesses tailored their testimony to fit the
2 revenge they sought.
3 I'm not going to go into any other political
4 arguments right now, but the evidence will show that we
5 have asserted two affirmative defences in this case.
6 We believe that once this court listens to all the
7 evidence and listens to this victim tell his story,
8 that you will find, because he suffered such a
9 diminished mental capacity and mental responsibility at
10 that time, that Esad Landzo should be found not guilty
11 of the charge of murder.
12 Thank you.
13 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much.
14 You may now lead your evidence.
15 MS. McMURREY: I need to get one more book.
16 Examined by Ms. McMurrey:
17 MS. McMURREY: May it please the court?
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, you may proceed.
19 MS. McMURREY: Thank you.
20 Q. Good morning, Dr. van Leeuwen; is that
21 correct? Would you state your full name for the court,
23 A. Second name, "van Leeuwen."
24 Q. We have had different pronunciations in this
25 court today. But, I will try to use the correct one.
1 I would like for you to -- can you tell the court how
2 you first got involved in this case?
3 A. I got the request of Mrs. Sampayo, of this
4 Tribunal, to evaluate whether the accused's psychiatric
5 condition was compatible with his confinement of the
6 United Nations detention unit, and I made a report on 6
7 November 1996.
8 Q. And then you made subsequently three reports
9 regarding Mr. Landzo. Can you tell the court what the
10 issues were in each one of the three reports that you
12 A. The second one was the accused lacking mental
13 responsibility or was he -- excuse me. The second one
14 was, is the accused suffering from a mental disorder
15 that renders him unable to understand and follow the
16 proceedings against him and/or assist in his defence,
17 and if so, please answer the following questions, but
18 my answer was that he was not suffering from such a
19 mental disorder that rendered him unable to understand
20 it and so on. And I sent my -- I made my report at 25
21 November 1996. And the last one, that was the accused
22 lacking mental responsibility or was he in a state of
23 diminished mental responsibility at the time he was
24 alleged to have committed the offence. The second
25 question that the mental health of the accused at the
1 time of the events in question affect his ability to
2 understand the wrongfulness of his alleged conduct or
3 influence that conduct and if so to what extent. And I
4 sent my report at 13 January 1997.
5 And then a couple of weeks ago, I think two
6 to three weeks ago, you telephoned me, and you sent a
7 fax and you said that I should be asked to come to the
8 court to testify, and you asked me to see once more
9 Mr. Landzo, and I thought that was a reasonable
10 question because I hadn't seen him since January 1997,
11 and I don't like to talk about a person whom I haven't
12 seen for such a long time. So I spoke with Mr. Landzo
13 last Sunday, not yesterday, but yesterday a week ago in
14 the United Nations detention unit in Scheveningen.
15 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, I wanted to ask now -- Your
16 Honours, these three reports that Dr. van Leeuwen
17 previously made, discuss in detail some events that are
18 relevant to Mr. Landzo's condition, and I would like to
19 offer these three reports into evidence at this time.
20 They are before the court anyway for other purposes,
21 but I would like to offer them at this time as evidence
22 relevant to Mr. Landzo's mental condition in 1992
23 because he goes back and he describes his family
24 history, the history of school, and everything else
25 that's relevant to the condition he ended up in in
2 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Oppose of testing him at
3 that time. It was not really turned back. You had
4 what he read as to why he was testing him.
5 MS. McMURREY: But the facts in the report
6 itself, Your Honour --
7 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You heard what he read
8 that was referred to him.
9 MS. McMURREY: Will the court accept the
10 third one that dealt with the mental responsibility of
11 the defendant? That's exactly what he was trying to
12 decide the issue in 1996. I'm offering then, if the
13 court does not want to accept report 1 and 2 --
14 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Nobody is denying that
15 he examined the accused, but you're projecting it back
16 to a period which was not in issue at that time. The
17 reference to him stated whether he was capable of
18 standing trial, whether his detention in the prisons
19 there was compatible. And lastly, his diminished
20 mental responsibility did not refer back to any dates.
21 So you don't talk about a date reference back to 1992.
22 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, the third report
23 dealing with his mental responsibility at the alleged
24 time of the allegations in the indictment is precisely
25 the Defence we're asserting, and I believe that every
1 word that Dr. van Leeuwen wrote at that time is not
2 only relevant, but it's mandatory to support exactly
3 what Dr. van Leeuwen found in 1996 and 1997.
4 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I see we're speaking at
5 cross purposes. I'm not saying that you're not
6 suggesting a defence of diminished responsibility. But
7 when reference was made to the doctor, specific terms
8 of reference was made to him, and that was what he
9 determined in his report.
10 MS. McMURREY: Well, the Defence is offering
11 the third report dealing with the mental responsibility
12 of Mr. Landzo in 1992. Is that report going to be
13 accepted into evidence?
14 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: If it refers to that, it
15 will be taken into account.
16 MS. McMURREY: I'm sorry, Your Honour. Is it
17 accepted into evidence or is it just going to be taken
18 into --
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, every report
20 relating to mental capacity of accused persons will be
21 accepted into evidence.
22 MS. McMURREY: Thank you very much.
23 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: What I'm telling you is
24 when you're making your statements, restrict yourself
25 to the terms of reference to which the reference was
1 made to him.
2 MS. McMURREY: I would like to now pass out a
3 copy of that third report to the Trial Chamber for your
4 reference while Dr. van Leeuwen is testifying.
5 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, just so the record
6 is clear, if we could just have an exhibit number.
7 THE REGISTRAR: The third report is marked
9 MR. MORAN: Do the others have numbers also?
10 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Should have.
11 THE REGISTRAR: The first one is D44/4 and
12 the second one, D45/4.
13 MR. MORAN: Thank you very much.
14 MS. McMURREY: I'm still not clear. Does the
15 court wish to receive the other two reports or not?
16 I've passed out the third one which is dealing with
17 mental responsibility in 1992, but the statements and
18 the history of Mr. Landzo are included in D44/4 and
19 D45/4, and would the court approve of considering these
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: As far as I remember,
22 the doctor made three reports. I don't know which your
23 last one is referring to, whether that is your own
24 particular one. I knew the references to which the
25 Trial Chamber, in consultation with the registrar,
1 referred to him, and I think that is what he was
2 speaking to, the last which you telephoned him and made
3 your own private arrangement is quite different. So I
4 don't know what has happened there, what he had already
5 reported to the Trial Chamber, and the Prosecution, I
6 think, has copies of those reports.
7 MS. McMURREY: That's correct.
8 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, you submitted to me a
9 curriculum vitae in Dutch, so I am not able to really
10 read it myself, but I would just like to go through
11 your training and your qualifications as an expert in
12 forensic psychiatry today. Could you tell the court
13 where you studied psychiatry?
14 A. I started medicine in Leiden University.
15 Afterwards, I specialised in psychiatry at the Utrecht
16 University and I got my Ph.D. degree at the Amsterdam
17 University. Afterwards, I started to work for a mental
18 hospital and for a community mental health centre. At
19 that time, I wrote my -- I wrote a book for the -- I
20 did a study for the PhD degree which was about
21 emergency psychiatric. Besides, I did expert work
22 since the beginning of the '70s for the court in
23 Utrecht and after I moved to Maastricht where I worked
24 for the mental hospital there. I kept my work for the
25 Utrecht court in doing expertises in criminal law
2 Afterwards, Maastricht court asked me to do
3 the same, and from the beginning of 1981, I started to
4 work completely in forensic psychiatry, that's to say,
5 I'm part-time working for the Ministry of Justice in
6 Maastricht. That means being a consultant for the
7 court and for the two detention units in remand houses
8 and prisons in Maastricht and Sittard. Since 1986, I'm
9 part-time professor in forensic psychiatry at the law
10 school of Leiden University.
11 Q. Thank you very much. Now, you've also
12 attended different conferences in other countries too
13 concerning forensic psychiatry, haven't you?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. What were those? What countries have you
17 A. I studied in the United States and several
18 times in New York and Boston area, Washington. I was
19 especially interested in the position of the expert in
20 the adversarial system of the common law. I was
21 interested in how do they deal with the issue of
22 criminal responsibility, and I was interested in the
23 shooing (phoen) area, how it worked out with
25 Q. And you reviewed the law that I submitted to
1 the Trial Chamber as the law that is most commonly used
2 in the international community in reference to
3 diminished mental responsibility, didn't you?
4 A. Yes, I think, to my opinion, I'm a clinician,
5 I need to do my own work, and I need to present my
6 knowledge, my conclusions, but they are always
7 clinical. But I need to make them that they are
8 understandable for lawyers, because the lawyers, they
9 need to do the work in a courtroom. I think the
10 international opinion is always the same, that if you
11 talk about criminal responsibility, first of all you
12 need to detect whether there is a disorder or not at
13 the time of the alleged conduct. That's the first
15 Afterwards, you need to evaluate whether
16 there is a linkage between this disorder and that
17 conduct. If so, how do you evaluate that, because for
18 every conduct, you need, first of all, to be conscious
19 of your own behaviour. Second, you need to have
20 insight in the consequences of your act, consequences
21 in the field of criminal law too; and third, you need
22 to make a decision that has to do with your willingness
23 or not. We know that mental disorders can influence
24 those three mental functions, and by evaluating that in
25 that way, you can say there is some kind of diminished
1 criminal responsibility or maybe there is no criminal
2 responsibility. I think that is the other rule, we
3 call it other rule, that started with the American Law
4 Association, and that is internationally recognised and
5 was the formulation in -- I got from Ms. Sampayo too.
6 To understand the wrongfulness of his alleged conduct
7 or influence of that conduct and if so to what extent.
8 Q. That definition that Madam De Sampayo gave
9 you differs from the definition that we're using for
10 diminished mental capacity in this courtroom, in fact,
11 that definition that Madam De Sampayo gave you to
12 utilise as the standard that you were to apply is
13 really the Dutch standard, and that has nothing to do
14 with diminished responsibility. That has to do with
15 lack of responsibility; doesn't it?
16 MR. COWLES: Your Honours, may I impose an
17 objection at this point. I don't believe the Trial
18 Chamber has ruled as to a legal definition at this
19 time. So whether counsel has provided different
20 national laws on the definition of diminished
21 responsibility to this doctor is irrelevant.
22 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I think you might be
23 later on, the Trial Chamber is not to rule until it
24 knows what are the concentrations of the Defence. We
25 do not yet know what the Defence is about. Until we
1 know what it is and what the Defence relies upon, you
2 are free to question the way you are going.
3 MS. McMURREY: Thank you.
4 Q. In fact, as a forensic psychiatrist, Dr. van
5 Leeuwen, you can make a clinical evaluation as far as
6 psychiatry goes of Mr. Landzo, but without a
7 definition, you can't come to any forensic criminal
8 conclusion, can you?
9 A. I think a criminal conclusion, I don't need
10 to make. That's the lawyer's work. I can only make my
11 clinical conclusions, but I do agree with you that if I
12 say to the court, "This man is suffering from that
13 mental disorder," and then finished, then I shouldn't
14 be a forensic psychiatrist. So I need to do some
15 translation, and that we have the word of the criminal
16 responsibility. That's the translation between the
17 clinical conclusions on the one side, and the work of
18 the court on the other side presenting a verdict.
19 Q. In fact --
20 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Please, counsel, what
21 you have invited the expert to tell the Trial Chamber
22 is a state of mind of the accused person at the time he
23 committed the offence. He is not expected to go into
24 the legal arguments about conduct, omission or anything
25 of that nature. He is to tell us what the mental state
1 is, and within the definition which we are going about
2 abnormality of mind, whether it arose from inherent
3 causes or whether it is from arrested or retarded
4 development of mind. These are the things he is
5 expected to tell us. He is not expected to tell us
6 what the legal definition is. The legal definition
7 rests with the Trial Chamber in determining the extent
8 of what counsel has established before the Trial
10 MS. McMURREY: And, Your Honour, that's
11 absolutely right. My only concern is that he will
12 testify about the mental state of Mr. Landzo in 1992,
13 but as an expert, an expert can be asked to form an
14 opinion on an ultimate issue in the case. In order for
15 him to form an opinion, we're just trying to come up
16 with an assumption of the law that we're using, and the
17 court has just reconfirmed the fact that we are talking
18 about the same premise of diminished responsibility.
19 So I won't go into that anymore, but in order for him
20 to come to a conclusion, he has to sate what standard
21 he's applying, and that's why I was covering that with
22 him. I'll move forward.
23 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You may be careful to
24 know that he is not a lawyer, and he's only using his
25 medical knowledge to tell you what abnormality of mind
2 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, he's a forensic
3 psychiatrist, though, and that's the difference --
4 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He has explained to you
5 already he was not giving you legal conclusions. He
6 was not doing that. He told you that, right here.
7 MS. McMURREY: Well, okay. I will be asking
8 him legal conclusions later, but not until his mental
9 state has been developed.
10 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, can you describe to the
11 court your contact with Esad Landzo, how you met him
12 and how much time you spent with him and what the
13 quality of the time was you spent with Mr. Landzo?
14 A. For the first two evaluations, I spoke with
15 him -- the first time I spoke for two and a half hours,
16 and the second time was about five hours, and the last
17 time, the last examination, I spoke with him about nine
18 hours, and I say so because the first -- for the first
19 report, I spoke once with him. For the second, I spoke
20 twice with him. For the third one, I spoke three times
21 with him. I think the first conversations were useful
22 for the clinical evaluation too. And then last Sunday,
23 I spoke with him for two hours.
24 Q. In coming to your opinions about Mr. Landzo's
25 mental state, were you provided other documents that
1 you reviewed and took into consideration, his prior
2 statements, prior statements of other psychiatrists?
3 A. Yes, I saw -- I read the psychological
4 expertise of Mrs. De Manredi (phoen), from Professor
5 Lagazzi, and from Professor Loga.
6 Q. Thank you. Were you also provided a copy of
7 the results from Dr. Alfredo Verde?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Who is another clinical psychiatrist. With
10 the assistance of the usher, I would like to ask now
11 that this book be shown to Dr. van Leeuwen. I'll give
12 you an excerpt from the book afterwards. Dr. van
13 Leeuwen, do you recognise this book?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. Who are the authors of this book?
16 A. This is absolutely the internationally
17 recognised standard work in the field of psychiatry.
18 Q. What is the title of the book and who are the
20 A. There are many authors. "Synopsis of
21 Psychiatry, Behaviour Sciences/Clinical Psychiatry."
22 There are many authors, but especially Mr. Kaplan and
23 Mr. Sadock are the authors, but it is written by many,
24 many, many, persons. It was absolutely outstanding
1 Q. And that book is relied upon as authoritative
2 by every psychiatrist in the international community,
3 isn't it?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. I'd like the -- with the assistance of the
6 usher, would you provide Dr. van Leeuwen with these two
7 copies? I think they have previously been marked,
8 haven't they?
9 THE REGISTRAR: D47/4 and D48/4.
10 MS. McMURREY: I have a copy here for the
11 Trial Chamber.
12 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, the typed-out page right
13 there that says "personality disorders," the first
14 one? Do you recognise that as an exact definition from
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Is this the definition that you rely on in
18 making your evaluations each day when you evaluate
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. I'd like to offer that definition as
22 authoritative in the psychiatric field. It's the
23 precursor. I'm sorry. I will get that. Dr. van
24 Leeuwen, a person has to be determined to have a
25 personality disorder under DSM-IV before he can go to
1 the next table to determine what personality disorder
2 exists; would that be accurate?
3 A. Yes, DSM-IV has been developed by the
4 American Psychiatric Association, I believe, since '98,
5 it was, and about two to three years ago, we got a
6 fourth edition. What is DSM-IV? It has become the
7 international bible for psychiatry, and just a matter
8 to work, that you can work together and that you can
9 communicate and do psychiatric research. It is a
10 descriptive way of diagnosis. You describe symptoms.
11 You describe behaviours. You don't talk about causes.
12 And then second -- so it is a descriptive system and
13 it's a categorical system, and it is a system with five
14 axis. The first axis reveals the actual mental state,
15 any kind of mental disorder. The second axis is their
16 personality disorder. The DSM-IV gives for the axis to
17 give the general -- can make general characteristics of
18 a personality disorder, and then afterwards the
20 Q. So the second paper that I've handed you
21 which has categories of a table taken from -- is that
22 table taken exactly from the book that is in front of
23 you by Kaplan and Sadock?
24 A. Yes, that's true.
25 Q. Are these the criteria that are used as
1 standards in the psychiatric field all over in the
2 international community?
3 A. I suppose so, and I can assure so that I do
4 so and my colleagues in Holland do so. I'm using this
5 everyday, several times, because every inmate I see for
6 the first time, I need to write down the diagnosis, and
7 I always do according to this system.
8 Q. Are these pages exact copies from the pages
9 that are inside that book?
10 A. Yes, I saw it.
11 MS. McMURREY: Your Honours, I would like to
12 introduce into evidence the criteria that all
13 international psychiatry uses in determining, first,
14 the personality disorder under DSM-IV and then the axis
15 two criteria which is the second copied page out of the
16 text which shows what personality disorders are to be
17 determined. I'd like to introduce those into evidence
18 to assist the court. The Prosecution has copies of
19 these also.
20 MR. COWLES: Your Honour, we have no
21 objection, except that D47/4 is the one piece of
22 paper. It has no indication of from where it came
23 within the larger book or what the page number or the
24 source is or where it can be found. I don't know how
25 it is excerpted from the larger book.
1 MS. McMURREY: I will provide the Prosecution
2 with the exact page at the next break, but it was the
3 exact definition they use out of the book.
4 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I would sure
5 appreciate a copy of these exhibits if I could be
6 provided with them at some point.
7 MS. McMURREY: I think I may have extra
8 copies right there if the usher would provide the
9 Defence counsel with them also.
10 MR. COWLES: Once we have those
11 identifications, we have no objection to those
13 MS. McMURREY: I would like to offer it into
14 evidence subject to my giving the Prosecution the exact
16 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I think in trying to
17 tender this, I think the sufficient identification
18 should have been made as to its source. There's
19 nothing here indicates how you got it or what it
20 relates to and the authority for making it. It could
21 well be your own creation.
22 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I asked the
23 expert witness if he identified that as the exact
24 definition that he relies upon everyday, and he said it
25 was, so, I believe that is authentication enough in the
1 international community that it came from the definiton
2 they use every single day to evaluate.
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Nothing stops him from
4 taking it and defining this as his own criteria. And
5 then you do not rely on this piece of paper to be his
6 own. But when you bring this piece of paper as nothing
7 linking it with anything which is known to anyone else,
8 I think it's fairly difficult to accept it as authority
9 for what you are saying.
10 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, at the break, I
11 will provide the exact page number in the book and
12 re-offer that document into evidence, but I'd like for
13 the court to be able to use it right now as reference
14 during his testimony, and I'll re-urge the offering
15 into evidence at another point.
16 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He's still giving
17 evidence, and he may be cross-examined on it, so you
18 don't have to worry about the court using anything at
19 this stage.
20 MS. McMURREY:
21 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, you've explained what DMS-IV
22 is. But can you explain to the court what is the
23 standard in psychiatry that is used that is called
24 reasonable psychiatric probability, and if you use
1 A. I think that psychiatry has always used the
2 word "probability" because it is not like -- it is not
3 a natural signs of mental diseases, but we are making
4 improvements to prove that many mental conditions has
5 to do with biological factors. But we don't know --
6 still we don't know -- we don't know very much about
7 mental functioning. So we need to work with
8 probability. A human being is very complicated.
9 Somebody's behaviour is a product of maybe endless
10 number of factors, so we can always -- we can only
11 analyse some of these factors, and I think that
12 probability is the only reasonable word and the only
13 word which is reliable.
14 Q. When you say "reasonable psychiatric
15 probability," does that mean that it's more likely than
16 not, that it occurred?
17 A. Yes, and it's based upon clinical evidence
18 and the actual -- the state of art of our science.
19 Q. Speaking of all of the things that add up to
20 a decision for a mental psychiatric probability, I
21 would like for you, however you want to use, if you
22 would like to use the flip chart, to discuss what
23 evidence is relevant, in approaching 1992, the mental
24 state of Mr. Landzo at Celebici. If I might, if you
25 would like to use -- oh, you have your own. Thank
1 you. If you would like to use the flip chart or if you
2 would just discuss with the court, in determining the
3 mental state of someone at a set time on a timeline,
4 what evidence is relevant in determining that state
5 that existed at a set time?
6 A. I should like to use this, because I want to
7 make clear one thing. We have mental diseases which
8 come from nowhere. For example, we know a bit about
9 it, but it seems that it comes from no where. A lot of
10 the fields of psychiatry is what we call reactions. Do
11 you understand reactions? And if you talk about
12 reactions, and we think many diseases are to -- somatic
13 diseases too are a matter of reaction. For example,
14 you got an infection and your body is reacting. So if
15 you talk about the mental state, we have circumstances,
16 events, and they may be stressful. Can you read this?
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, we can.
18 A. So circumstances, they are more prolonged,
19 they are a bit lasting. Events are just for a moment.
20 They may be stressful. For example, a war is a
21 stressful circumstance, and in a war you can have
22 stressful events.
23 Then we have a person, and if we talk about
24 the personality disorder, it is not something like
25 being mad or being foolish, it is a person, you talk
1 about a person, and every person has its
2 characteristics. Every person can be vulnerable, but a
3 person with a personality disorder is very much
4 vulnerable in the conditions, even in the conditions in
5 the culture where he is living. So you can be
6 vulnerable in a specific way.
7 What can happen is that special circumstances
8 or events just trigger the person's vulnerability. You
9 can have another person who is not very much vulnerable
10 or the circumstances can not be triggering for the
11 person. Then in the field of reactions, "reactions".
12 The first responsibility is that the event. You have
13 the circumstances of the event and you go on feeling
14 adaptation or adjustment. The second possibility is
15 that you can't adjust because of this. And the first
16 possibility is what we call an acute stress disorder.
17 That's more in the beginning. You have symptoms. For
18 example, adaptation is not a thing which happens in one
19 second. Everyone has stressful events. Sometimes you
20 sleep for one night, you don't sleep very well, or that
21 day you don't like your food. That has nothing to do
22 with disease. But in acute stress disorder, you lose
23 your self-control. You have not a feeling to be who
24 you are. You are very unstable and you are crying, you
25 are in a panic, you don't sleep, you don't like your
1 food and like that for a couple of weeks. That's not
3 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, would you tell the court the
4 difference between acute and chronic?
5 A. I think the second possibility in adaptation
6 is what's called in the DSM-IV is an adjustment
7 disorder. That hasn't to do only with a war, for
8 example, that has to do with normal life. Someone who
9 comes to work very hard for 10, 20 years, there is a
10 change and he can't adjust to the new circumstance and
11 then he develops symptoms. You see, adjustment
12 disorder means that you can't adapt anymore and you
13 start to produce symptoms and those symptoms can be in
14 the field of a depressive mood. It can be in a field
15 of feeling yourself anxious, uncertain, you don't know
16 what to do. You have lost all your self-control. It
17 can be under the field of behaviour. You are doing
18 things you would normally not do.
19 The most specified is what is called the
20 post-traumatic stress disorder. This is a special one
21 because then you need to have suffered from very
22 traumatic, not only stressful, but a very traumatic
23 event which can give you the feeling to be very
24 lonesome and very powerless. You are under the
25 influence of a huge power which was overwhelming for
2 Then usually there's a silent period. This
3 is acute. This is immediately afterwards. This goes
4 slowly -- not slowly, but it comes. There's always a
5 linkage, somebody feels the linkage between this and
6 this. This comes later.
7 If I talk about Mr. Landzo, then here in this
8 field, I think I can link my three things. First of
9 all, I need to stress that when I talked with him for
10 my report in January 1997, he was denying everything.
11 So I couldn't ask him why did you do this? Why did you
12 do that? Because he said, I didn't do those things.
13 When I talked with him last Sunday, his mental
14 condition had changed tremendously. It was absolutely
15 amazing for me. It was like somebody else. He wasn't
16 depressive anymore, and he was talking English
17 fluently, and he couldn't talk any English when I spoke
18 with him last year in January.
19 He told me, as a psychiatrist, I was rather
20 amazed, I said "You have changed." He said, "Yes, it's
21 true. I feel much better," and so on. So he talked to
22 me. He has a very good contact with his Defence
23 counsel. She gave him the advice to learn English, and
24 he did so, and he discovered that he was able to learn
25 English. He was listening to the radio and so on. She
1 got him a laptop so he got used a bit to work with the
2 computer. But next to that, beside that, he talks
3 twice a week with the Dutch psychiatrist, a
4 psychologist who specialised in people who have
5 suffered from a traumatic event. In total, once a
6 month there's a psychiatrist from Luxembourg who is
7 talking with him and that's a psychiatrist of Bosnian
8 origin. But for him, he told me that it's more
9 important that the Dutch psychologist will talk with
10 him twice a week.
11 Then, now he said to me, in the
12 psychotherapy, I have made the decision to tell the
13 truth. Now, I need to emphasise that I'm a
14 psychiatrist, so it is not my job to evaluate whether
15 somebody is telling the truth or not. That's your
16 job. Let me be very clear on that. So I can only
17 describe what he told me, and it had nothing to do with
18 whether that is true or not. I can only work with what
19 somebody is telling me. That doesn't mean anything
20 about is this truthful or not. Anyway, he told me and
21 told me what he did. He told me about Celebici, and he
22 told me that he beat one man, he told me why he did so,
23 and he told me how that man died from it.
24 He told me another thing. He said to me that
25 when I had the conversations with him for the three
1 earlier reports, he regret very much that he couldn't
2 talk with me freely. And now he told me that in those
3 days, he had a Bosnian counsellor, Defence counsellor,
4 who strictly advised him to deny and so he did so. I'm
5 a psychiatrist, and I have had a lot of experience, I
6 felt that he was very much willing to talk with me at
7 that time. He was looking for it but, I as a
8 psychiatrist, I had to respect his position of an
9 accused who is denying. I felt that he was -- I was
10 sure he has a story, but he is not allowed to talk
11 about it. So now he did so.
12 Now, for me, I have more possibilities to
13 evaluate, to reconstruct his mental condition at the
14 time of May 1992 in Celebici. First of all, the person
15 of Mr. Landzo, from the beginning, many things went
16 wrong. I think the Defence counsel has described it
17 for you, so I'm not going to repeat it. But -- and you
18 can read it in my report of January 1997. I still
19 stick to it. So he has a personality disorder, but no,
20 it's more obvious that that is a mixed personality
21 disorder. We mean it is not one category. You need to
22 use more categories to describe the reality of this
24 One category is, he is lacking self-esteem,
25 self-image. He cannot feel himself being a person, a
1 human being. He has a lack of that. And that we call
2 a borderline personality traits. Because of that, in
3 relations, he can see through it, and it's very
4 important because he is so empty to a certain extent,
5 he can be very dependent.
6 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, I just want to interrupt you
7 for a second. Those borderline and schizoid and
8 dependant personalities, those are recognisable
9 personality disorders on the chart that we have before
10 the Trial Chamber, aren't they?
11 A. Yes, let me explain this. You see, this
12 person, how dependent he is, he told me that in that
13 camp, he was under the influence of a Mr. Delic. I
14 don't know him so I just described what he told me.
15 And he explained to me why he was under the influence
16 of that person.
17 MR. MORAN: Excuse me, Doctor, just one
18 second. Your Honour, I'm going to object to any
19 mention of my client and if they are getting into
20 anything about my client, I will renew my motion to
21 sever us from the Landzo Defence.
22 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes. I don't think he's
23 referring to other persons, and he's not even giving
24 any evidence of what he told him. He should not.
25 MR. MORAN: Yes, Your Honour, and I ask that
1 he be instructed to not give any evidence about what he
2 was told.
3 A. I'm only talking in clinical terms. I have
4 nothing to do with guilt. That's not my job. I think
5 that's very important to --
6 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: That's not what you
7 mean. You are merely telling how he related to you.
8 You are not telling the Tribunal what he told you, no.
9 A. Pardon me?
10 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You are not telling the
11 Tribunal the details of what he told you, but how he
12 related it to you.
13 A. Yes, he told me about the relationship. It
14 has nothing to do with the responsibility --
15 THE INTERPRETER: Would the doctor please use
16 a microphone?
17 A. I'm not in a position to prove that that was
18 the reality at that moment. I can tell you -- I can
19 tell you one thing. He is a man who is very vulnerable
20 for that.
21 THE INTERPRETER: I can't hear at all now.
22 MR. MORAN: Excuse me, Your Honour.
23 MS. McMURREY: Excuse me, Dr. van Leeuwen.
24 The interpretation booth says that they can't hear you
25 at all.
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Use your earphones in
2 case they might say anything you want to hear.
3 A. I hear you very clearly.
4 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You speak into the
6 A. Okay. Because this is clear, I think.
7 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes.
8 A. So if you talk about the dependency traits in
9 Mr. Landzo's character, it is fascinating to see how he
10 has changed. First, he had a lawyer, and his lawyer
11 said to him, "You need to deny," and he did so, but he
12 was totally willing to do something else, but that was
13 impossible for him. And now, the influence, for
14 example, of other persons, when he was 16, 17, it was
15 his older brother who had to fill his life in offence
16 of his brother. He couldn't make it himself. He
17 couldn't make his own choices. Then in that camp, he
18 said he was very much under the (redacted).
19 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, same objection.
20 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You don't say what he
21 told you, just his personal relationship with you
22 should be enough. Don't say anything about anything
23 that is happening here.
24 JUDGE JAN: It will help if you don't say the
25 name of the person. You can say he was under the
1 influence of another person. That probably would help
2 if he doesn't name anyone.
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: No, he shouldn't.
4 MR. MORAN: That's kind of like trying to
5 unring the bell. The bell has been rung.
6 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: No. I think it will not
7 be in the record. It should be redacted. He shouldn't
8 say that.
9 A. Anyhow, I need to have the possibility to
10 talk about interactions and relationships to tell you
11 the mental truth, you see?
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Whatever you use in
13 coming to your conclusion will be sufficient for the
14 Trial Chamber, but not the names of persons who he told
15 you, because that might be against the rules.
16 A. Am I right if I use as a word, the deputy
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: No, nothing.
19 MR. MORAN: Your Honours --
20 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Nothing like that. If
21 he is the under the influence of anyone whatsoever, you
22 can say he had some persons influencing him. Persons
23 influencing him might be somebody else.
24 MS. McMURREY: Might I suggest the person who
25 represented authority or a superior? I think that
1 would probably work.
2 MR. MORAN: We would object to that, Your
4 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It would not be fair to
5 name the co-accused person.
6 JUDGE JAN: Ms. McHenry will be very happy
7 with this claim. You can use it for corroborated
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: This is all the things
10 which he has told the expert in confidential, and they
11 should not be divulged here.
12 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I would like to
13 remind the court we asked for a severance two times,
14 and in my Pre-Trial brief to the court in February of
15 1997, the possibility of this conflict arising came
16 because the experts need to be able --
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: We aren't going into the
18 issues of severances or not. The Trial Chamber has
19 ruled on that. It has to be a joint trial. When he
20 comes to give his evidence, he can come to say anything
21 and then the court will determine whether it can be
22 taken into evidence. It is not for the expert who
23 listened to him in confidence to come and tell the
24 Trial Chamber what he told him. He's not giving
25 evidence on behalf of him, or should he do that?
1 MS. McHENRY: If I may be heard just for one
2 minute? Your Honour, the Prosecution would, consistent
3 with what Your Honours said, would agree, and I think
4 this doctor has already said it, that what Mr. Landzo
5 told this person is not being used for the truth of the
6 matter, so both with respect to what Mr. Landzo said
7 about himself, and even about others, we wouldn't -- I
8 don't see Defence counsel suggesting that it's truth of
9 the matter asserted. In fact, with respect to certain
10 assumptions, she may well be having to bring in
11 additional evidence to show that, in fact, some of it
12 is true or not true. We would certainly agree that
13 whatever Mr. Landzo told this person or the other
14 persons is not admissible evidence against the other
15 accused, if that will help things.
16 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I suppose counsel should
17 know that.
18 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, your microphone is
19 not on. I couldn't hear you. I apologise.
20 JUDGE JAN: Does this clear up the position
21 as far as you're concerned?
22 MR. MORAN: No, it doesn't, Your Honour. It
23 just doesn't.
24 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: What I'm saying is that
25 whatever the accused told the expert in his examination
1 of him is not evidence in this Trial Chamber and should
2 not be mentioned for the purposes of his defence. He
3 could have relied on him for making his conclusions,
4 but definitely it has nothing to do with the evidence
5 he is giving here.
6 MR. MORAN: I take it then that Your Honours,
7 if anything comes in, Your Honours will treat it like
8 the court has already decided to treat the defendants
9 custodial statements as not admissible against the
10 other defendants?
11 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, yes.
12 MR. MORAN: And totally irrelevant as to
13 those defendants?
14 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Surely.
15 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I'm not real happy
16 about that, but I guess it's as happy as you're going
17 to make me.
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Definitely that is a
19 loss, I know it, and accepting other circumstances
20 where he comes in and observes other statements he
21 made, that is a different matter. But when he wants to
22 see through some of that, it couldn't be evidence
23 before the Trial Chamber and will not be admitted. And
24 we will not allow counsel to suggest it in that way.
25 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I will just watch
1 and see how things proceed, and if I need to make an
2 objection, I will object. The court knows I'm not too
3 shy to do that.
4 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: We also would protect
5 other accused persons from such evidence.
6 MR. MORAN: I understand, Your Honour, and
7 the court has been very good about that for this entire
8 trial, and I'll protect my client and I'm sure the
9 court will help me.
10 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, just for clarity,
11 if I might ask so that Dr. van Leeuwen is clear also,
12 and that the Defence is clear, the statements of the
13 accused to Dr. van Leeuwen are instrumental and
14 necessary in his evaluation of the mental state of
15 Mr. Landzo, but they have nothing to do with the truth
16 of the matter asserted as against the other
17 co-defendants, but it's relevant to the mental state,
18 and he can discuss the relationships in generic terms.
19 Is that acceptable?
20 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, he could.
21 MS. McMURREY: All right, thank you.
22 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, I'd like for you to look at
23 your report that you submitted, the last one on mental
24 responsibility, and in that report, I want you to
25 describe to the court what evidence is relevant or all
1 of the evidence that is relevant from the time
2 Mr. Landzo was born until the time he appeared in
3 Celebici in 1992. Would that be an accurate statement?
4 A. Yes, that has to do with personality
5 disorder. It starts from, let's say, from the birth
6 and even before that. We think. So that's very
8 Q. All of that evidence would be relevant to
9 establishing his mental deficiency or mental
10 responsibility at the time in 1992?
11 A. It is relevant but it's not the only relevant
12 factor, and then I repeat what I wrote down here. In
13 his case, the circumstances were the war, but so was
14 everyone in that area had to do with it. Then you had
15 his special experience in that correction camp.
16 Q. Can you describe for the court what happened
17 to Mr. Landzo, what the traumatic experience was in
18 that Croatian camp? What I argued in opening statement
19 is not evidence. If you can reflect what it was that
20 occurred -- that happened to Mr. Landzo in that
21 Croatian camp in 1991?
22 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You mean what he was
23 told happened to him?
24 MS. McMURREY: Yes. I think he already
25 qualified that the truth what was told to him but he
1 used it to evaluate his conclusions. I'm asking him,
2 that traumatic experience, if he could describe that to
3 the court as explained to him.
4 A. We didn't talk very much about it, just
5 briefly. He told me what he saw there, what he saw
6 where people were killed, tortured and so on. And it
7 was one of those horrendous histories you heard from
8 that area. He told me, the war will come in Bosnia too
9 and you will see the same things, and that made him
10 afraid. This is still, I think, in the field of
11 normality, I think everyone would be shocked if he
12 would get that information. Then he told me he saw on
13 television the cruel things which happened in Croatia,
14 and then it was started in Bosnia, and he was thinking
15 about -- he told me he was thinking about rape and he
16 was imagining that it would be just horrible if they
17 would rape my 15-year-old sister. So I need to defend
18 my family, and the only way to do so is to enter the
19 army. Normal things. I mean, we all can understand
20 this, but then he comes in the army, and he was not a
21 mature person. He didn't have much reserves, do you
22 use that, mental reserves, and that made him
23 vulnerable. And then to a certain extent, the army was
24 an attraction for him. I described it in my report
25 what made it attractive for him, not in the field of
1 logical thinking, but in the field of just his
2 vulnerability and that was his dependency. So he is a
3 man who can lose any possibility to make his own
4 decisions and to make his own joy in a situation of
5 dependency. And what he told -- let's say you have
6 generals, you have soldiers, you have an army, but they
7 keep their own personality. They make the choices,
8 they make the decisions, they suffer but they don't
9 change as a person. But he was. He was in the field
10 of the adjustment disorder. He had the symptoms of
11 it. He slept very badly. He told me he was using
12 sleeping pills. He drank quite a lot and he combined
13 it with the drug Akineton to have more affect over the
14 alcohol. So he was not in a stable, mental condition
15 at that time.
16 Q. So even in 1992, he was experiencing sleeping
17 problems that he described to you?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. I want to go back further in the life of Esad
20 Landzo and can you describe the kind of isolated,
21 lonely person he was in his childhood, if you could
22 describe that for the court?
23 A. I think you described it very well. I can't
24 improve upon it. It's absolutely the same things I
25 heard, and I wrote them in my third report.
1 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, what I say is not evidence
2 in the courtroom. What you say is.
3 A. Now I make it my evidence because this is
4 absolutely true. For me, he was a boy playing alone in
5 the woods with his dogs, and not just a regular dog,
6 but dogs who were without a boss, do you understand?
7 Q. Stray dogs?
8 A. Stray dogs, yes.
9 Q. And I think you recounted that he also would
10 adopt dogs who would have puppies? What would he do?
11 What was his behaviour when he would have the dogs with
12 the puppies?
13 A. I don't know. I didn't talk very special
14 about it. You see, there is always a combination of
15 factors. Somebody who loves dogs doesn't me he has a
16 personality disorder, but what made it in his case a
17 presymptom of a later personality disorder is that he
18 had only -- his only friends were dogs.
19 JUDGE JAN: All this information is based
20 upon what Landzo himself told you?
21 A. Usually it is, because somebody -- let's say
22 when I do an evaluation here in Holland, then a social
23 worker can go to the family and talk, "What do you
24 think about this person," and then you get more
25 information that I didn't have in this case. It wasn't
1 possible. So I can only give you the history, and then
2 all of this should --
3 JUDGE JAN: You did not verify from any other
4 source what he was saying to you was true?
5 A. I could follow the picture. I made my
6 picture from what he told me, and that's -- I could
7 work with it, but it's always the same, and I will
8 repeat again, I just tell you what I heard and that's
10 JUDGE JAN: From his mouth.
11 A. And that's the finish of my work. And I do
12 the clinical interpretations, yes.
13 MS. McMURREY:
14 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, can you tell the court what
15 impact the fact that Mr. Landzo was not able to go to
16 art school had on his future and his mental state?
17 A. He is a rather complicated person. He is
18 more complicated than I thought he would be. I thought
19 in the beginning. For example, I saw poems he made.
20 He is much more sensible, sensitive than you would
21 imagine him to be. I wrote in my third report, I noted
22 that he said "Bullets don't have eyes" as an
23 expression, it is rather sophisticated, so I can't
24 imagine that the reality of his life was poverty, and
25 not many chances in the artistic fields. It is
1 probably a field of his natural capacities, so that
2 would have given him the possibility to develop a
3 future for him. I think that's the same why his mental
4 condition has improved nowadays, because now he has,
5 again, hope for his future, because he learned English
6 and he is now feeling with English you can build up a
7 future for yourself. I think that was a disaster for
9 Q. Before Mr. Landzo got to Celebici in 1992,
10 can you describe the personality disorders that he
11 suffered before he ever got to Celebici?
12 A. Yes, I did so. What I mentioned on the mixed
13 personality disorder, and I meant borderline and
14 dependent traits, characteristics, and then without a
15 war, we don't know how he would have developed. Maybe
16 he would have become an alcoholic person. For example,
17 if he would have been able to finish that school, that
18 would have compensated -- could have compensated his
19 vulnerabilities in a way which is adequate from a
20 societal point of view, adequate for society. But we
21 don't know. To a certain extent, the war was
22 fulfilling some of his shortnesses, his shortness in
23 self-confidence, shortness of personality. So he had
24 some kind of identity.
25 Q. When you say he had some kind of identity --
1 A. In the war.
2 Q. -- in the war --
3 A. Because he was suffering from a lack of only
5 Q. Since he didn't have his own identity, the
6 war gave him a temporary identity; is that what you're
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. I want to go back to the events in 1992 at
10 Celebici. I believe that Mr. Landzo described to you
11 events leading up to the beating of an old man. One of
12 those, there was an event in July of 1992 when nine
13 military police were killed outside of a small town
14 named Bradina. Can you describe this event?
15 A. I can't describe the event. I can only
16 describe what Mr. Landzo told me about it, and he told
17 me that -- we had the same story, that he saw what
18 happened in that little village, and he told me there
19 was one man killed in a very cruel way, and that man
20 used to be his neighbour, and he had a very good
21 relationship with that man. So he was deeply shocked.
22 That, I can understand, but I think a natural person
23 would find a way to adapt to this very stressful event,
24 but he used his reserves. That I can imagine.
25 Q. Because he had an adjustment disorder, he was
1 unable to adapt like a normal person would have
3 A. That's what I mean, yes.
4 Q. You were aware that after he left Celebici he
5 was transferred to Musala prison as a guard. Can you
6 describe the contrast in the way he reacted at Musala
8 A. Again, I can only describe what he told me,
9 and it was new for me, that he had worked in another
10 camp too, and he said to me that was a normal camp with
11 a normal commander. I asked him, are you alleged for
12 misconduct in that camp too by the Tribunal? And he
13 said, no, I'm not, it was a normal camp. He told me
14 that there were prisoners in Musala who knew him from
15 Celebici, and they said to him, "You are completely a
16 different person," and therefore I just repeat, I tell
17 you what he told me, but then my interpretation is that
18 this story, if it is true, then it's -- it makes clear
19 again the importance of the influential factor.
20 Q. Of his dependant personality disorder?
21 A. In combination with this disorder, if he has
22 the right camp, the right commander, he does do what
23 his commands are, and that is because -- he isn't his
24 own person who reflects and says yes or no. He is
25 unable to do so anyhow, at that time.
1 MS. McMURREY: Your Honours, I think I'm
2 about to change topics. Would this be an appropriate
3 time for us to take our break?
4 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: We would normally have
5 taken a break at 11.30 and come back. Do you want to
6 continue with this witness?
7 MS. McMURREY: Yes, Your Honour, I only have
8 maybe 15 or 20 more minutes with him.
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: The Trial Chamber will
10 now rise and reassemble at noon.
11 --- Recess taken at 11.30 a.m.
12 --- On resuming at 12.03 p.m.
13 THE REGISTRAR: I remind you, sir, that you
14 are still under oath.
15 MS. McMURREY: I'm not sure, Your Honours,
16 would that require a response?
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: What response do you
18 expect? You may proceed.
19 MS. McMURREY: Thank you very much.
20 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, I would like to ask you what
21 your clinical conclusion would be as a psychiatrist?
22 A. My clinical conclusion is that Mr. Landzo is
23 suffering from mixed personality disorder, together
24 with borderline and especially dependent traits. So he
25 is suffering from a lack of mental capacity, because
1 that is the international recognised forensic
2 psychiatric equivalent of the clinical judgment of a
3 personality disorder.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 A. Second, if I combine the information he gave
6 to me, and that has nothing to do with whether it was
7 true or not, but if I combine his information, as I
8 described it here shortly, with my clinical
9 conclusions, then I conclude that he was suffering from
10 a mental disorder at the time of the alleged facts.
11 According to the criteria of the DSM-IV, you can
12 describe it as an adjustment disorder.
13 Q. Now, the personality disorders that you just
14 described, are they considered in psychiatric circles
15 as abnormalities of the mind?
16 A. I think you can say so, yes.
17 Q. This mixed personality disorder that you
18 described, did Mr. Landzo have the ability to exercise
19 his own free will as a guard in Celebici in 1992?
20 A. The personality disorder in itself can never
21 explain a loss of capacity to exercise your own free
22 will, because a personality disorder is a stable
23 condition, a continuous condition. Therefore, I will
24 repeat what I wrote down there. You can say in the
25 case of Mr. Landzo that because of the interference of
1 his personality disorder with all the vulnerability
2 that is linked to it on the one side, and the special
3 circumstances, the special events I mentioned, from a
4 clinical point of view, the factor of an interpersonal
5 influence, if it will prove to be true, is clinically
6 of great importance, then he was in a condition, a
7 mental condition, that he had a diminished capacity to
8 exercise his own free will.
9 Q. What is your conclusion, your forensic
10 conclusion, as a psychiatrist?
11 A. The consequence of a clinical conclusion that
12 somebody was in a mental condition which diminished his
13 capacity to exercise his own free will, from a forensic
14 psychiatric point of view, my advice would be to
15 consider him to have diminished responsibility at that
16 time and for the acts.
17 MS. McMURREY: Thank you very much, Dr. van
18 Leeuwen. At this point, Your Honours, I would like to
19 move to introduce the chart that Dr. van Leeuwen used
20 to explain the conditions into evidence.
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Do I understand what you
22 have applied for?
23 MS. McMURREY: That sheet that Dr. van
24 Leeuwen drew on which explains how he analysed the
25 conditions, I would like to move that it's admitted
1 into evidence. That just means it will go with the
2 papers of the court.
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He has a full report on
4 the accused person. I don't see how this makes much of
5 a difference.
6 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I don't hear any
7 objection from the Prosecution that it be --
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It is not necessary.
9 There is a full report.
10 MS. McMURREY: All right, thank you. I pass
11 the witness, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Any cross-examination,
14 MS. RESIDOVIC: Your Honour, the Defence of
15 Mr. Delalic has no questions for this witness.
16 MR. OLUJIC: Your Honours, the Defence of the
17 second accused, Mr. Zdravko Mucic, has no questions for
18 this witness.
19 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I have a few.
20 Cross-examined by Mr. Moran:
21 Q. Good afternoon, Doctor. My name is Tom
22 Moran, and I represent Hazim Delic in this case. I'm
23 going to ask you some questions concerning the
24 testimony you gave. I understand that English is not
25 your native language.
1 A. Thank you.
2 Q. Frankly, sometimes I think English is not my
3 native language because I ask questions that aren't
4 very clear. Sometimes I let my mind overrun my mouth,
5 if you would. If there is something that I ask you,
6 and you don't understand the question or you're unclear
7 about what I'm looking for, will you stop me, and I'll
8 rephrase it, and we will work it out until we both
9 understand it, so that I understand what I'm asking and
10 you understand what you're answering. Can we do that?
11 Now, one other thing, you have been real good
12 during direct, but during cross-examination, I'm going
13 to ask you to do this: If you look behind you, there
14 is a lady with a funny machine behind you, and there's
15 another one over there. They are court reporters, and
16 they write down everything you say. They can't write
17 down the nod you just gave me for a "yes." So you have
18 to say "yes" or "no" if "yes" or "no" is appropriate.
19 Will you do that for me, Doctor? See, Doctor, you're
20 nodding again. You have to say "yes" or "no."
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Thank you very much. Finally, if the
23 questions I ask call for a "yes" or "no" answer, will
24 you just give me a "yes" or a "no"?
25 A. Yes.
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You ask the question
3 MR. MORAN: Yes, Judge.
4 Q. First thing is, you're both a physician and a
5 Ph.D.; is that correct, Doctor?
6 A. Yes, sir.
7 Q. When you took your training as a physician,
8 you took the same kinds of training that any other
9 physician would take, infectious diseases, just regular
10 physicians training, followed by some period of time as
11 a resident in psychiatry?
12 A. I suppose so, yes.
13 Q. Is that correct?
14 A. Yes, sir.
15 Q. And then after you became qualified as a
16 psychiatrist, you went back and got a Ph.D.?
17 A. Yes, but I think that's a different system in
18 Holland than in the U.S.A. I don't know how it is in
19 the U.S.A. But in Holland, if you pass a university
20 degree that we call the doctorandus, then you pass a
21 university -- you have a university degree. And only
22 if you do a study and you describe it, we call that
23 something like a thesis, and you have to defend it at
24 the university, then you get a Ph.D. degree, and that's
25 quite a job in Holland.
1 Q. Getting a Ph.D. is quite a job anywhere.
2 A. For instance, in Belgium, it is completely
3 different, but that is the system in our country.
4 Q. Doctor, you testified on direct that you met
5 with Mr. Landzo a week ago Sunday. Did you prepare a
6 report for anyone based on that meeting, a written
8 A. Yes, I got a map with interviews which had
9 been taken in June '96. I read them briefly because I
10 soon reached the conclusion that it was not interesting
11 for my evaluations.
12 Q. That's a question I asked wrong, so let me
13 try it again. After you met with Mr. Landzo a week ago
14 Sunday, did you prepare a written report of your
15 conclusions based on that meeting a week ago Sunday?
16 A. No, I didn't.
17 Q. Okay, that's fine. Thank you, Doctor.
18 Doctor, you've talked about a thing called DSM-IV. All
19 we've ever said is "DSM-IV." That's it, isn't it?
20 A. That's part of that book, just a short part
21 of it, but it is part of that book.
22 Q. Just so that everybody knows what "DSM-IV"
23 stands for, it's the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
24 of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, prepared by the
25 American Psychiatric Association; is that right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. This thing is pretty much the bible worldwide
3 on diagnosing mental disorders, isn't it?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Again, so the Judges who may or may not be
6 familiar with this thing, it has codes for various
7 diseases, mental disorders, so that if you send a
8 report to a doctor in England, he knows what you're
9 talking about?
10 A. Roughly speaking, yes.
11 Q. It sets out various criteria to determine
12 whether or not someone is suffering from mental
13 disorders ranging from mild depression
14 through schizophrenia?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. It sets these out in five axes; right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You talked about the first two. The first
19 axis is what?
20 A. It describes the actual mental condition. In
21 the case of Mr. Landzo, I mentioned the adjustment
22 disorder. That is an axis 1 disorder.
23 Q. Axis 2 is personality disorders?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. That would be something, for instance, like
1 anti-social personality disorder?
2 A. That's one of the categories.
3 Q. Axis 3 has to do with medical condition,
4 physical medical condition?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Whether he has pneumonia or diabetes or a
7 broken leg or whatever; right?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Axis 4 has to do with any special
10 conditions. For instance, a special condition axis 4
11 might be being incarcerated in the U.N. detention
13 A. Sure.
14 Q. Then axis 5 is a general look at his ability
15 to function?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. That's measured on a scale of 0 to 100, isn't
18 it, Doctor?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. At 100, somebody is -- I don't want to use
21 the words "perfectly sane," because I don't think
22 anybody is perfectly sane, but they are functioning
23 just great in society, and zero would be just the
24 opposite of that; is that fair?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. When you met with Mr. Landzo in November, the
2 first time you met with him in November of 1996, did
3 you arrive at a conclusion as to axis 5?
4 A. No, I didn't try because I thought it wasn't
5 relevant for the questions I had to answer at that
7 Q. How about when you met with him later?
8 A. Same answer.
9 Q. How about when you met with him in January of
11 A. The same answer. Because in the forensic
12 psychiatric evaluation, you have to answer the question
13 of criminal responsibility. In Holland, we have to
14 give advice to the court how to go on with this fellow
15 within the framework of criminal law. So axis 5
16 usually is not so important for that question.
17 Secondly, with Mr. Landzo, about what period
18 do you talk about? Because usually they say you
19 reconstruct the axis 5 number from the last year, how
20 was somebody functioning the last year. But Mr. Landzo
21 spent most of that last year in prisons. So it was
22 senseless to try to reconstruct axis 5.
23 Q. So it makes no difference to anyone whether
24 or not he is -- well, let me just go to the examples
25 that are given in the DSM on what an axis 5 might be.
1 I will just pick two of them at random directly out.
2 Number 30, "Behaviour is considerably influenced by
3 delusions or hallucinations or serious impairment of
4 communications or judgment or inability to function in
5 all areas," and compare that with code 100, which would
6 be superior functioning in a wide range of activities.
7 It would make no difference to a court where
8 a defendant fit on that kind of scale? Is that what
9 you're saying, Doctor?
10 A. That depends. Because, for example, if I say
11 to a court, "He scores on axis 5 sixty," that doesn't
12 give any information to a court. It's the same if I
13 give to the court only the conclusion that this person
14 is suffering from an anti-social personality disorder.
15 I need to explain what an anti-social personality
16 disorder is, and I need to explain why this person is
17 suffering from that disorder. And then afterwards, I
18 need to evaluate what are the possible consequences of
19 suffering from that disorder.
20 So it's the same with axis 5, and I think
21 usually it is not relevant for the information the
22 court needs. It is relevant if I am a family doctor or
23 I'm a psychiatrist in a community mental health centre
24 and I have to refer the patient for admission to a
25 mental hospital. Then it may be relevant.
1 Q. So it's either irrelevant or Judges wouldn't
2 understand it or it's just not useful to them; is that
3 what you're saying, Doctor?
4 A. No. I'm saying to you that if I give the
5 information to the court that somebody is scoring 60 at
6 axis 5, that doesn't say anything at all for the court,
7 and I think that is right. They are not
8 psychiatrists. So I need to describe how somebody was
9 functioning in a certain period. I describe it in an
10 evaluation, of course, I always do. I repeat what I
11 wrote down there.
12 Q. By the way, when you arrived at your
13 conclusion, there was another psychiatrist, a
14 Dr. Lagazzi from Italy. Did you read his report at any
15 time in your life?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Did you rely on his report in coming to the
18 conclusions you discussed today?
19 A. Which report do you mean?
20 Q. Well, he wrote two of them, didn't he?
21 A. No, but which of my reports?
22 Q. Well, let's start off with which of your
24 A. The first one, he wasn't in the picture, so
25 when I had the first evaluation to do, he wasn't
1 there -- he was but not in this issue. The second
2 evaluation, he was appointed too, so we had two
3 conversations with each other. And in those
4 conversations, we just talked with each other. We
5 combined our experiences, our clinical experience, and
6 how we were thinking about it. Our conclusion was that
7 we had, roughly speaking, the same opinion. That was
8 the second one.
9 The third one, we had a complete meeting with
10 each other and with the third psychiatrist, and Mrs. de
11 Sampayo had asked us to do so and we did so. It was a
12 very fruitful meeting from a professional point of
14 Q. In arriving at the opinions that you gave
15 here today, did you rely on any of the factual
16 statements that are in Dr. Lagazzi's reports?
17 A. Facts?
18 Q. The facts related to Mr. Landzo?
19 A. Clinical facts or facts in the sense of life
21 Q. Facts in the sense of life events.
22 A. No, I didn't rely upon that.
23 Q. You didn't rely upon those. Okay, that's
24 fair enough. You say that Mr. Landzo is being treated
25 twice a week by a Dutch psychologist. Have you
1 reviewed that psychologist's notes or reports?
2 A. No, he wouldn't have been allowed to do so.
3 I telephoned him, and he said to me he didn't want to
4 give me detailed information, but he confirmed to me
5 too that he talked with Mr. Landzo twice a week. I
6 said to him that I was deeply impressed by the result,
7 and he said, "Thank you." So you can say that he
8 understood what I was meaning, and I think I understood
9 how he was working. But it would be impossible,
10 because he wants to keep himself completely free of the
11 criminal law procedure.
12 Q. I can understand that. Doctor, I'll be right
13 up front with you. I retained a psychiatrist to
14 interview my client, and he is what is called a
15 cross-cultural psychiatrist. He is an expert and
16 teaches cross-cultural psychiatry at McGill University
17 in Montreal, Canada. Tell the Judges what
18 cross-cultural psychiatry is?
19 A. I'm working in Holland, and I can assure you
20 that doing this work for quite a number of years, I got
21 very much used to the example of the Northern African
22 countries, because I have to evaluate many persons who
23 partly belong to that culture. It's the same with
24 persons who have their origins in the Dutch Antilles or
25 in Suriname, and now even I have to evaluate persons
1 who are refugees from African or Eastern European
3 I think as a forensic psychiatrist, if you do
4 this work intensively, then you need to develop a
5 cross-cultural way of thinking. The only thing you say
6 is that with your interpretations, you need always to
7 keep in mind what is the cultural background of that
8 person, even if I evaluated a Dutchman who grew up in a
9 sub-cultural background which is completely different
10 than mine. So in psychiatry, you need always to have
11 the ability to think in cross-cultural terms and to be
12 careful with it.
13 Q. The reason for that, Doctor, would be that
14 what might be perfectly sane for me to do as an
15 American may be insane for someone in - pick a
16 country - Burma. On the other hand, what may be a
17 perfectly sane and reasonable way of behaving in Burma
18 may be perceived to be way outside of the norms in the
19 United States; is that fair?
20 A. Now you will get an answer you don't like,
21 yes and no.
22 Q. I like all the answers, as long as they are
23 truthful, Doctor.
24 A. Yes, and that's true. Let's say especially
25 the personality disorders, they have a cultural
1 aspect. For example, I read an article from a Dutch
2 psychiatrist who interviewed 45 psychiatrists in India,
3 and they said, "A dependent personality is a normal
4 personality in our country and an avoiding personality,
5 it belongs to our culture to be always avoiding." So
6 that's true, then you have a cultural feeling.
7 For example, medical symptoms, they have dual
8 qualities. Schizophrenia, it has had lots of research
9 from the World Health Organisation, and schizophrenia
10 is a disease which is everywhere in the world.
11 JUDGE JAN: Doctor, may I say something? It
12 has something to do with the values in each society, in
13 each culture. For example, let's take attitudes
14 towards sex. It may be perfectly normal in Holland,
15 but it may be revolting in Pakistan. And sometimes
16 what is important to you gives you this sense. So
17 maybe the attitudes are different.
18 A. Yes, I fully agree with you. Therefore, you
19 always need to be careful with your interpretations,
20 and you need to cross-examine your own cultural
21 standards that you don't -- because if you make your
22 own cultural standard to the proof of being sane or
23 insane, then you are wrong. I think you understood me
24 very well. Thank you. I think that it depends, it
1 For example, this adjustment disorder, I
2 think you can work with it in every country, but you
3 need always to be careful. Is this a medical symptom
4 for that person? That's an international standard,
5 because the international standard for a medical
6 symptom is that you are suffering from it. Therefore,
7 my answer is yes and no.
8 MR. MORAN:
9 Q. Let me go ahead to a slightly different
10 topic. You testified that basically you're relying on
11 reaching your opinions on what Esad Landzo told you.
12 The long and the sort of it; is that correct?
13 A. No, partly, because I have the ability to
14 make my own clinical judgments. So I interview, I
15 listen to the facts, I listen to his life history, and
16 I observe him, yes? I'm trained for that. Then I make
17 a measure of all these things, so that's one part of an
19 Second, I listen to his information about his
20 life history, but I haven't joined his life, yes? So I
21 must rely upon it. He told me about what he did in
22 that Celebici camp, and then I always repeat again, I'm
23 not in a position to tell whether it is true or not.
24 That's the job of the lawyers. So it's very easy. I
25 only described what he told me, because then you can
1 argue, you can investigate, as to whether it's true or
2 not. I only say, "If that is true on the side of the
3 facts, then this is my interpretation."
4 Q. For instance, when you met with him the
5 second time in November of 1996 --
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. -- there was -- let me back off a second.
8 You've described him as a dependent personality. Does
9 that mean if there is a strong authority figure, he
10 would become dependent on that authority figure and do
11 what that authority figure told him to do?
12 A. Yes. The first time I saw him, he was in a
13 rather bad mental condition. I will never forget -- I
14 was something like an authority. We talked quietly.
15 It was a quiet atmosphere. Maybe it was the first time
16 he could talk with somebody. First he had done with
17 the psychiatrist from Bosnia, but I'm not quite sure
18 that was completely in a quiet atmosphere.
19 With me, I explained to him a few things and
20 he talked with me. I will never forget when I went
21 away, he was asking, "When do you come back?" So he
22 changed. Then afterwards, I'm sure his Defence
23 counsel, she's filling him. The psychotherapist, he is
24 filling his emptiness. Now he is doing what his
25 psychotherapist is telling him, but he is going, he is
1 going, that I noticed. But nevertheless, all we know
2 is he has other persons who gave him other messages,
3 but still he is a dependent person. I could observe it
4 in this way.
5 Q. In fact, the second time you visited him
6 which was, what, about three weeks after the first
7 time, he exhibited quite a bit of more aberrant
8 behaviour, for lack of a better term, didn't he? Let
9 me give you an example. What is a dissociative
10 phenomena, Doctor?
11 A. That was described in my secondary report. I
12 was telephoned by Mrs. De Sampayo. She told me that he
13 had shown some kind of behaviour during some of the
14 sessions at that time for this Tribunal. So I heard
15 those things, and Mr. Landzo told me a bit about it,
16 but I described in my report that I didn't see them in
17 the hours I was talking with him. And what a
18 dissociative state is, I described it in my report.
19 Q. Yes. Doctor, does the DSM-IV use the phrase
21 A. "Malingering"?
22 Q. Yes. If you would like to borrow my copy of
23 it, you can read it.
24 A. The book I have is Dutch. I think it's the
1 Q. What is malingering, Doctor?
2 A. It is that you are playing a disease. Do you
3 understand this?
4 Q. Yes.
5 A. But you know that you are doing so. That's
6 very important.
7 Q. And it's to fool other folks, right, to fool
8 other people?
9 A. Yes, you know why you do it, yes.
10 Q. In fact, DMS-IV warns practitioners in a
11 medical/legal context that there's a strong possibility
12 of malingering, doesn't it, Doctor?
13 A. I think if you are working as a forensic
14 psychiatrist, you get everyday training in this field.
15 I can assure you, if you work in a prison, every
16 prisoner will say to you, "I need to see my wife, and
17 you are a psychiatrist, so you understand how important
18 it is for me. Please take care that I see my wife
19 tomorrow at home." So those things, I'm used to it.
20 But I always say it is not so difficult to discover
21 whether somebody is malingering or not. There is
22 something else if they are manipulating. Do you see
23 the difference? Malingering, how can I defend myself
24 against it, because I don't talk quite often for an
25 hour with somebody. Then I would have a danger. I
1 talk hours and hours. Usually in many cases, many
2 times. Then I get a real clinical judgment.
3 Usually, the person I'm talking with doesn't
4 know what is relevant for me or not. Sometimes I ask
5 somebody who is trying to malinger. It is so easy to
6 be detected.
7 Q. Doesn't the American Psychiatric Association
8 in DSM-IV warn practitioners that they should try to
9 get information from third sources, more reliable
10 sources? I believe the phrase they use is "collateral
12 A. You always like them if you can get them, but
13 you need to work with what you can get.
14 Q. As I recall on direct examination, I'm not
15 trying to put words in your mouth, I'm relying on my
16 own notes, okay? If my notes are wrong, what I am
17 about to say is wrong. I just want to say that. The
18 first time you met or the first couple of times you met
19 with Mr. Landzo, I guess until a week ago Sunday, he
20 denied any involvement in any bad acts at Celebici; is
21 that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. In fact, you've read his statement to the
24 Office of the Prosecutor, I'm sure?
25 A. Pardon me?
1 Q. You have read the oral statement he gave to
2 the Office of the Prosecutor, have you?
3 A. I wrote it in my report.
4 Q. You've read that.
5 A. I described it in my report.
6 Q. Sure. In that, he denies any involvement
7 with any bad acts, if you would?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You said on direct that his Bosnian attorney
10 had advised him to deny it; is that a fair assessment?
11 A. He talked to me last Sunday, and I must say
12 that at the end of 1996, Mr. Lagazzi telephoned me. We
13 said to each other that we had the impression that
14 something like that may occur, but it was not our task
15 to talk about it officially. Why do I tell this to
16 you, to the court? I was not surprised when Mr. Landzo
17 told me, and I am not even more surprised because it
18 proves again how dependent he is. Because I remember
19 when I told the court earlier in this testimony, that I
20 felt he was very much willing to talk completely with
21 me. I could feel it, but I had to respect his
23 Q. Sure. That's fair enough. You think that
24 the reason he lied was because he was dependent on his
25 Bosnian attorney and his Bosnian attorney told him to
1 lie? Is that what you're saying?
2 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I'm going to
3 object to the term "lying." He is not saying he lied.
4 He said he respected his position of denying the
5 allegations at the time. That is not considered a lie
6 by any stretch of the imagination.
7 JUDGE JAN: The advice his counsel gave him,
8 is that not privileged?
9 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I don't know that
10 when the advice that counsel has given is revealed to a
11 third party that that is not a waiver of the
12 privilege. In any case, I'm not asking what advice
13 counsel gave --
14 JUDGE JAN: Deny the charges.
15 MR. MORAN: Deny the charges.
16 JUDGE JAN: That is advice.
17 MR. MORAN: Any privilege was probably waived
18 by telling a third party about it.
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He is not the one giving
20 that evidence.
21 MR. MORAN: Okay, Your Honour. I'll move
23 Q. In any case, it was your opinion, based on
24 your meeting with Mr. Landzo a week ago Sunday, that
25 the reason he made these denials was because of a
1 dependent personality and things told to him by his
2 then lawyer? I think that's what you said on direct.
3 A. Yes, and because the Defence lawyer of
4 Mr. Landzo asked me questions about probability, and
5 that I refer to again. So it was, for me, quite
6 probable, but not more than that, because I never can
7 say more than that, that he did so because his Defence
8 lawyer at that time said to him so, because that is
9 completely -- you can completely explain that thing
10 from his person. I think in his psychotherapy, I'm
11 quite sure that the psychotherapist works with the
12 whole matter, listening very much, being interested,
13 being empathic.
14 Mr. Landzo said in that climate, he took the
15 position to change his position, what he called to tell
16 the truth, to tell what happened, to tell what
17 happened. Those were his words.
18 I don't know, and it's impossible to get that
19 information, but I think that his therapist has given
20 him some kind of message that the only way to survive
21 all these experiences is to come out with them.
22 Q. Okay.
23 A. And the psychotherapist is not a dominant
24 person, because a psychotherapist never -- is never
25 allowed to be so, but he's very influential again.
1 Q. In fact, a psychotherapist can be the most
2 important person in your life. Maybe he shouldn't be
3 but can be?
4 A. That's a question, I think, for another --
5 Q. Another time, another place. You said that
6 Mr. Landzo currently suffers from post-traumatic stress
7 syndrome, PTSD?
8 A. I think that was not at the time of May 1992,
9 but I think that started maybe -- it started in the
10 Bosnian prison.
11 Q. Okay.
12 A. To develop the symptoms of a post-traumatic
13 stress disorder. Anyhow, when I observed him for the
14 first time, they weren't really the symptoms which
15 belonged to a person with post-traumatic stress
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: That is counsel's book.
18 Do you need it?
19 MR. MORAN: I may need that.
20 THE REGISTRAR: I'll give it back to you.
21 MR. MORAN: I may need it now. I can lend it
22 to you over lunch.
23 THE REGISTRAR: I will give it to you
25 MR. MORAN: Thank you.
1 Q. Doctor, any diagnosis of PTSD that may be
2 made now is irrelevant to anything that occurred in the
3 summer of 1992; is that fair?
4 A. Yes, that is my opinion, because I need to
5 warn that it's a fluent development from an adjustment
6 disorder to a post-traumatic stress disorder. I
7 started to say earlier that a human being is
8 complicated, we all know. For example, he had the war
9 circumstances. He had some traumatic events, but maybe
10 he would have got adjusted to it later, after the war.
11 But immediately from the war conditions, he entered
12 into the prison, and that is absolutely not the right
13 place to get adjusted to a traumatic experience. And
14 even you may say that he had a new traumatic
15 experience, because being a prisoner, you are in a
16 situation of others have the power and you don't have
17 any power.
18 Q. Okay. You also said --
19 JUDGE JAN: Are you referring to your
21 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, quite frankly, I'm a
22 bit nervous about what I am going to hear later from
23 other witnesses; secondly, although this Trial Chamber
24 has said that nothing that comes out of the mouths of
25 these physicians will be used against my client,
1 somebody else may look at this record in the future,
2 and if they rely upon it, for instance, in assessing
3 the legal sufficiency of evidence, I don't want it to
4 be said by some other judges at some other time and
5 some other place that I had a chance to cross-examine
6 somebody and didn't do it. The court understands what
7 I'm doing? Secondly, I don't know -- again, I don't
8 know what other witnesses might say, and I think I
9 might --
10 JUDGE JAN: If other witnesses say something
11 against your client, you can cross-examine him.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Whether anything affects
13 your client, you can ask them.
14 JUDGE JAN: I'm not stopping you. I was just
15 thinking of that.
16 A. If you will allow me to give a quick
17 reaction, because to demonstrate to you what I mean, if
18 you would give me somebody else the order to evaluate
19 your client, I could do it, do you understand?
20 MR. MORAN:
21 Q. Sure.
22 A. Because I think only in a sense of
23 interactions and not in the sense of guilt. So if I
24 should get that order, I should do it completely free
25 and independently again.
1 Q. I understand that.
2 A. Because it's not my position to be against
3 somebody or defending somebody. I'm just doing
4 clinical work, but that's a quick reaction.
5 Q. I'm the lawyer and I defend people and you're
6 the physician and psychiatrist and you --
7 A. I think that's very important to distinguish.
8 Q. I understand that. You're a scientist. In
9 fact, you're the second scientist in three days to sit
10 in that chair. Last week I brought my scientist on,
11 and I understand where you're coming from and you're
12 doing the best you can.
13 Without going into any great details, you
14 said that when he joined the army, he wasn't a mature
15 person and he didn't have any reserves of personality
16 and became very dependent on other people. Is that a
17 fair assessment?
18 A. No.
19 Q. That's fine.
20 A. I need to say how it was. The reality is
21 that he was in war circumstances. We can assume that
22 he was. I can judge that he has a dependent
23 personality, so then you can make some conclusions.
24 Then second, if it is proven that he was under the
25 influence of another person in that special situation,
1 then my interpretation is that that influence is
2 clinically relevant, you see? And I don't see a
3 contrary thing. I'm not in a position to say he was
4 under the influence of another person. No, he said he
5 was, and this is my interpretation. And then
6 afterwards, you need to prove whether that was true or
7 not, whether he was in that position. Do you
8 understand? That's very important.
9 Q. Sure. That's fair enough, Doctor. Doctor,
10 you talked about his dependency on his brother and his
11 brother's friends prior to the war. Do you know
12 anything about what he and his brother and his
13 brother's friends did?
14 A. Well, what he told me was that they drank
15 quite a lot. They bought drinks, alcoholic beverages
16 in the shops, and they put all the money they had
17 together and then drank it together.
18 Q. That would be -- in my country, for young
19 people to do that, we're talking about cross-cultural,
20 might be very reasonable. And in Pakistan, that might
21 be very unreasonable for young people to do that.
22 JUDGE JAN: You get lashes for drinking.
23 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, then I'm glad that I
24 don't live in Pakistan.
25 MS. McMURREY: Tom would look very black and
1 blue at this point, I promise you.
2 A. For me, the situation he described was not
3 something I had any idea to do. That situation has
4 proven that he was suffering from something, for me,
5 the important thing was that he couldn't make his own
6 friends. So he was in a circle, he got an easy
7 entrance by means of his brother, and in the circle of
8 boys, he was about 17 and they were 19 to 20. That had
9 some relevance for me.
10 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Doctor, I'm a little
11 worried about your interpretation of dependency. Now,
12 if you consider the situation of the priest, the priest
13 in religion, the priest of any church, who takes out of
14 obedience, and the feelings of their military and their
15 superiors, who must obey their superiors
16 directions? Now, in what category do you put such
17 situations if you regard dependency as one of the
18 conditions for determining the person's vulnerability
19 to set in traits which you have indicated. These are
20 situations that are accepted. So a priest must be, a
21 soldier must be, so how then do you regard this
23 A. Thank you for your question because that
24 gives me the possibility to explain exactly what I
25 mean. I think you may have a priest who gives up his
1 own personality, maybe because he has never had a
2 personality. And then being a priest is some kind of a
3 solution for that person, and you have other persons
4 who choose to become a priest, they have their own
5 reasons for it, and as a priest, they remain -- they
6 keep their own personality. They keep the ability to
7 think, they keep the ability to make decisions within a
8 certain framework. The same you can say about
10 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: But they still must
12 A. Of course. But there's a difference between
13 knowing that you are obeying because the situation asks
14 you to obey, or obeying with closed eyes because you
15 can't do anything else than obey. And you can't do
16 anything else than obeying with closed eyes.
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: My fear is that this
18 does not necessarily explain the person's personality,
19 because if the person is in such a situation in which
20 he must obey or suffer the penalty for disobedience,
21 you cannot bring that within the purview of somebody
22 who has, what you call, a personality trait, which
23 makes him subjected to such situations.
24 A. I think that -- I remember when I was working
25 in the army, that was in the beginning after I had
1 finished my medical studies and I started psychiatric
2 residency, we had to evaluate persons who wanted to
3 become military soldiers. One of the instructions we
4 got is take care that this is a person with which can
5 be independent, even in a military police section, they
6 prefer people who can obey, but who can be independent
7 too. And if they had traits of great dependency, we
8 got instruction, "We don't want him." So making a
9 diagnosis is not something like looking five seconds
10 and then I have my diagnosis. It's like a puzzle, do
11 you understand, a puzzle, little things, you put them
12 together, and then you get all these little things
13 together and then you recognise something.
14 I don't say Mr. Landzo has a dependent
15 personality trait to such a clinical extent that they
16 make him vulnerable because he said to me he was
17 obeying in that camp. No, because I saw it. I saw the
18 repetition, yes, his lawyer, his brother, his lawyer, a
19 Defence lawyer, his new Defence lawyer, his
20 psychotherapist. So at the moment his mental condition
21 is good because his inner life is filled at the moment,
22 you see?
23 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much. I
24 just wanted to relate that to the general situation of
25 the --
1 A. So the situation you described, they have
2 nothing to do with the personality disorder. This is a
3 situation, and if you choose for that situation, you
4 know the consequences, but you can still use your
5 brain. But if have you a personality disorder, you
6 can't use any more of your brain, and then it can be
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you.
9 MR. MORAN: May I proceed, Your Honour?
10 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes.
11 MR. MORAN: Thank you very much. I just
12 didn't want to interrupt you, Judge.
13 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Go ahead.
14 MR. MORAN:
15 Q. You say you worked in the army and this is
16 the first I heard about that. Militaries all over the
17 world recruit young folks, don't they?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. In fact, if I told that you the British army
20 typically recruits people at age 16, you wouldn't
21 disagree with that?
22 A. If you tell me, I wouldn't --
23 Q. I saw that on BBC last week so that's where
24 that came from. I can tell you that the United States
25 military recruits people at age 17, some of whom have
1 not completed high school. And I don't know what age
2 the Dutch army starts recruiting people, but just
3 because they are young and immature doesn't mean that
4 they are just going to look at a first sergeant that's
5 been in the military for 15 years and just blindly do
6 whatever that man says, does it?
7 A. I think the reality is that at the moment,
8 because until two years ago, we had a professional
9 army, partly, and every boy from about 18 to 19 had to
10 enter the army for one half year, or if you became an
11 officer for 21 months, unless you were not capable, you
12 didn't have enough abilities to do your military
13 service. But at the moment, we have a professional
14 army, so a boy of 17 can think, "I want to enter that
15 army," but our army doesn't say "Oh, yes, you want to
16 join us. Please be welcome. You will be examined
17 too." And I think -- and then afterwards, you enter
18 the army, and if you can't sustain the situation, then
19 you are thrown out again.
20 Q. Sure.
21 A. So it is not a matter of only of mature
22 persons, no. They are persons who are young. They
23 need to be developed. But in a modern way of thinking,
24 an army is professional. Being in the army is doing
25 your job, and you get trained to do that job.
1 Q. Sure. By the way, Mr. Landzo is not mentally
2 retarded or anything like that? He is a bright guy,
4 A. I think you mean with the word mentally
5 retarded --
6 Q. He is not dumb?
7 A. What we call, intelligence.
8 Q. Yes, he is above average intelligence?
9 A. Sure. The first psychologist tried to do
10 testing, I remember, and if I see how he is talking
11 English now, then he is absolutely from at least of
12 average intelligence.
13 Q. I'm here to tell that you his English is much
14 better than my Bosnian.
15 JUDGE JAN: That doesn't mean much.
16 MR. MORAN: No, Your Honour, that doesn't
17 mean anything at all, and I'll plead guilty to speaking
18 about four words in Bosnian.
19 Q. So we're not talking about a person of less
20 than average intelligence?
21 A. Sure.
22 Q. In fact, he's probably a little above
24 A. Maybe.
25 Q. Probably felt a little frustrated when he
1 couldn't go to art school. Doctor, in fact, I think I
2 may have mentioned it, have you ever heard of a
3 diagnosis in DMS-IV called anti-social personality
5 A. You asked me whether I have heard about it?
6 Q. Yes.
7 A. Yes, I did.
8 Q. And DSM-IV -- by the way -- well, let me back
9 off. DSM-IV points out that deceit and manipulation
10 are central features of anti-social personality
11 disorder, and then it goes on to say: "It might be
12 especially helpful to integrate information acquired
13 from other systematic clinical assessment with
14 information collected from collateral sources when
15 reaching that diagnosis." Is that fair?
16 A. I think so.
17 Q. In fact, people with anti-social personality
18 disorder are pretty good liars, aren't they, as a
20 A. You say as a group. That depends. That
21 depends. You see, because I see about 30 to 40 inmates
22 a week. I talk with them, and the majority of them,
23 you could say they have an anti-social personality
24 disorder, so I'm very used to the disorder. I know
25 some of them lie, some of them don't lie. That depends
1 upon the situation. Sometimes they even -- even me
2 they trust and they don't lie, but it's not easy for
3 them to trust somebody.
4 Q. What are the symptoms of anti-social
5 personality disorder?
6 A. I mentioned a couple of them.
7 Q. Would it be helpful if I lent you DSM-IV and
8 you could have it right in front of you?
9 A. Yes, but one of the symptoms is that you have
10 criminal behaviour and that otherwise you set fire when
11 you're a school boy, that you started to steal, taking
12 things and not paying for it, even as a school boy,
13 that you are manipulating, that you are lying, that you
14 are not reliable, that you are sexually
15 very promiscuous; do you understand?
16 Q. Sure. You also have things pop up like, for
17 instance -- strike that. People with anti-social
18 personality disorder, they are not crazy? They are not
20 A. Crazy is not a clinical word. If you mean by
21 crazy, psychotic, then I can follow you.
22 Q. Psychotic is people that are --
23 A. That is another kind of disease in a
24 personality disorder.
25 Q. Psychotic is people who see snakes coming out
1 of the wall?
2 A. That's a sign of a psychosis.
3 Q. You haven't seen that in this case?
4 A. Sure not.
5 Q. Anti-social personality disorder used to be
6 known by some other names, didn't it? How about
7 sociopath or sociopathy?
8 A. That word hasn't had a long history like the
9 word psychopath.
10 Q. I notice that you said that someone who loves
11 dogs, it doesn't mean that he has a personality
13 A. I love dogs.
14 Q. I thought I would pass along to you that
15 there's a saying in Washington, D.C. --
16 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You are rehashing his
17 evidence. If you have finished what you have to ask,
18 then --
19 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I am --. Let me
20 look at my notes.
21 Q. Do you know, Doctor, if Mr. Landzo claimed to
22 have committed violent acts outside of the abnormal
23 violent acts? Now, if someone, for instance, is in the
24 infantry in the army, they are going to engage in
25 violent acts if they are in combat. But setting that
1 aside, do you know if Mr. Landzo has claimed of
2 committed any inappropriate violent acts outside of any
3 reference to what's in the indictment?
4 A. You mean in the war situation or not?
5 Q. Like I say, setting aside what one would
6 expect from a soldier in combat, I would expect that a
7 soldier in combat, if he saw the enemy coming at him,
8 he would shoot him, and that's a violent act?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. On the other hand, there was an incident
11 involving my army during the Vietnam war called My Lai
12 where an officer in the United States army gunned down
13 120 people. I would call that inappropriate violence.
14 Do you know -- but that would be involved in wartime?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Then, on the other hand, I have had clients
17 who have engaged in inappropriate violence by shooting
18 convenience store clerks during robberies. So when I
19 say "inappropriate violence" that's a pretty wide
20 scope. This, I guess, just calls for a yes or no.
21 Aside from the allegations in the indictment, do you
22 know whether Mr. Landzo has claimed to have engaged in
23 any, what I would call, inappropriate violence?
24 A. He told me why he got his eight-year sentence
25 and he went and he had to stay in the prison two
1 years. He told me the reason for it, but he said to me
2 that he was alleged to have committed a murder and this
4 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: This is not part of the
6 A. But he told me about it.
7 MR. MORAN:
8 Q. And that is the only inappropriate violence
9 you know about?
10 A. That is the only story I heard about. I said
11 a story.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I think the Trial
13 Chamber will now rise.
14 MR. MORAN: Thank you, Your Honour, and after
15 lunch I may have no further questions, but I would like
16 to --
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: We will reassemble at
19 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.04 p.m.
1 --- On resuming at 2.35 p.m.
2 THE REGISTRAR: I remind you, sir, that you
3 are still under oath.
4 MS. RESIDOVIC: Your Honours, before my
5 colleague continues, may I inform you that my
6 colleague, Professor O'Sullivan has other obligations
7 this afternoon and he will be absent from the
8 courtroom, with your permission. Thank you.
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much.
10 MR. MORAN: May it please the court?
11 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Are you still
13 MR. MORAN: For about five minutes, Your
14 Honour, will be about all.
15 Q. Doctor, over the lunch hour -- by the way, I
16 hope you had a good lunch. Over the lunch hour, did
17 you discuss your testimony with anyone?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Okay, fine. Doctor, you say that you are
20 familiar with the findings of Dr. Lagazzi or at least
21 you're familiar with what he found and his diagnosis of
23 A. It was in the cases, finding it back in my
24 second and third report.
25 Q. But you're familiar with it today, where
1 you're sitting right now, you're familiar with what he
2 had in his report?
3 A. Just two reports, I have them.
4 Q. You don't have the third report that I was
5 just handed about two minutes ago?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Doctor, I'm going to ask you something based
8 on the facts that he outlines in those reports. They
9 are fairly straightforward questions. Doctor, if you
10 have someone who gets drunks with a bunch of his
11 buddies, a bunch of his co-fighters, and takes a woman
12 and suspends her from the top of a tall building by
13 holding her by her heels because she refused to go with
14 him, and when they hear her crying, they pull her up to
15 safety. Would that be more consistent with
16 anti-personality disorder or would that be more
17 consistent with this kind of disorder that you were
18 talking about or this dependency disorder?
19 A. This question can't be answered with the
20 information you gave me. I should need much more
21 information by means of an assessment, with the need of
22 the assessment. I could only formulate a hypothesis
23 from the information you gave me. It is clearly not
24 enough for any clinical judgment.
25 Q. How about this, Doctor: How about a person
1 who is promised a house to move into, but when he shows
2 up at the door drunk, he finds four girls there inside
3 this house, so he becomes angry and tosses in a hand
4 grenade and fires a burst of machine gun fire, injures
5 one of the girls --
6 MS. McMURREY: Your Honours, I'm going to
7 object that this line of questioning with hypotheticals
8 that has nothing to do with this case is totally
9 irrelevant and out of line with this expert.
10 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Someone who is drunk, he
11 can behave anyhow. You don't have to bother with
12 that. Any other relevant questions?
13 MR. MORAN: Yes, Your Honour.
14 Q. Sir, do you know whether, after the period he
15 was in Celebici, whether or not Mr. Landzo was assigned
16 to any other units in the Bosnian army?
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Is that also part of his
18 assessment of his mental health?
19 MR. MORAN: Yes, Your Honour.
20 Q. Do you know what he did while he was assigned
21 to those units?
22 A. He told me before Celebici --
23 Q. I'm asking about after Celebici, Doctor.
24 A. I remember what he told me what he did before
25 Celebici, that I remember. And then after Celebici,
1 shortly afterwards, he went to that other camp. Then
2 he told me he was in the army, but then he was 56 days
3 in gaol without any -- he didn't know why. And then
4 afterwards, I believe shortly afterwards, he came into
5 gaol again, and that was the case which ended in the
6 eight-year sentence.
7 Q. So you don't know anything about the rest of
8 his active service?
9 A. He told me a tiny little bit, but I thought
10 it was a very short period, as far as I remember, no
11 substantial information.
12 Q. Doctor, given the information you have,
13 including the reports you've examined and the other
14 doctors you've talked to, would it be fair to say that
15 a diagnosis of personality disorder mixed with
16 predominant features including characteristics of both
17 schizoid, anti-social personality disorder; would you
18 say that's a fair diagnosis?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Could a competent physician make that
22 A. Anything is possible. I don't know how
23 competent that colleague would be, but if you know
24 Mr. Landzo very well, you need to have really done a
25 thorough evaluation, assessment. Then you should
1 understand that the key problems concerning the
2 personality structure of Mr. Landzo is different with
3 the key problems of somebody suffering from anti-social
4 personality disorder. So that's more a psychodynamic
5 point of view. And then afterwards, if you reduce
6 yourself to the rather easy descriptive way of
7 describing in the DSM-IV, even then he doesn't show the
8 characteristics of the anti-social personality disorder
9 as described in DSM-IV, and I mentioned them already.
10 He didn't commit crimes before anyhow. As far as I
11 know, he was not sexually promiscuous. He didn't set
12 fire. He didn't steal things. But more important, if
13 you have met him, if you really start to know him, then
14 you understand he has other problems.
15 Q. So someone that would make that diagnosis
16 would just be wrong, in your opinion?
17 A. Yes.
18 MR. MORAN: Thank you very much, Your
19 Honours. I pass the witness.
20 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much.
21 The Prosecution, any cross-examination?
22 MR. COWLES: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: May I be a little
24 helpful. The Defence of the accused is one of
25 diminished responsibility, and I suppose that is what
1 the experts are required to testify to. So you might
2 as well direct your questions to that aspect of the
4 MR. COWLES: Thank you, Your Honour. I
5 intend to do that, yes.
6 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much.
7 Cross-examined by Mr. Cowles:
8 MR. COWLES: May it please the court.
9 Q. Good afternoon, Dr. van Leeuwen. My name is
10 Jim Cowles. I represent the Prosecutor in this
11 matter. Dr. van Leeuwen, you have testified that you
12 do not diagnose any post-traumatic stress disorder in
13 Mr. Landzo in 1992; is that correct?
14 A. That's not probable.
15 Q. And the specific personality disorder that
16 you do diagnose of Mr. Landzo in 1992 is what?
17 A. As I told, it's a mixed personality disorder
18 with borderline schizoid and dependent traits.
19 Q. And you have discussed or used previous
20 reports rendered by Dr. Lagazzi in this matter; is that
22 A. I didn't use the reports, but I remember when
23 we had that meeting at the beginning of January,
24 January 1997, and we discussed the whole evening with
25 each other, with Mr. Lagazzi, then it was Loga, then we
1 discovered that we had the same clinical opinion about
2 the nature of his personality disorder and the nature
3 of his vulnerabilities. So I didn't build up my
4 clinical judgment about his personality by reading. I
5 had my opinion, and afterwards, I read those reports.
6 Q. Then you are aware that Dr. Lagazzi did,
7 indeed, diagnose Mr. Landzo with post-traumatic stress
8 disorder in his report of November 1996?
9 A. I did the same.
10 Q. I'm sorry?
11 A. I did the same.
12 Q. You found post-traumatic stress disorder --
13 A. At that time.
14 Q. -- in 1992?
15 A. At the time of the investigation.
16 Q. At the time of the investigation?
17 A. Yes. And that had to do with the questions I
18 had to answer in the first and second time.
19 Q. Is it your understanding that Dr. Lagazzi did
20 not diagnose post-traumatic stress disorder in
21 Mr. Landzo in 1992?
22 A. I can't remember. I don't know.
23 Q. All right. It is your testimony that
24 Mr. Landzo does not have a lack of mental
25 responsibility; in other words, insanity; correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. You're saying he has a diminished
4 A. He has -- for reasons I told and I explained
6 MS. McMURREY: Your Honours, I'm sorry. This
7 has been asked and answered and explained over and over
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: This is
10 cross-examination by him.
11 A. May I go on.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, you may.
13 A. Thank you. So he had, from a clinical point
14 of view, he had a diminished capacity to exercise his
15 own free will, and I mean "will" as a psychological
16 function, mental function. And then if that is your
17 conclusion and your conclusion is that the capacity is
18 diminished because of a lack of mental capacity or
19 together with a mental disorder, then the consequences
20 in forensic psychiatric field that you are given advice
21 for a diminished criminal responsibility.
22 Q. Doctor, in your report dated 13 January 1997,
23 which was your last of the three reports you rendered,
24 you indicate that: "It remains unclear whether or not
25 the subject meets the criteria of a personality
1 disorder." On page 15 of that report, in the paragraph
2 beginning with "On the basis of ..."; you don't see
3 that? I'm looking at the report --
4 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: The second paragraph,
5 the second paragraph of page 15?
6 A. Yes, on page 16, that's my original report, I
7 said: "It is more sensible and safer to say he has a
8 personality with schizoid traits." If you mean that?
9 Q. No, I was referring to --
10 A. And I went on with "That has to do with
11 personality disorder." I think then it is better to
12 talk about vulnerabilities. That is what I explained
13 to the court. If you talk about a personality
14 disorder, you talk about vulnerability for
15 circumstances. Everyone is vulnerable, but somebody
16 who has a personality disorder is more than the average
17 person in that culture for average circumstances or
18 extreme circumstances vulnerable.
19 Q. He may be vulnerable, Doctor, but what do you
20 mean in this report -- on my copy of the report, I
21 believe it's the copy that's been entered in the
22 record, on page 15, that the subject -- "It is unclear
23 whether or not the subject meets the criteria of a
24 personality disorder." I don't know if you have the
25 same copy that's been filed with the record.
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It's the report dated
2 the 10th of January. If you look at page 15, the
3 second paragraph which is there.
4 A. Will you give me your translation, because
5 then I can find it back in mine.
6 MR. COWLES:
7 Q. The second paragraph at the top third of the
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Would you prefer the
10 Dutch version?
11 A. It should be on page 17. I've got it. In my
12 copy, page 17 is missing.
13 MR. COWLES:
14 Q. Do you have it now in your copy?
15 A. I couldn't find it because I'm missing my
16 page but it's covered now.
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You mean in the Dutch
19 A. Yes, in the Dutch original. Yes, the reason
20 was that I sat at that moment at this very dangerous to
21 conclude to a personality disorder because we don't
22 know how he would have developed himself without that
23 war; do you understand? So I said for any other
24 vulnerabilities, I could recognise at the moment, but
25 from a viewpoint of the investigation assessment, I had
1 the problem that he was really in a depressed mood. He
2 was not to be interviewed as I could do now, a week ago
3 first, so you had the mask of disease, mental disease,
4 at that time. But especially in the field of
5 interpretation, you had the problem that from the early
6 adulthood, he was under extreme circumstances. So what
7 he -- it ranges to include the interpretation, that
8 includes to a personality disorder. I feel myself no
9 better informed with the -- because now he is in a good
10 mental condition. You can talk with him freely, and
11 you can witness the developments he has made the last
12 one-half year, and then you see it repeats and
13 repeats. And then he could give me a bit more
14 information. I didn't change my mind, but at that
15 moment, I needed to be more careful with my
17 Q. Very well. You mentioned a good deal about
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. That you found in Mr. Landzo. Where,
21 exactly, in the DSM-IV does it refer to
23 A. The DSM-IV?
24 Q. Under any description or diagnostic criteria?
25 A. DSM IV is just description, description,
1 description, and if I talk about vulnerability, then
2 I'm more thinking in a more psychodynamic way which
3 reveals more of the reality of a human being. If I'm
4 revealing to the court, I need to try anyhow, to reveal
5 the reality about that person, and a person is more
6 than a reduction of symptoms. That's the weakness of
7 the DSM-IV, but the strength of the DSM-IV is that we
8 can communicate with each other, but it doesn't reveal
9 the truth of a human being. And vulnerability, that
10 describes more the psychodynamic aspects of a human
11 being. Do you understand?
12 Q. Where does that term or how does that
13 diagnosis fit under any criteria under any personality
14 disorder in the DSM-IV? Can you point to a section?
15 A. No, I just said that DSM-IV (indiscernible).
16 DSM-IV is nothing more than a way of describing
17 categories, nothing else.
18 Q. Which is internationally recognised as a
19 criteria to describe personality disorders; correct?
20 A. You have the general criteria and a special
21 -- the inflexible and the maledictive traits, which is
22 very important, and which causes significant distress
23 or impairment of social or occupational or other
24 important areas of functioning. Those are general
25 characteristics, and that you can translate in the term
1 of vulnerabilities.
2 Q. All right. Now, going back for just a second
3 to Dr. Lagazzi's report rendered at the same time you
4 rendered your reports, his report states that at the
5 time the incident happened, the accused was influenced
6 by psychopathological disorder --
7 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I'm going to
8 object right now. He said he didn't rely on Dr.
9 Lagazzi's report to form his opinion. Dr. Lagazzi will
10 be here to testify about his report and that would be
11 the best source for questioning about Dr. Lagazzi's
13 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He told you that he made
14 his own independent examination.
15 MR. COWLES: I'll move on. Thank you.
16 Q. When you indicate, Doctor, that he is
17 vulnerable then, does that fit with your description of
18 him that he can be led, that he is susceptible to be
19 being told what to do and he will obey orders, in other
21 A. Yes, but I answered to the court when I got
22 that question. Obeying has nothing to do with disease
23 or a lack of mental capacity on its own. It is the way
24 you are obeying and the intensity. And then you get
25 again, the general characteristics.
1 Q. You didn't find any mental disease or mental
2 defect in Mr. Landzo, did you?
3 A. Oh, yes.
4 Q. A disease?
5 A. Look at this one.
6 Q. You're saying that he has a disease but
7 you're not saying that he has a lack of responsibility
8 at all; correct? He's not insane at the time of 1992,
9 was he?
10 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, that's been asked
11 and answered. He's not talking about insanity at all
12 and he keeps referring to insanity.
13 MR. COWLES: Your Honours, the doctor has --
14 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Will you please conclude
15 with your questioning. The doctor is here to answer.
16 MR. COWLES:
17 Q. Doctor, your findings of Mr. Landzo indicate
18 that he was fully aware of his actions in 1992; isn't
19 that correct?
20 A. Sure.
21 Q. And your findings indicate that he also
22 understood the wrongfulness of any deeds and he was
23 aware of his actions; is that correct?
24 A. Yes, because I think we were talking about
25 killing all the people. I think everyone in the world
1 knows that that is not allowed, as an act.
2 Q. So he was aware of moral consequences in
4 A. I think on that basic level, yes.
5 Q. Are you familiar with a report rendered in
6 1994 when Mr. Landzo was examined by other doctors in
7 the --
8 A. One doctor.
9 Q. One doctor.
10 A. I know that.
11 Q. You're familiar with that report?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Are you aware of his conclusion that, and I
14 quote "During the commission of the crime, the subject
15 was able to comprehend the significance of his act and
16 his ability to control his acts was reduced but not --
17 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I'm objecting.
18 The Prosecutor is testifying from a document that is
19 not in evidence. If he wants to ask Dr. van Leeuwen
20 about what he knows about the report, that's
21 different. But the Prosecutor is testifying right now
22 and offering evidence before this court.
23 MR. COWLES: I was asking the doctor is he is
24 familiar with this doctor's report, and Dr. van Leeuwen
25 indicated he was.
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Ask him whether he knows
2 about the report and the conclusions of that report.
3 MR. COWLES:
4 Q. Are you familiar with the conclusions of the
6 A. Yes, and I must warn you and everyone,
7 because that was a report about another act than we are
8 talking about here. Criminal responsibility is not a
9 personality trait. Criminal responsibility represents
10 somebody's mental state at the moment of a certain act
11 or certain acts, and a combination of that mental state
12 and the interference of that mental state and those
14 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Doctor, strictly
15 speaking, this is what you are here to tell the Trial
16 Chamber. What counsel for the accused has asked you to
17 come and say is that "Our client is suffering under a
18 diminished responsibility for his acts." And that is
19 what you are here to testify about. It refers to
20 criminal responsibility and that it is less than what
21 is expected of somebody who lacks criminal
22 responsibility for committing an act. This is what you
23 are here to testify about after examining him. How did
24 you come to the conclusions that his capacity to commit
25 those acts have been diminished by virtue of his mental
1 state? This is what you are expected to say.
2 A. Do you want me to answer that?
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: That's what counsel is
4 leading you to.
5 MS. McMURREY: Well, I just want to offer an
6 objection right now. The Prosecutor is going into a
7 set of facts that have nothing to do with Mr. Landzo's
8 mental capacity in 1992 in Celebici, and it's
9 irrelevant to these proceedings, and the court has
10 ruled that that was irrelevant to these proceedings
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He hasn't stated any set
13 of facts. All he pointed out was the conclusion of
14 another doctor, which this expert knows very well, and
15 whether he agreed with it. That was the question he
17 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I just want to
18 clear up, this doctor that the Prosecutor is referring
19 to examined Mr. Landzo in regard to another set of
20 circumstances that have nothing to do with Celebici.
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: About his criminal
23 MS. McMURREY: With some other -- not having
24 to do with Celebici, but --
25 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It's a report which was
1 tendered to the Trial Chamber. It was not a report
2 which was done outside this Trial Chamber.
3 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, it was done in
4 Zenica prison in 1994.
5 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I know about that. The
6 1994 situation was not what was tendered to us here.
7 JUDGE JAN: I thought that incident took
8 place in Celebici in 1992?
9 MS. McMURREY: Well, the report of this
10 doctor was --
11 JUDGE JAN: I'm talking about the incident
12 which the doctor referred to in the report.
13 MS. McMURREY: You're absolutely correct,
14 Your Honour, the allegation was that it occurred in
15 Celebici in 1992.
16 MR. COWLES: Your Honours, I intend to move
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, go on to something
19 else. Confine yourself to reports which have been
20 tendered to the Trial Chamber in respect of which you
21 rely opinion.
22 MS. McMURREY: I would just like to respond
23 to Judge Jan's question.
24 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I don't think it has
25 anything to do with the question he's asking. Go
2 MR. COWLES:
3 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, the diminished
4 responsibility issue; you are unable to give a
5 percentage or a level of diminished responsibility, of
7 A. Not a percentage, because a human being, and
8 especially the mental state of a human being, you can't
9 reduce it to the measure of 25, 51 per cent or
10 something like it. I'm used to a system where we have
11 on the one side, you have criminal responsibility, and
12 the other side you have criminal not responsibility,
13 and then you have a whole field between. And then I
14 always use as a metaphor, if somebody has a fever, you
15 can have a fever of 38 degrees, do you understand 38
16 degrees celsius? Then you can still make a choice
17 whether you stay in bed or not. If you like your work,
18 you go out of bed and continue your work. If you have
19 40 degrees, you can still go to work but it is not easy
20 to go to work, and that is an interference I'm trained
21 for as a clinician.
22 So I say somebody has some kind of a mental
23 disorder at that particular time, and you may expect
24 that that has such a lot of influence on his
25 capacities, that he was between 0 and 100, between the
1 two extremes, he was somewhere in between. And that
2 you express as diminished, somewhere between. But in
3 Holland, we use a sliding scale with the slightly
4 diminished or strongly diminished or diminished.
5 Q. No system that you're aware of does
6 diminished responsibility ever exculpate a person from
7 criminal responsibility?
8 JUDGE JAN: That's a question of law. How
9 would he know?
10 JUDGE JAN: You said no system of law. There
11 are hundreds of systems of law. How can you say that?
12 MR. COWLES:
13 Q. Doctor, the incident that Mr. Landzo did
14 admit to you, that he beat a man to death; did he say
15 that he did it under orders?
16 A. He said to me strictly that that was the only
17 time he did so without an order.
18 Q. Without an order. So how is that related to
19 diminished responsibility as a result of a personality
21 JUDGE JAN: The case of the Defence is he
22 didn't have the free will. Under the circumstances
24 A. I think that has to do with that.
25 MR. COWLES:
1 Q. So he couldn't help himself; is that what
2 you're saying?
3 A. I didn't say he couldn't at all. I think
4 that experience -- you see, if you find, I just tell
5 you what he told me and I repeat what I said before.
6 He said to me that he saw, I believe, 8 people. They
7 were killed in a cruel way. He discovered one man who
8 he loved very much. That is a very stressful event for
9 everyone, but he was in a state, in a condition, that
10 he couldn't settle down with it partly.
11 Q. All right. If he is unable to act out of his
12 free will, and so he was --
13 A. Partly.
14 Q. Partly, all right. As a result of this
15 personality disorder, was this personality disorder --
16 did this come about in his earlier life, during the
17 course of his earlier life, correct, not by a single
18 incident that occurred that may have occurred during
19 the war?
20 A. Personality -- therefore, I was careful at
21 that time when I made my third report, because a
22 personality disorder is growing during -- from the
23 birth, and nowadays, we say the genetic factors are
24 important too, but it is growing. You see the
25 presigns. The presigns are the first signs you see in
1 the early development, and then adulthood starts, and
2 then you see the personality disorder expresses the way
3 of life of that person, and then you can recognise the
4 personality disorder. So it is not -- it had nothing
5 to do with an event, but I didn't say, and I must
6 repeat what I show you here and what I said before, a
7 personality disorder in itself never explains a
8 criminal act. It is always an interaction of the
9 personality disorder and specific circumstances.
10 Q. Such as free will?
11 A. And that interaction produces some of these
12 disorders, and that disorder influences the capacity to
13 exercise your will.
14 Q. All right. Would you agree that most
15 criminals could be diagnosed as having some kind of
16 personality disorder?
17 A. I'm very strict with it.
18 Q. I'm sorry?
19 A. I'm very strict with it. I always say, "If
20 you are not strict with the general criteria, then
21 every criminal is suffering from an anti-social
22 personality disorder. It absolutely doesn't work. I
23 don't want to work in that way of thinking. I'm very
24 careful, because I think "disorder" is a vague word and
25 you need to use it very carefully and especially
1 forensic psychiatry. If you do it in clinical
2 practice, okay, but in forensic psychiatry, that's the
3 whole basis for your advice about criminal
4 responsibility, so you need to be very careful.
5 Q. And if you find or you do diagnose a
6 personality disorder in a criminal who is charged with
7 committing a criminal act, do you always find
8 diminished responsibility?
9 A. Oh, no, it depends from case to case.
10 Q. Why not?
11 A. I always want to assess the special case, the
12 special person, the special dossier, the special
13 accusations and so on.
14 Q. And Mr. Landzo's case, the special things in
15 his life, were that he was a frustrated art student, he
16 liked stray dogs, he didn't have many friends, he was
17 easily led, he was vulnerable to be influenced.
18 Couldn't that describe an awful lot of people, Doctor?
19 A. Yes. I don't say an awful lot, but, of
20 course. But then you get the degree of severeness
21 too. If you, in your younger years, you live in the
22 woods, you love to be in the woods together with a dog,
23 sleeping in a hole with a dog, that's quite a lot.
24 Q. Doctor, you said that Mr. Landzo, you know
25 that Mr. Landzo abused drugs and alcohol during 1992,
1 during the time of the war experiences; is that right?
2 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, that wasn't the
3 testimony that he abused drugs. The testimony was that
4 he used them to sleep.
5 A. I can't remember that.
6 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Use the proper
8 Q. Are you aware that Dr. Landzo used alcohol
9 and drugs during the time in question in 1992?
10 A. I talked with him about it and he didn't deny
11 that he was drinking, and he liked to drink, and he
12 combined it with Akineton because he discovered that
13 alcohol had more influence, but I put the question very
14 directly to him, and he answered me that he never had
15 drinks when he was working.
16 Q. Very well then. I will move on.
17 A. That was his answer.
18 Q. Now, is it your testimony that because of his
19 condition that no matter what type of crime he may have
20 committed or if the facts showed that he, indeed,
21 committed a crime, that he would have some degree of
22 diminished responsibility?
23 A. At the time that I was producing my third
24 report, I had to do it in that way. Not everyone --
25 some people, some forensics are going to say if
1 somebody is denying, I don't see anything at all. To
2 my opinion, I can assure you in Holland, I'm used to
3 working here, many colleagues share my opinion, and
4 that it differs from case to case. Sometimes you must
5 say that I can only -- I have only the possibility to
6 describe the kind of disturbance, of disorder, at the
7 time of the act when I can talk with somebody about the
8 criminal act. Yes? Other cases, you say, I see such a
9 huge amount of disorder, and I read what act could have
10 been, then I can combine it, but not very precisely,
11 just roughly, and that I did.
12 Q. In your examination with Mr. Landzo, you had
13 no -- did you have any information about facts that he
14 is alleged to have committed during the time, during
15 the summer of 1992 in Celebici?
16 A. I got, what do you call that, confinement.
17 MS. McMURREY: If I may assist. He had a
18 copy of the indictment, Your Honour.
19 A. The indictment I got.
20 MR. COWLES:
21 Q. That's just the formal charge, you're aware
22 of that?
23 A. Yes. It's a lot of detail. I don't
24 remember. It was very detailed.
25 Q. Have you had the benefit of any other
1 descriptions or any other information given to you
2 about acts that Mr. Landzo is alleged to have done?
3 A. I got recently from the Defence counsel, I
4 got a map, and I started to read it, but I'm a
5 psychiatrist, so if I read those things, I'm not
6 interested in -- that he -- did he do this or did he do
7 that, something like that.
8 Q. I understand.
9 A. I only want to have an idea. What kind of
10 acts are you talking about?
11 Q. I'm going to ask you about a few. Backing up
12 just a second, when you said you're examining someone
13 and you decide or you think there's going to be
14 diminished responsibility, but the individual denies
15 having done anything to begin with, you can't find out
16 what diminished responsibility exists, right, because
17 he denies the facts that underlie the act that gave
18 rise to alleged diminished responsibility; is that
20 A. That is, again, I repeat my metaphor of
21 fever. Sometimes you have such a lot of information,
22 you get a clear description of acts, criminal acts,
23 which are alleged on the one side, and on the other
24 side I get a clear picture of the nature and the
25 severeness of the mental disorder. Then I can say
1 roughly -- and there I did, there is not any indication
2 for any criminal responsibility, but on the other side,
3 I presume there's some kind of diminished
4 responsibility, but I can't make it precise for you
5 because I can't ask the questions: Why did you do
6 that? What did you feel in that moment? Those
7 questions I could have asked to Mr. Landzo last time.
8 Q. Would it be helpful to you then, as a doctor,
9 giving this information to the court to have had
10 information or to have information about facts he is
11 alleged to have done?
12 A. No, because -- only to start my
13 conversation. I can say to somebody, you are alleged
14 that you have done that. If he says no, I haven't done
15 it, then it's finished. If he says yes, that I have
16 done, then I go on. So it is not for my -- sometimes
17 it is useful just to make your starting hypothesis, but
18 then you need your further investigation, and I have my
19 own ways.
20 Q. Let me ask you this: If the facts of the
21 case -- let's put it this way: If the testimony has
22 been rendered in this court in the past, concerning
23 Mr. Landzo, specifically, about physical things he did
24 and acts he took; wouldn't that be helpful to you as a
25 forensic psychiatrist to determine if the man was
1 acting under free will completely, 100 per cent, or
2 less than something --
3 JUDGE JAN: The accuracy of those facts is
4 yet to be determined.
5 MS. McMURREY: I was going to say I object
6 because those are allegations by the Prosecution which
7 have not been proven and they are not relevant to this
9 MR. COWLES: They are facts in evidence.
10 JUDGE JAN: They are accuracy to be
11 determined yet by this court.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: What the doctor had done
13 himself is an examination of the accused person.
14 MR. COWLES: Then may I pose a question --
15 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Not on what he hasn't
17 MR. COWLES: May I pose the facts -- may I
18 pose a testimony that has been adduced in court by
19 witnesses in the form of a hypothetical situation.
20 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: That doesn't concern
22 JUDGE JAN: It is hypothetical. It will be
23 of no use to. Too hypothetical for us to take into
24 account. The accuracy of those facts is yet to be
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He has examined the
2 accused. We want to have the experience of his
3 examination, not things which would come later.
4 MR. COWLES: Very well. I will move on from
5 that then, Your Honours.
6 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, you know nothing about the
7 allegations or the facts --
8 JUDGE JAN: He has read the indictment.
9 MR. COWLES:
10 Q. And that is it, Dr. van Leeuwen; is that
12 A. Yes.
13 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I object to that
14 characterisation. He has read statements, much more
15 information than just the indictment. I believe the
16 Prosecutor has misstated what he has --
17 MR. COWLES: I didn't misstate anything, Your
18 Honour. I'm asking the Doctor what information he has
19 about the facts of the case and he has told me only the
21 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, the facts of the
22 case are what the indictment alleges. They are no
23 facts of this until the court determines its verdict.
24 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: We have heard the
25 argument about this. The doctor was concerned with
1 examining the accused person and that he has done, and
2 we are limited to his experience from his examination,
3 and not more. He has told us what he has done and it
4 is under that that you should ask him questions?
5 A. May I say that that indictment was very clear
6 to me, it was nice working with it from me, in my
8 MR. COWLES:
9 Q. Is it your testimony that his diminished
10 responsibility does not cover just one act but could
11 cover a whole series of acts over a period of several
13 A. No. Then I need to refer to my third report,
14 but the one case I could reconstruct more detailed with
15 Mr. Landzo recently, then I can give for that act, he
16 was diminished responsible. Maybe for the other acts,
17 because he told me more than he could do at January in
18 1997, because then he didn't tell me anything at all.
19 And now he told me more about how it was in that camp,
20 what he felt in that camp, and he told me about the
21 interpersonal influence and those things. He didn't
22 tell me in January 1996 -- 1997, so, therefore, I can't
23 go a bit further. So I think it is something between,
24 for that special act, I think this diminished
25 responsibility, but I think it counts for the whole
2 Q. For the whole period?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. For any act that Mr. Landzo is alleged to
5 have done?
6 A. No, no, not any act, but then I need to -- I
7 should have had a possibility to talk with him about
8 the acts, other acts which are mentioned in the
9 indictment, for example.
10 Q. But he denied those; correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. All right. Is it ever in your experience
13 then concerning Mr. Landzo, then, isn't it true,
14 Doctor, that in his particular case, some of his acts,
15 any activities that he did, may have been the product
16 of complete free will, 100 per cent free will?
17 A. It's possible, but I didn't say -- if I say
18 it is possible, everything in life is possible, so it's
19 not more specific than that as an answer.
20 MR. COWLES: If I may just have a moment,
21 Your Honours.
22 Q. In the document presented to you by the
23 Defence counsel, there is reference to the personality
24 disorder description in the document, the second
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Concerning guilt, rejection and humiliation
3 as being factors. I don't have the document in front
4 of me, but I believe that was a description of the
5 personality -- one of the facets of the personality
6 disorder mentioned in the document. Under clinical
7 features, are you with me on that one? Do you know
8 where I'm talking about, Doctor? The clinical features
9 of -- from the DSM-IV?
10 A. Oh, that, yes.
11 Q. Are you using any of those clinical features
12 -- do you have the document now and are you looking at
13 the section I'm referring to, the clinical features?
14 A. Of what?
15 Q. Does that section have any bearing on your
16 diagnosis that you are making?
17 A. I see the clinical factors of the
18 post-traumatic stress disorder.
19 Q. And you are not finding that in 1992?
20 A. I don't suppose so because he was still in
21 the situation of stressful circumstances and stressful
22 events, and the post-traumatic stress disorder usually
23 develops afterwards. Therefore, I don't presume at
24 that particular time he could already have developed
25 post-traumatic stress disorder. It came later. You
1 see, therefore, I referred to as the adjustment
2 disorder as a clinical definition.
3 Q. You found in 1992, the best you can do is say
4 that he had an adjustment disorder?
5 A. Yes, a disorder, it means a disorder.
6 Q. Not post-traumatic stress disorder?
7 A. Already from theoretical issues, you must
8 presume that it couldn't yet have been developed at
9 that time, because he was still under the
11 Q. I understand, thank you. Just to clarify,
12 these clinical features here, you are not saying that
13 Mr. Landzo exhibited these features?
14 A. In 1992?
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. Maybe a tiny little bit, but it has nothing
17 to do with the concept of the post-traumatic stress
18 disorder, for reasons I explained to you. He was still
19 in the situation of -- you can say this is a definite
20 maladaptation, and this is a situation where you are
21 still under the fire of the stressful circumstances,
22 but you can't adjust your developing symptoms.
23 Q. So it's an adjustment disorder then, Doctor,
24 is what you're diagnosis is of Mr. Landzo in 1992?
25 A. I think that is the best possible diagnosis.
1 MR. COWLES: Thank you very much. I have no
2 further questions, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much.
4 Any re-examination?
5 Re-examined by Ms. McMurrey:
6 MS. McMURREY: Yes, Your Honours, if I may
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes.
9 MS. McMURREY: Thank you.
10 Q. Dr. van Leeuwen, the Prosecutor just said to
11 you that the only thing you have diagnosed Mr. Landzo
12 with with regard to his mental state in 1992 is an
13 adjustment disorder, but that's not true, is it?
14 A. No, because if you talk about an adjustment
15 disorder, you need always to explain who could develop
16 such an disorder, and then you come to clinical -- to
17 what is maybe the first clinical conclusion, that he
18 has a mixed personality disorder, and especially the
19 borderline and dependent traits are relevant for
20 explaining the interaction with those specific
21 circumstances. And then after that, you can explain
22 how could he develop an adjustment disorder.
23 Q. The disorders, the personality disorders that
24 you identified under the DMS-IV that Mr. Landzo did
25 suffer in 1992 were schizoid and dependent personality
1 disorders and possibly others. That's what you include
2 in your mixed --
3 A. I think the basis is the -- what we call the
4 borderline structure, and the main issue is feeling
5 that you are empty. You don't have a self, and that
6 gives a fair chance that you are conducting with others
7 in a way which is described on the schizoid category,
8 and if you are empty inside, you are very much
9 vulnerable for completely absorbing what's coming from
10 outside, if you get a chance.
11 Q. In fact, that borderline type that you're
12 describing is listed on that table, 27-1, from the book
13 that we described earlier, Kaplan and Sadock book, and
14 borderline type is discussed?
15 A. Yes, borderline type.
16 Q. And dependent personality and schizoid
17 personality disorders are all discussed with the
18 criteria on those tables, aren't they?
19 A. (Nods).
20 Q. Now, the Prosecutor also said that it is
21 possible that he was acting under his own free will,
22 but what we are talking about as a psychiatrist, as a
23 clinical psychiatrist, and as a forensic psychiatrist,
24 you answer questions not on what is possible, because
25 you said anything is possible, but you answer questions
1 on reasonable, psychiatric probability, and there is a
2 big difference there, isn't there?
3 A. But the Prosecutor asked me is it possible.
4 Q. Right.
5 A. That question I answered.
6 Q. Yes, but you don't determine --
7 A. It was nothing to do with my expertise.
8 Q. Thank you. When you were talking about the
9 adjustment disorder, a personality disorder must have
10 interaction -- there's three factors, I think,
11 personality disorder, then a circumstance of some sort,
12 and then the reaction, the affects on behaviour, and
13 that's what you look at is the whole picture, the three
14 elements, not just one or two, but all three?
15 A. Yes, because that represents more of the
16 reality of a human being than just only describing some
18 JUDGE JAN: Ms. McMurrey, are you leading
19 evidence to show that the acts attributed to him, that
20 he had committed those acts under the direction of
22 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, part of his
23 personality disorder has to do with being such a
24 dependent personality that he could not exercise free
1 JUDGE JAN: That's what I said. Are you
2 leading to show that he had committed those alleged
3 acts under the direction of anyone.
4 MS. McMURREY: That's part of it. That would
5 be one of these personality disorders but he suffers
6 from several.
7 JUDGE JAN: When you are talking of free
8 will, this means that he is acting under the influence
9 of somebody else.
10 MS. McMURREY: That is part of it and that's
11 one of the reasons that he could not exercise free
12 will. But the Defence releases on other reasons that
13 he couldn't exercise free will also, and I believe it
14 has to do with this mixed disorder, and not just one
15 facet of it. I will ask Dr. van Leeuwen if I'm correct
16 in that, but it's not just one simple dependent
17 personality, it has to do with other facets of the
18 personality disorders that the psychiatrists have
20 JUDGE JAN: Because in the statement before
21 the psychiatrist, he had named someone as a person who
22 told him to do those things.
23 MS. McMURREY: Yes, Your Honour, and that is
24 part of --
25 JUDGE JAN: That's why Mr. Moran was very
2 MS. McMURREY: I understand that completely,
3 Your Honour. I'm not here with blinders on. I
4 understand completely.
5 MR. MORAN: And, Your Honour, that is an
7 MS. McMURREY: Is there another question that
8 I can help answer the court before I go on.
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You are the one who is
11 JUDGE JAN: You talk of free will. You talk
12 that somebody had molded that will or influenced that
13 will, so there has to be evidence that somebody did
15 MS. McMURREY: Yes, Your Honour. This is our
16 first witness. We have 27 listed. I will try to bring
17 all of that together as the case --
18 JUDGE JAN: Just to be aware of this
20 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I believe it was
21 stated in the Pre-trial brief in 1997, so this is not
23 Q. I want to go back to the fact that the
24 Prosecutor asked you about a paragraph on page 15 of
25 your third report. Well, you said it remained unclear
1 whether he suffered from a personality disorder. At
2 that time, you didn't have as much information as you
3 have now. Now today after interviewing Mr. Landzo, you
4 can clearly say that he has a personality disorder,
5 can't you?
6 A. Yes, that's true, and -- but I warned that I
7 think, and that is vulnerability was clear, was obvious
8 at that time too, yes? But, you know, how do you
9 develop a diagnosis of personality disorder? You need
10 somebody being an adult, and you see how he is
11 developing himself in the adult society, and then you
12 discovery the characteristics of a personality
13 disorder. But when his adulthood started, he was in
14 such extreme circumstances, that I thought at that time
15 it is rather dangerous to make interpretations, because
16 we don't know how he will react in an adult society.
17 And we still don't know, but I got more information,
18 and I think it is very relevant too, clinically
19 relevant, that under the influence of psychotherapy,
20 his condition could improve so much as he did.
21 Q. When you talk about vulnerability, that is a
22 layman's term or a term that you use as just one facet
23 of describing a dependent personality disorder?
24 A. All personality disorders.
25 Q. Okay.
1 A. I think that is the key issue or the key
2 characteristic of a personality disorder. Everyone is
3 vulnerable, but if you are suffering from a personality
4 disorder, you are very vulnerable for the
6 Q. And the reason that this kind of personality
7 disorder is different from my personality disorder or
8 Judge Jan's personality disorder is --
9 A. Please, I don't like that.
10 Q. No, no, I'm just saying a normal person, if I
11 can characterise myself as normal, would be that theirs
12 is an extreme case and it's pervasive throughout their
13 life. Would that be accurate?
14 A. Yes, in that you have a lack of capacity to
15 adapt to the way -- to the circumstances which are
16 variable in life. You always react in the same way
17 from your personality disorder, and you can't make
18 choices. Even so, you do things which are not fruitful
19 for you because you need to react in that way. And a
20 mature personality, you can make choices. As I
21 explained to you, a mature personality can make a
22 choice to obey in a system because he likes that or he
23 likes to work, but an immature person is always looking
24 for -- can only obey.
25 Q. I want to go back to Mr. Moran's
1 cross-examination of you. Mr. Moran alluded to a
2 personality disorder called anti-social. Would you say
3 that Mr. Landzo is suffering from an anti-social
4 personality disorder?
5 A. No, definitely not. As I explained, meeting
6 somebody or suffering from that disorder gives you
7 another experience than meeting Mr. Landzo, even
8 earlier. That's first. So I think the key -- the
9 problems on the level of the personality structure
10 which are described with anti-social personality
11 disorder doesn't apply upon the problems in the
12 personality structure of Mr. Landzo. Second, if you
13 reduce your way of thinking to symptoms, yes, or to
14 descriptions, then the correct traits, the virtues, the
15 characteristics of the anti-social personality disorder
16 doesn't apply neither for Mr. Landzo's case history.
17 Q. In fact, as far as any kind of criminal
18 activity was concerned, none of that was evident in
19 Mr. Landzo before 1992, was it?
20 A. As far as I -- anyhow, he told me.
21 Q. I want to ask you about malingering, because
22 Mr. Moran made it sound like malingering as under
23 anti-social behaviour was the same as telling the truth
24 or not telling the truth. Can you explain to the court
25 the difference between malingering and what the DSM-IV
1 is talking about in that situation?
2 A. Malingering is different because you play
3 some kind of illness because you don't want to work
4 anymore. You can have somebody who has the feeling I
5 can't work anymore, because I sleep very badly and I
6 have nightmares and I lost all self-confidence, then he
7 can't work because of a certain kind of disease. But
8 then you have somebody who thinks, life is much easier
9 if I stay home. How can you manage that? You need to
10 go to the doctor and say to the doctor, I can't work, I
11 have this, and I have this and I have this and I have
12 that. Boys and girls who don't like to go to school,
13 and sometimes for a couple of days, they malinger.
14 That's malingering. And if something else, then
15 telling the truth and not telling the truth is another
17 Q. As part of your expertise as a forensic
18 psychiatrist and based on all your experience, you're
19 trained to be able to look for the symptoms and the
20 characteristics of someone who is really malingering
21 and someone who is being sincere about their disorders;
22 is that correct?
23 A. Yes, because usually somebody doesn't know
24 all the factors which are -- usually a disease, you
25 have many symptoms. You have a combination of
1 symptoms, and only if you find that combination then
2 you can conclude, and usually somebody -- he come and
3 tell me this, and he come and tell me that, and he come
4 and tell that, and then I think that's not a
5 combination. That's clinical evidence based upon
6 clinical evidence. So usually it is -- it doesn't
7 occur so often, as you may think, in my work,
8 especially with inmates. Sometimes they try to get out
9 of the system, but it's very easy to be recognised.
10 MS. McMURREY: I would like to also reoffer
11 the paper that I had earlier talking about personality
12 disorders. That comes directly from Mr. Moran's book
13 which is the bible on DSM-IV by the American
14 Psychiatric Association, page 63. So, if the court
15 would allow me to reoffer that document now, I would
16 like for it to be accepted as authoritative on
17 personality disorders.
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: This one?
19 MS. McMURREY: The typed one which is not
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I think there is one
22 which is in here.
23 MS. McMURREY: I think it's marked D47/4?
24 JUDGE JAN: Yes, D47/4.
25 MS. McMURREY: It's D47 or D48. It's the one
1 that's type without an identification on the top.
2 MR. MORAN: Your Honours, I would object that
3 on page 63 of the DMS-IV.
4 MS. McMURREY: I'm sorry, it's page 633.
5 MR. MORAN: Page 63 has to do with
7 MS. McMURREY: It's page 633 of the DMS-IV
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: We have to properly
10 identify the source so it can be admitted into evidence
11 and so where you got it from.
12 MS. McMURREY: That's why I'm trying to do
13 that orally in court, that D48/4 is directly from the
14 DSM-IV manual, page 633, and I ask that it be admitted
15 into evidence at this time.
16 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, you can. I don't
17 see the problem in that.
18 MS. McMURREY: I have no further questions.
19 Thank you very much, Dr. van Leeuwen.
20 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Doctor, I'm still not
21 too satisfied with the state of the mental condition of
22 the accused. If I remember rightly, you have rated his
23 mental intelligence as above average?
24 A. Yes.
25 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: And that he is not
2 A. No, I don't talk about retarded mental
3 capacity, especially if you -- I mean, mental
4 retardation has to do with intelligence and usually we
5 think so. No, I said that a lack of mental capacity,
6 and capacity, that means more, much more.
7 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Now, if he is not
8 retarded and he is above average, so he has at least
9 normal mental capacity to commit acts?
10 A. To the references I'm used to working with,
11 we say mental retardation has to do with intelligence
12 and mental capacity has to do with all your
13 psychological, all your mental functions.
14 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Together, everything
16 A. Yes.
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: So if you are above
18 average, then you have no such inhibitions as to --
19 A. Oh, yes, you can have shortness in empathy.
20 You can have shortness in capacity to control your
21 impulses. You can have a shortness in social
23 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: In law, that does not
24 excuse anybody. Merely because you have no empathy,
25 you can not show emotions of a particular type. That
1 doesn't help you. If your mental capacity is so
2 affected that you have a retardation of your ability to
3 act, then --
4 A. For an act, you need more than intelligence,
5 do you understand? For an act, you need more than
7 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, physical
8 probability, everything?
9 A. Other capacity. We use, what we call,
10 "gebrekkige ontwikkeling," which is an impaired
11 development of your mental capacity.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I understand this.
13 A. So originally, last century, it was designed
14 only for intelligence, but later on we use it for your
15 whole mental capacity. And then in your report, you
16 define what capacities -- in what capacities you find a
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: What I'm trying to find
19 out is you referred also to his problems, as you
20 indicated in the diagram, his adjustment of the life,
21 none of these things arose out of any diseases
23 A. For example, he has a lack of capacity to be
24 an independent adult person. That's a lack of capacity
25 from a clinical point of view, and that is clinically
1 relevant in this case. He has not a lack of
2 intelligence. He has a lack of capacity to be
3 independent, and that we can explain because he has
4 borderline structure.
5 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Are these the factors
6 which enable you to say that he has diminished
7 responsibility for his actions?
8 A. If you have a shortness, if you lack in
9 capacity to be an independent person, that makes you
10 very vulnerable. And then if you get certain
11 circumstances, then you can get into a condition in
12 which, from a clinical point of view, you can't fully
13 exercise your --
14 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You can't restrain your
15 passions, do you mean? If you can't reexplain your
16 passions, you are a strong boxer, you can beat up
17 anybody, that should excuse you from any
19 A. No, because that nothing to do with a mental
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: That's true. Now, where
22 lies this mental disorder?
23 A. That's what I told you. It's on the level of
24 a mixed personality disorder.
25 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much.
1 A. And on the level of the adjustment disorder.
2 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you.
3 JUDGE ODIO-BENITO: Doctor, I would like to
4 know your opinion about how the use of power can affect
5 or influence the personality or the behaviour of
6 someone suffering this adjustment disorder?
7 A. If he is under the influence of power or --
8 JUDGE ODIO-BENITO: If he has power.
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: How to use his power.
10 A. I think that makes an immature person. I'll
11 use in general words, is more dangerous if getting
12 power than a mature person. Do you understand? I
13 think that is very obvious.
14 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you. Thank you
15 very much.
16 MS. McMURREY: Could I ask one additional
17 question based on that response?
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, ask your question.
19 MS. McMURREY:
20 Q. That would also depend on what authority
21 figure that a dependent personality would be basing his
22 identity on, wouldn't it?
23 A. Yes. The vulnerability is that you lose the
24 ability to make a choice, to say, "I don't want to
25 follow that person, and I would like to join that
1 person." If somebody is overwhelming, then you take
2 everything. And sometimes a mature person can get into
3 a situation that the situation doesn't allow him to
4 make any choice, but I mean another issue. It is the
5 immaturity of the personality which limits the
6 responsibility to make choices.
7 MS. McMURREY: Thank you very much, Dr. van
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much for
10 your evidence. I think that was very --
11 A. It was very interesting for me too.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You are discharged. Can
13 we have your other witness?
14 (The witness withdrew)
15 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, the Defence is
16 faced with a little logistics problem right now. We
17 have Dr. Verde as our next witness, but I've been
18 informed we don't have an Italian interpreter until
19 tomorrow, and that's with us bringing in an independent
20 Italian interpreter, so I ask the courts indulgence to
21 allow us to start with Dr. Verde in the morning once we
22 get the interpreters.
23 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: But you indicated that
24 you have two or three Dutch specialists.
25 MS. McMURREY: Yes, but they are not present
1 in the courtroom because --
2 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You were supposed to
3 have them present.
4 MS. McMURREY: They are not listed in the
5 order to be here present today. I mean, that's not how
6 we scheduled it. The next person in order was
7 Dr. Verde and we don't have the Italian interpreter
8 until the morning.
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Is he here?
10 MS. McMURREY: Dr. Verde is here. He's out
11 in the outer room right now. I mean he's in the
13 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Did you inform them that
14 you needed an Italian interpreter?
15 MS. McMURREY: I'm not going to place the
16 blame on the registry. On Thursday, we notified the
17 registry that we needed a Dutch interpreter for Dr. Van
18 Leeuwen today but we proceeded without one, but I don't
19 feel that it would be possible to proceed without an
20 Italian interpreter and the registry has informed me
21 that they can't have one here today. If Dr. Verde
22 feels comfortable in speaking -- he speaks English, but
23 I think that with the technical diagnostic explanations
24 that we have, that it would be much better for
25 Dr. Verde to speak in his native language.
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: If you say that he will
2 be speaking in Italian, this is another unmerited
3 holiday again. I didn't expect this. I thought since
4 you were having a Dutch interpreter, you would utilise
5 the provision for other Dutch witnesses. This is what
6 I expected anybody would do.
7 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, we don't have the
8 Dutch interpreter here either.
9 JUDGE JAN: This gentleman was speaking very
10 good English.
11 MS. McMURREY: Yes, that we went forward with
12 that even without a Dutch interpreter, even though we
13 had requested one, because I felt that Dr. van Leeuwen
14 spoke very good English. But I don't believe that
15 Dr. Haeseker or Dr. Lammers would feel comfortable
16 testifying without a Dutch interpreter, and I don't
17 feel that Dr. Verde would feel comfortable testifying
18 without an Italian interpreter.
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I'm not too comfortable
20 with this type of arrangement. I want a tidier
21 arrangement when bringing your witnesses. This is a
22 situation you would have known much earlier than now,
23 even telling the registry on Thursday, was very much of
24 an untidy way of arranging it. You knew that it might
25 require other interpreters. These are not the official
1 languages of the Trial Chamber. You should have done
3 MS. McMURREY: I filed my final witness list
4 on Thursday and at the same time I requested the
5 interpreters that I foresaw that we needed at that
6 time. If it was untimely, then I apologise to the
7 court, but based on the scheduling that we have done,
8 that's when I requested it. If the court would like, I
9 can try to get victim and witnesses to get one of the
10 Bosnian witnesses here --
11 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You didn't think about
12 it? If any other witness comes we substitute him for
14 MS. McMURREY: I think I am semi-prepared to
15 go ahead and present one of the Bosnian witnesses if we
16 can get them.
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: We can break now. You
18 make the arrangements so we'll come back in 30 minutes
20 MS. McMURREY: I'll try my best.
21 JUDGE JAN: Ms. McHenry will not have any
22 objection. You can save some time.
23 MS. McHENRY: I don't have any objection. I
24 don't anticipate that I would ask for any sort of
25 break, but certainly we can hear them and -- as you
2 JUDGE JAN: It will save us some time.
3 MS. McHENRY: Yes, Your Honour. You know we
4 have been very flexible about not getting our required
5 notice and going with little notice.
6 JUDGE JAN: You have half an hour at least.
7 MS. McMURREY: I just want to inform the
8 court that these were witnesses that have been out in
9 Naaldwijk during the Jazz Festival and I think victim
10 and witnesses may have brought them in by now since the
11 festival is over with, but I will check with them
13 JUDGE JAN: I hope they enjoyed the
15 MS. McMURREY: They were out in where ever
16 that was.
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much. We
18 will break now and come back at 4.30.
19 --- Recess taken at 3.50 p.m.
20 --- On resuming at 4.32 p.m.
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Ms. McMurrey, yes, you
22 may proceed to call your witness.
23 (The witness entered court)
24 MS. BOLER: The Defence calls Senadin
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Swear the witness.
2 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will
3 speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
5 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You may proceed,
7 WITNESS: SENADIN TURKOVIC
8 Examined by Ms. Boler:
9 MS. BOLER: Let me first just tell the court
10 that we were fortunate that Victims and Witnesses Unit
11 did have him. Mr. Turkovic was able to be here. The
12 majority of my notes on this witness are in my hotel
13 room. The clerks at the hotel were kind enough to go
14 get them. We have a legal assistant on the way to the
15 Bel Air now. At some point -- is he here? Great. I
16 can go ahead and get started. I was just going to ask
17 the court's indulgence in getting those notes. Would
18 it be easier if I waited about one minute until I got
19 those notes or do you want me to begin?
20 JUDGE JAN: Get his name and other
21 particulars in the meanwhile.
22 MS. BOLER:
23 Q. Mr. Turkovic, please state your name for the
25 A. My name is Senadin Turkovic.
1 Q. Please tell us your age, where and when you
2 were born?
3 A. I was born on the 21st of July, 1964 in
5 Q. What is your citizenship?
6 A. I'm a Bosniak citizen of the federation, that
7 is, of the state of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
8 MS. BOLER: Your Honours, at this time, would
9 the court allow me just a minute to shuffle some paper
10 and get my notes out?
11 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, you may do that.
12 MS. BOLER: Your Honours, as luck would have
13 it, I have two notebooks that say "Landzo Defence
14 Witnesses," and I did my best to explain to the
15 receptionist exactly which notebook and what names;
16 however, I'm going to rely on my memory because I was
17 given the wrong book.
18 I would ask the interpreters -- I did explain
19 to Mr. Turkovic a few minutes that I would be getting
20 my notes from our discussion the other day. I would
21 ask that he just be informed of that I don't have those
22 notes, but I do have some notes, and we will do the
23 best that we can do.
24 Q. Have you lived in Konjic all of your life?
25 A. Yes, ever since my birth, and I'm still
1 living in Konjic.
2 Q. How are you employed?
3 A. I'm working in a state-owned company. I have
4 been working there for 12 to 13 years. This company is
5 based in Celebici, and I also do some private business.
6 Q. You told me the other day a little bit about
7 that private business. Will you tell the court what
8 other businesses you are involved with?
9 A. Before the war, I also worked in a
10 state-owned company, but I had a private business of my
11 own, that is, a restaurant and a shop, together with a
12 Croatian company as a sales outlet. Now I have a
13 store, which is quite large, rather, a restaurant, with
14 about 200 seats. Next year, I plan to double the
15 capacity. I work with my sister, and privately we do
16 the accounting for several other private companies.
17 I'm also a war veteran, a disabled war veteran, and I
18 was retired as such.
19 Q. At a point a little later in the questioning,
20 I'm going to ask you about that injury. You mentioned
21 that you are a war veteran, and I will be following up
22 on that in just a few minutes, okay?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Are you married, Mr. Turkovic?
25 A. Yes. Fortunately I am, and I have a child
1 who will soon be one year old.
2 Q. In fact, the one-year birthday of this child
3 is the reason that we brought you to testify this week
4 rather than next week; isn't that right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Let me take you back to 1992. What were you
7 doing before the war began?
8 A. I was working in the way that I have just
9 described, that is, I was self-employed as well as
10 working in a public company.
11 Q. You told me earlier that you had been so
12 employed for 12 or 13 years, so I recall that now.
13 A. Eight years until the war, but due to the
14 fact that years of service are doubled during wartime,
15 I have a total of 12 or 13 years of service now.
16 Q. Would you explain to me exactly what was your
17 capacity during the war as in TO, et cetera, whatever
18 you were when you did your military service?
19 A. Could you explain whether you are referring
20 to the situation before the war, that is, where I did
21 my military service or now during the war in Bosnia?
22 Q. I'll ask you in two parts. What was the
23 first type of military service that you had and how old
24 were you when you had that military service?
25 A. I did my military service for the first time
1 in Belgrade. I was 18, going on 19, and I was there
2 for 28 (sic) days. I was in a special branch of the
3 army, that is, as a military policeman in Tito's
4 Guard. Do you need any further details about that?
5 Q. You told me that you were 18 or 19 and you
6 told me when you were born. About what year did you do
7 this service?
8 A. I was 18 at the time.
9 Q. Just for my own benefit, do you recall the
10 year that you did this service in Belgrade, like,
12 A. 1983, and I returned in 1984 on the 22nd of
13 July. Actually, I spent 428 days in all.
14 THE INTERPRETER: That was an error on the
15 part of the interpreter, the number of days.
16 MS. BOLER: 428, thanks.
17 Q. Let me now draw your attention -- Your
18 Honours, may I stop and just get some water? Thanks.
19 Let me now draw your attention back to 1992. When do
20 you recall the war starting for you?
21 A. For me, the war started when the people
22 of orthodox religion took to the woods.
23 Q. Do you remember approximately what month that
24 was in 1992?
25 A. The end of March and the beginning of April.
1 Q. At that time, did you become a member of the
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. What was your position in the TO and what was
5 your function in the TO? What did you do?
6 A. At first, I was a regular soldier like any
7 other volunteer. In time, I was appointed deputy
8 commander or the leader of the security for the
9 collection centre at Musala.
10 Q. Distance-wise, for my information, about how
11 far from Konjic -- about how far from Celebici to
12 Musala in distance?
13 A. I can't be very precise but roughly eight
15 Q. I believe you told me that your position at
16 Musala was as a commander, a coordinator for security,
17 and I believe you told me that you had something to do
18 with scheduling the guards. Could you give me a little
19 bit more of a description of what your job at Musala
21 A. Yes, my duty was to schedule the guards. My
22 main task was to assign the guards who were, at first,
23 members of the TO and, later, of the army in order to
24 provide security for all entrances to the facility
25 where people of orthodox religion were accommodated or,
1 in short, I can call them Serbs. They were placed
2 there so that no one could reach them, either us or
3 citizens or refugees of our own religion who had
4 already been expelled by those same Serbs.
5 Q. I'm sure that the number changed, but
6 approximately could you tell me how many Serbs were in
8 A. That is a difficult question, but the number
9 varied up to as many as 200, I think. Then later on,
10 the number dropped to about 90, but I'm not sure.
11 Q. Since you were in charge of the security at
12 Musala, can you tell me about how many people you were
13 in charge of? About how many people were employed in
14 that capacity at Musala?
15 A. Are you referring to the total number of
16 people or just the number of people per shift?
17 Q. Per shift would be a better question.
18 A. There were eight to nine men on the outside
19 per shift, and there were those who were ready. With
20 those, the number went up to about 12.
21 Q. Did any of the guards spend more time at
22 Musala than just their shift? Were there places to
23 sleep there or did everyone leave Musala at the end of
24 their shift?
25 A. Some people stayed to sleep there. There was
1 a special room for that purpose. I couldn't tell you
2 exactly how many beds there were. I know that at
3 times, there were two to a bed to rest on. They had
4 the same food as we did, and they were there in case of
5 need. We could wake them up and call them up to help
6 us should that need arise.
7 Q. Do you recall meeting Esad Landzo at Musala?
8 A. I do.
9 Q. When I say "meeting," you didn't know Esad
10 Landzo well before Musala, did you, Mr. Turkovic?
11 A. I didn't know Esad Landzo before the war, not
12 even his brother, whom I know now.
13 Q. Let me specifically draw your attention now
14 to Esad Landzo and his position at Musala. Do you
15 recall how he came to be hired at Musala? Do you
16 recall the circumstances of his coming to Musala in the
17 first place?
18 A. I really do not recall the circumstances
19 under which he came, nor do I know where he came from
20 or where he was sent from.
21 Q. Do you recall his arriving in Musala about
22 mid to late January of 1993?
23 A. He came to Musala in 1992.
24 Q. Do you know approximately when he left
1 A. He left Musala maybe ten days after the
2 aggression of the Croats against the Bosnian army.
3 Q. Do you recall what month that would have
5 A. It was the month of April. It was on the
6 15th of April that the aggression was carried out
7 against Bosnia.
8 Q. That's the date I had as well. Let me ask
9 you to tell me what kind of jobs you assigned Esad
10 Landzo to do at Musala? What were his tasks at Musala?
11 A. Esad Landzo's tasks at Musala were, in the
12 first place, security for the collection centre at
13 Musala. Some people call it a prison. Others call it
14 a collection centre. Apart from those tasks, Esad
15 Landzo was also required, like all the other people who
16 were members of the security, to provide security of
17 the frontlines towards the Serbs. We regularly had to
18 send reinforcements numbering five to ten soldiers to
19 cover a certain position. I can't remember exactly how
20 many times Esad Landzo went there. When I asked for
21 volunteers, he applied himself, and he went with me to
22 the frontlines.
23 Q. When you went to the frontlines, do you
24 recall how long you were there before you came back to
25 Musala prison, the scheduling?
1 A. We would mostly stay two, three, or four
3 Q. Now let me direct the questioning back to
4 your observations of Esad Landzo in Musala. Can you
5 describe for me his behaviour with the Serbs there in
7 A. I could.
8 Q. Would you say that he had a good relationship
9 with the people that he was in charge of?
10 MS. McHENRY: Your Honour, I'm going to
11 object to the leading that's been going on, that
12 question included.
13 MS. BOLER:
14 Q. What were your observations of Esad Landzo's
15 behaviour at Musala?
16 A. Let me say that at Musala, while I was the
17 commander or deputy commander of the collection centre
18 at Musala or when I was in charge of the security of
19 the same facility, we warned all soldiers in the unit
20 to respect human rights - Senad Kazagic had required us
21 to do this - so as to avoid any mistreatment, any
22 seizure of property or goods intended for those
23 prisoners, let me call them that. Esad Landzo had no
24 incidents with those people who were accommodated
1 Q. I heard you just say that the standard of
2 treatment for the people at Musala was that there was
3 no mistreatment, no hitting, no pushing, no beating;
5 A. Yes, that is how it was.
6 Q. Who let everyone know that those were the
7 procedures to be followed at Musala?
8 A. We would receive orders from the commander of
9 the Right Bank, Senad Kazagic, and those orders were
10 then passed on by myself and the commander of that
12 Q. Did you specifically tell Esad Landzo and the
13 other guards that that was the behaviour that you
14 expected of guards at Musala?
15 A. Yes, Madam.
16 Q. Did Esad Landzo follow this high standard for
17 the treatment of Serbs at Musala?
18 A. I could say that he did.
19 Q. Would you also say that you never had to
20 discipline Mr. Landzo about -- let me rephrase that.
21 Did he obey the rules at Musala, obey your rules?
22 A. On one occasion, and let me be quite frank,
23 he did violate those rules.
24 Q. When he violated this rule, what was your
25 reaction or what was the reaction of someone in
1 authority at Musala?
2 A. The warden reacted, the warden of the
3 facility. What actually happened, I don't really know
4 because he didn't tell me. So I don't know what
5 disciplinary measure was taken against him.
6 Q. Let me back up just a little bit. You used
7 the term "violation of the rules." Can you tell me
8 what that violation was?
9 A. I wasn't myself an eyewitness, so I find it
10 difficult to describe it, but I learned from others
11 that he made a movement in the direction of one of the
12 prisoners. Whether he hit him or not, I don't know.
13 This was noticed by the warden who reprimanded him for
14 this. This happened only once.
15 Q. Is it your testimony then, in your opinion,
16 that Mr. Landzo, once he was told that that kind of
17 behaviour did not take place at Musala, did he follow
18 the rules from then on out?
19 MS. McHENRY: Objection. She's leading the
20 witness again.
21 MS. BOLER:
22 Q. Do you recall if this violation occurred when
23 Mr. Landzo first came to Musala?
24 MS. McHENRY: Objection. She's leading the
25 witness again. I have no objection if she wants to
1 ask, "When, if you know, did this incident happen," but
2 this continued leading I do object to.
3 MS. BOLER:
4 Q. Mr. Turkovic, if you know, when did this
5 violation of the rules at Musala occur?
6 A. I really can't tell you the exact date. I
7 know it was at the beginning, maybe a month or a month
8 and a half after the facility was established as such.
9 Q. Once Mr. Landzo was instructed by the
10 authorities there not to behave that way, did he then
11 behave accordingly?
12 A. He did.
13 Q. I told you that I would go back to the injury
14 that you received on the frontlines. Let me ask you,
15 please, to tell the court about that injury.
16 JUDGE JAN: Is it really relevant for our
17 purposes? You're leading evidence with regard to
18 Musala. We're interested with Celebici. He may be a
19 very good person before joining Celebici. He may be a
20 very good person after he left Celebici. We're
21 concerned with specific allegations against him in
22 regards to the Celebici camp.
23 MS. BOLER: I'll move on, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE JAN: Are you leading evidence of his
25 good conduct?
1 MS. BOLER: I'm sorry, Your Honour, what?
2 JUDGE JAN: Are you leading evidence of his
3 good conduct?
4 MS. BOLER: Am I looking for evidence of his
5 good conduct?
6 JUDGE JAN: Because then if the Prosecution
7 will be able to show that he was not a person of good
8 conduct, how can it help you?
9 MS. BOLER: I think I'm working towards a
10 contrast to show how his dependent personality molded
11 to the different type of authority figure at Musala,
12 and that was the point of my line of questioning. When
13 the leadership demanded a certain behaviour at Musala,
14 that he was able to follow that. That was the point of
15 those questions.
16 JUDGE JAN: How is his injury really
18 MS. BOLER: You're right, Your Honour. I can
19 move on. May I just have about 30 seconds?
20 Q. Let me direct your attention back to the
21 frontline, not to ask about your injury, but to ask
22 about Esad Landzo's behaviour on the frontlines. Would
23 you characterise him as a good soldier, as an obedient
25 MS. McHENRY: Objection, again, to her
1 leading the witness.
2 MS. BOLER:
3 Q. What type of soldier would you describe Esad
4 Landzo to be when you observed him on the frontlines?
5 A. Esad Landzo, I would say, was much better
6 than some other soldiers.
7 JUDGE JAN: That doesn't amount to much.
8 A. On the frontline, he always volunteered when
9 I asked for volunteers. He was a man who wanted
10 action, who wasn't afraid of being killed.
11 MS. BOLER:
12 Q. Did he follow the orders of the people in
13 authority on the frontlines?
14 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He volunteered when he
15 was always asked to do things. When everyone was
16 asked, he volunteered.
17 MS. BOLER:
18 Q. Then that would imply that he followed orders
19 from the authority figures when he was on the
20 frontlines? Let me move on. I think I have covered
22 Were you aware of a hand injury or a
23 disability to Mr. Landzo's hand? If you're not aware
24 of it, just tell me so.
25 A. Can you repeat the question, please?
1 Q. Do you have any knowledge of a hand injury
2 sustained before the war, by Mr. Landzo?
3 A. No, I said that I didn't know Esad Landzo
4 before the war.
5 Q. Let me rephrase that. Were you aware of any
6 type of hand injury that you would have -- did you
7 notice any hand disability when Mr. Landzo was at
9 A. Madam, it was a war, and nobody heeded any
10 injuries. Even if he had no leg, if he could carry a
11 weapon, he would have been used and he would have had
12 to fight.
13 Q. Do you recognise Mr. Landzo in the courtroom
15 A. I recognised him with difficulty but I did
16 recognise him.
17 Q. May I ask you to expand on that? What is the
18 difficulty that you had today in recognising
19 Mr. Landzo? What's the difference between Mr. Landzo
20 today and when you knew him at Musala?
21 A. The first difference that I can observe is
22 his haircut. His hair is longer and he is much
23 heavier. His face is fuller. He looks like a
24 gentleman, a bit like a gentleman. That's all.
25 MS. BOLER: Your Honour, may I have just a
2 Q. Mr. Turkovic, were you with Esad Landzo at
3 Glavaticevo, were you with him in that area of the
5 A. Could you repeat the name of the place? I
6 didn't understand the name of the place you mentioned.
7 MS. McMURREY: Sorry, Your Honour, if I could
8 just be of assistance. I think the name was
9 Glavaticevo. Does that sound familiar?
10 MR. MORAN: I think we all had the same
11 problem. There was no interpretation.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Let's get the
13 interpretation through.
14 THE INTERPRETER: Mr. Moran did not switch on
15 the microphone.
16 MS. McMURREY: None of us heard any
17 interpretation on the last statement of the witness.
18 JUDGE JAN: The translation did not come
19 through. Maybe there's something wrong with the
20 translation booth.
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I hear it will take some
22 five minutes to correct it. Okay, we can rise for five
23 minutes and come back at a quarter past.
24 --- Recess taken at 5.08 p.m.
25 --- On resuming at 5.15 p.m.
1 MS. BOLER:
2 Q. Let me go back to one of the things that we
3 discussed before the break. We had discussed briefly
4 that --
5 A. Please go ahead.
6 Q. Back to the incident that you discussed
7 earlier about Mr. Landzo gesturing to a prisoner and
8 being protected by someone in authority. I believe you
9 said you weren't there right at the time. Did you walk
10 in directly thereafter?
11 A. The warden of the facility came, and later I
12 reprimanded Landzo, and then the warden punished him.
13 Q. Did the warden tell you what had happened?
14 A. Other soldiers told me that he raised his
15 hand and he moved his hand aside, whether he hit him,
16 whether he tried to hit him, I can't tell you.
17 Q. Did anybody tell you of any injury as a
18 result of that?
19 A. Whose injury are you referring to?
20 Q. Let me rephrase that. You say that it was a
21 gesture and that he moved his hand toward a prisoner;
22 is that what you're saying happened?
23 A. Yes, he moved his hand. Whether he hit him
24 or not, I can't tell you. Whether he wanted to hit him
25 or just push him, I don't know.
1 Q. But the people that told you this, did they
2 tell you there was a hit or did they tell you that you
3 just raised his hand?
4 MS. McHENRY: Objection, asked and answered.
5 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He answered that. He
6 said that he was punished for his conduct. I think
7 that should have satisfied you.
8 MS. BOLER:
9 Q. Let me ask you about a policy at Musala
10 wherein Serbs were allowed to leave the prison to go do
11 some types of work. Are you familiar with that?
12 A. Yes, some of them were allowed to go out.
13 Some were allowed to go home. They were escorted by
14 guards to have a bath because we didn't want to have an
15 epidemic. They have the same toilet facilities as we
16 did. Some of them went to work in the hospital. They
17 got better food. They had their own cook there. In
18 the clinic of Konjic, they volunteered for them, about
19 a dozen of them. And then they also carried coal.
20 They also peeled potatoes and did similar kinds of
22 Q. When you say they were escorted, did Esad
23 Landzo on occasion escort these Serbs?
24 A. I don't remember it. I can't tell you
25 precisely. I really can't.
1 Q. Do you recall a Serb at Musala -- I'll try to
2 get this right, whose name was Mico Kuljanin?
3 A. Are you referring to Mico Kuljanin, a fat
5 Q. Yes.
6 A. Yes, I remember him well.
7 Q. Did you have an occasion to observe the way
8 Mr. Kuljanin and Mr. Landzo interreacted (sic) or --
9 that's a bad word.
10 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Related to each other.
11 MS. BOLER:
12 Q. Let me ask you this. How was Mico Kuljanin
13 treated at Musala? Did he have some special treatment
14 at Musala?
15 A. No, he was subjected to no particular
16 treatment. He even had some privileges compared to
17 other inmates. He was even allowed to go to town. He
18 was married in Konjic at that time.
19 Q. When you say he was married in Konjic at that
20 time, not during his confinement at Musala, but before
21 he came to Musala; correct?
22 A. No. He was an inmate in Musala, a detainee
23 in Musala. In 1993, he was discharged from Musala. He
24 remained in Konjic. He joined the army. He married a
25 girl and he has a son, and he still works in Konjic.
1 He is a successful businessman. He has two companies
3 Q. Let me direct your attention back to when
4 Mr. Kuljanin was at Musala. If Mr. Kuljanin came to
5 this Tribunal and testified that he was mistreated at
6 Musala, he would not be telling the truth; correct?
7 A. Madam, I came here and I swore I would tell
8 the truth. I would tell Mr. Kuljanin, if he said so,
9 that he is lying. I would say it openly.
10 Q. In your capacity as head of security at
11 Musala, you never saw anybody beaten; is that correct?
12 A. No, not in my presence, and if it had
13 happened when I was not present there, the Serbs who
14 were there, who were detained, some of whom who were my
15 friends, they would have told me.
17 MS. BOLER: Your Honour, may I have just one
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Your minutes are
21 MS. BOLER: Yes, Your Honour. This will be
22 the last one.
23 Q. Mr. Turkovic, are you familiar with a Bendzo
24 Dusko who attempted to leave Musala prison, to escape
25 from Musala?
1 MS. McMURREY: Dusko Bendzo.
2 MS. McHENRY: I'm going to ask about the
3 relevance of this.
4 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, Mr. Bendzo is in
5 the indictment and I think it's very relevant that this
6 testimony comes out now, if he knows.
7 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It's related to his
8 period in Musala prison, apparently.
9 A. I know several Bendzo. If you gave me his
10 photograph, I could describe him. If he showed me a
11 photograph, there is one who is called Dusan Bendzo.
12 Could you tell me what he looks like, how tall he is,
13 what his hair looks like? Could you give me a
14 description of that person?
15 MS. BOLER:
16 Q. All I can tell you, I can't tell you a
17 physical description, but I can tell you that he did
18 try to escape from Musala, if that helps you to
20 A. Can you help me when it was, what year? Was
21 it in 1992 or at the beginning of '93?
22 Q. I don't know. So I'm not going to be able to
23 help you with that. I have information that it was in
24 1993 or 1994 and that he was a former taxi driver who
25 escaped from --
1 A. Yes, I know the gentleman. I think that he
2 even managed to escape. That was in 1994 after the
3 surrender by the army of the facility of the military
4 police. I think that this fact is true, but I don't
5 know the details. I know that taxi driver.
6 Q. Were you there at Musala when this occurred?
7 MS. McHENRY: Your Honour, I am still going
8 to object to relevancy, whether or not someone who is
9 mistreated in Celebici subsequently escaped from
10 Musala, we believe, is totally irrelevant.
11 MS. BOLER: I only ask it because it was part
12 of the indictment and I thought this witness might be
13 able to give us a little more information.
14 MS. McHENRY: Certainly there's nothing in
15 the indictment about any escape from Musala.
16 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Which count is it?
17 MS. BOLER: I may just have to --
18 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, if I might
19 assist, it's in the count alleging tortures under
20 command responsibility, and what it would show is that
21 -- I believe that the evidence would be that
22 Mr. Bendzo escaped and killed the guard at the time.
23 JUDGE JAN: He admitted that himself in his
25 MS. McMURREY: He didn't come to testify,
1 Mr. Bendzo.
2 JUDGE JAN: Somebody did come and say that he
3 escaped, he wasn't exchanged and he had --
4 MS. McMURREY: But Mr. Bendzo never came in
5 the Prosecution's case. That's why I was asking the
6 question, because he is still in the indictment.
7 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: That's Count 38, isn't
9 MS. McMURREY: I don't have my indictment in
10 front of me, Your Honour, but it's the one -- general
11 charges under command responsibility, I believe, for
13 MS. McHENRY: And if I might just clarify, in
14 addition to him not testifying, I believe there was
15 testimony that from one witness who indicated that some
16 persons escaped, and he said absolutely no one was
17 injured, no guards were injured at that time, and he
18 couldn't say what happened after that, just to, I
19 think, clarify the record. In any event, we believe
20 subsequent events about Musala are totally irrelevant
21 to whether or not he was mistreated in Celebici, unless
22 they are going to suggest that somehow he was tortured
23 in Celebici because someone thought that a year later
24 he was going to escape from Musala.
25 MS. BOLER: I don't think that was the point
1 of -- the point of questions and bringing this witness
2 to testify about Musala was just to kind of move
3 forward from the testimony from Dr. van Leeuwen this
4 morning about his dependent personality and how he was
5 able to adapt to whatever authority figure was in his
6 life at the time. That was the point of bringing this
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Do you still have
9 anything to ask him, then move on.
10 MS. BOLER: No, Your Honour. I pass the
11 witness at this time.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: With your handicap, you
13 couldn't do much. Was there any cross-examination?
14 MS. BOLER: I assure the court that for my
15 next witness, I'll be much better prepared than this
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Any cross-examination?
18 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I have a couple of
19 questions. I can probably do it in five minutes, if
20 you will give me that long.
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, you may.
22 Cross-examined by Mr. Moran:
23 JUDGE JAN: Do you have any questions, Ms.
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: Since the Defence counsel
1 have to set the order, I move that my colleague Mr.
2 Moran has the first question. We agree with this.
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, you may proceed,
5 MR. MORAN:
6 Q. Good afternoon, sir. My name is Tom Moran
7 and I represent Hazim Delic, and I want to ask you
8 about four questions based on what you testified to on
9 your direct. I'm going to go from back to front. The
10 last question that Ms. Boller asked you?
11 MS. RESIDOVIC: Your Honour, I apologise.
12 The witness got the same translation and the
13 translation said that Mr. Moran represented Mr. Zejnil
14 Delalic. Since the transcript doesn't say so, the
15 witness heard the same thing as I did. Mr. Moran does
16 not represent Mr. Delalic. Could we get the right
17 translation so that we don't confuse the witness?
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much. I
19 think it should be corrected.
20 MR. MORAN:
21 Q. I represent Hazim Delic.
22 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I didn't hear the
23 correction. Okay, I have seen it here, yes.
24 MR. MORAN:
25 Q. The last question that you were asked about
1 Dusko Bendzo reminded me to ask you a question about a
2 man by the name of Risto Vukalo. Did you ever hear of,
3 see, engage in any mock executions at the Musala prison
4 to scare prisoners?
5 A. At Musala, there were no executions during
6 the year while I was in charge of security. That I can
7 allege emphatically.
8 Q. How about a mock execution where you scare
9 somebody, you make him think you are going to execute
10 him but you don't do it. Maybe you fire over his head,
11 something like that. Did any of that occur?
12 A. In my presence, such an event never
13 occurred. I mentioned that I spent several days on the
14 frontlines on seven or eight occasions, but somebody
15 would have told me, because this can provoke a great
16 deal of fear and this can affect a person's health. He
17 can have a heart attack or something like that.
18 Q. By the way, were prisoners or detainees, I
19 guess is the right word, from Musala ever taken to the
20 frontlines and forced to dig trenches or things like
21 that -- create fortifications for the Bosnian army?
22 A. Not a single Serb prisoner built
23 fortifications for the army. They did carry food, but
24 they would select people from amongst themselves to do
25 this. They selected the persons themselves.
1 Q. That's fine. Let me go on to another
2 subject. You said that some of the Serb detainees were
3 allowed to go home -- excuse me, to have a bath because
4 you did not want an epidemic. Do you recall testifying
5 to that?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. What kind of epidemic are we talking about
8 and why did you fear it?
9 A. We were afraid of hepatitis; we were afraid
10 of other infections, because, after all, there were
11 quite a large number of people in a group, many
12 soldiers. This was all interconnected. It could
13 affect their families, our families. The pressure in
14 the water pipes was low, so there was a shortage of
15 water. We had one large room for these purposes, and
16 if people didn't wash regularly, then, of course,
17 infections could spread, especially in the summer
19 Q. So based on medical advice, you allowed these
20 people to go wherever they could to take showers so
21 they could be clean to prevent epidemics; is that
22 correct, sir?
23 A. This was even contrary to the orders of the
24 commanders. This was the decision taken by the warden
25 and myself. I personally took some people, escorted
1 some people, on a number of occasions. I can even give
2 you some names.
3 Q. Yes, sir, but what I'm asking is you did this
4 based on medical advice to prevent epidemic; is that
6 A. The doctors came regularly and they told us
7 that that is what we should do.
8 Q. Fine, that's what I was getting at, sir. The
9 next thing I would like to ask you about, and, again,
10 I'm changing subjects completely. You testified about
11 an incident where Mr. Landzo supposedly raised a hand
12 in the direction of a detainee. Without getting into
13 the facts of that incident at all, as I recall, you
14 testified that you reprimanded Mr. Landzo which, in my
15 army would be, you chewed him out, and he was later
16 punished by the warden. Was that because, as the
17 deputy commander, you lacked the authority to punish?
18 A. I could have punished him as well.
19 Q. Okay. You referred to Musala as a collection
20 centre, as opposed to a prison. Was that a place where
21 people who were not suspected of committing crimes
22 against the government were taken to be protected? Is
23 that what Musala was for?
24 A. It's a rather complicated question. Every
25 prisoner in that collection centre was arrested with a
1 firearm on him, so he was a prisoner, after all, but he
2 was set aside there because we wanted to protect them.
3 Q. Protect them and protect the government also
4 from people with guns?
5 A. Yes, that is how one could put it, because
6 they had the same food as I did. There was no
7 difference between the Bosnian soldier and this
8 arrested Serb with a gun in his hand.
9 Q. Sir, by the way, when were you assigned to
10 Musala? I heard that and then I just didn't put it
11 down in my notes. When were you first assigned there
12 as the commander of the guard?
13 A. I'm unable to tell you the exact date. Maybe
14 one of the gentlemen could help. After the arrival of
15 a group of soldiers who were transferred from Celebici,
16 I was assigned by Mr. Senad Kazazic to another facility
17 intended for military purposes, but as there were fewer
18 guards than was necessary, Mr. Kazazic then transferred
19 me to Musala.
20 Q. I don't need an exact date. Was it April or
21 May or June?
22 A. It was June.
23 Q. June 1992?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. While you were there, were there any
1 prisoners who were transferred from Celebici to Musala?
2 A. Yes, a large number of them.
3 Q. When they came in, did they look beaten,
4 starved, kicked, abused?
5 A. One couldn't notice very much on them. Of
6 course, they were all dirty because none of their
7 people had any clothing, enough clothing, to send
8 them. That's as much as I can say.
9 Q. Okay, that's fine.
10 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I pass the witness.
11 JUDGE JAN: I think you better do that.
12 MR. MORAN: Pardon?
13 JUDGE JAN: You better do that.
14 MR. MORAN: I think I'll quit while I'm
16 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Is this Ms. McHenry
18 MS. McHENRY: We will certainly be
19 cross-examining this witness, Your Honour. I'm sorry.
20 I wasn't sure if even other Defence counsel wanted to
21 do it, but we definitely would like to cross-examine
22 and I'm ready to start at Your Honours' convenience.
23 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Ms. Residovic, are you
24 cross-examining this witness?
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: Your Honour, I don't know
1 whether we are prolonging our work today, and I may
2 have a couple of questions. As far as I can tell, it
3 won't take more than 10 to 15 minutes, but if this is
4 put off until tomorrow, I may not have any questions if
5 my turn comes after Mr. Olujic's.
6 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Mr. Olujic, any
7 questioning? Any cross-examination?
8 MR. OLUJIC: At this point in time, we have
9 no questions for this witness. Thank you. But if
10 Madam Edina Residovic wishes to question the witness, I
11 don't mind.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It's not the time now
13 that matters, it's whether you have any
14 cross-examination. If you have any cross-examination
15 and it's not likely to be extensive, we can take your
16 questions. Because it's not too much to continue for a
17 few more minutes. So if you have any, let's have your
19 MS. BOLER: It says an error has occurred in
20 your programme, to keep working anyway, check and
21 ignore and save your work to quit. You will lose
22 information you entered since your last save. I just
23 don't want to lose anything. I haven't done anything
24 except that thing has appeared.
25 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much.
1 Ms. Residovic, let's hear you.
2 MS. RESIDOVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
3 Cross-examined by Ms. Residovic:
4 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Turkovic.
5 A. Good afternoon, Ms. Residovic.
6 Q. I'm Defence counsel for Mr. Zejnil Delalic,
7 and this time, this is correct, as opposed to a moment
8 ago when there was an error in the translation.
9 Mr. Turkovic, we do not know each other from before;
10 isn't that so?
11 A. No, that is not so. I saw you yesterday.
12 Q. That was my next question. We met for the
13 first time, yesterday, briefly for fifteen minutes; is
14 that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you. In the course of the
17 examination-in-chief, you said that Senad Kazazic, the
18 commander of the right bank had assigned you to the
19 Musala facility; is that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. In answer to a question, you said that this
22 happened sometime in June 1992?
23 A. In June.
24 Q. If I may remind you, this was a couple of
25 days after the unfortunate event that occurred when the
1 Chetnik shell hit Musala?
2 A. Yes, that is correct. I don't exactly know
3 how many days afterwards but shortly afterwards.
4 Q. Thank you. If we were to try to fix the time
5 in relation to this event, then it must have been the
6 second half of June of 1992; isn't that so?
7 A. Possibly.
8 Q. Mr. Senad Kazazic was in 1992 -- let me
9 rephrase my question. Mr. Senad Kazazic was the
10 commander of the detachment, the detachment known as
11 the right bank or Konjic 1?
12 A. The right bank, yes.
13 Q. Throughout the time you were at Musala, your
14 immediate superior was Hebibovic known as Broceta?
15 A. Yes, Ismet Hebibovic known as Broceta, yes.
16 Q. Throughout the time that Mr. Kazazic was in
17 this detachment, Konjic 1, throughout that time he gave
18 you advice regarding strict respect of the rights of
19 the persons held in Musala?
20 A. Mr. Kazazic insisted on it.
21 Q. Is it true, Mr. Turkovic, that you told me
22 yesterday that you personally, never personally knew
23 Mr. Zejnil Delalic, but that you had heard of him, like
24 the other people of Konjic, especially on the basis of
25 his discotheque?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Is it true that Mr. Delalic was never a
3 superior of yours while you were at Musala?
4 A. He wasn't, nor did he ever come to Musala.
5 Q. Is it also correct that you spent quite a bit
6 of time in Musala, within the facility, while you were
8 A. Actually, most of the time I slept there,
9 unless I was on leave.
10 Q. You said that the detainees had the same
11 food, same quality and quantity of food, as your
12 soldiers did?
13 A. That is true. Even during the conflict with
14 the HVO, we would give them our food reserves. We set
15 up a canteen, and the same cooks cooked for them and
16 for us.
17 Q. Mr. Turkovic, you said that a number of
18 guards who provided security for Musala would
19 occasionally go to the frontlines?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. If I were to say that these were lines in the
22 vicinity of the town of Konjic in the direction of the
23 Chetnik positions, would that be correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Is it also correct to say, Mr. Turkovic, that
1 not a single of your guards was ever a member of
2 Tactical Group 1?
3 A. As far as I know, no one was.
4 Q. Mr. Turkovic, thank you. I have no further
6 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Mr. Olujic, have you any
8 MR. OLUJIC: Your Honours, I said that I had
9 no questions for this witness and I thank you. Not
10 because of the time limit but simply I have no
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Ms. McHenry, any
13 questions for you?
14 Cross-examined by Ms. Henry:
15 JUDGE JAN: He has been speaking mostly about
16 Musala. There's no allegations against them with
17 respect to Musala.
18 MS. McHENRY: Your Honour, if he had not been
19 called at all, I would not have objected, but given
20 that he has objected, and presumably because someone
21 thinks he is relevant evidence, I do have some
23 Q. Now, sir, when you started work in Musala in
24 June of 1992, were you a member of the TO?
25 JUDGE JAN: I think he said that.
1 A. Yes, at the time, all the units were members
2 of the TO.
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Are you not receiving
4 any --
5 MS. McHENRY: I think after Ms. Residovic it
6 was still on Bosnian so I missed that.
7 Q. Were you a member of the military police,
9 A. Yes, please, I beg your pardon? No, I was
10 never a member of the military police, except in the
11 former army in 1983.
12 JUDGE JAN: He is a member of the TO. How
13 can he be a member of the --
14 MS. McHENRY: MUP, if I understand correctly,
15 MUP is different than the military police.
16 Q. Sir, is it the case that at some point there
17 were members of the TO that were members of the
18 military police, even if it wasn't you?
19 A. No, the military police, at the time, came
20 from the HVO.
21 Q. Did there ever come a time where the TO or
22 the Bosnian army had military police?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. You indicated you were never a member of the
25 military police. Were any of the people who worked in
1 Musala, to your knowledge, members of the military
3 JUDGE JAN: Military police of the TO?
4 A. Possibly.
5 MS. McHENRY:
6 Q. Is it your testimony, sir, that you don't
7 know whether or not that the guards who worked under
8 you were members of the military police or not?
9 A. I don't know.
10 Q. Do I assume then, sir, have you no idea if
11 Mr. Landzo was ever a member of the military police?
12 A. Possibly, but at what time? At what period
13 of time, I don't know, because the first police was
14 formed by the HVO, and who among the Bosniaks was a
15 member of that military police, I don't know.
16 Q. When Mr. Landzo came to Musala to work, do
17 you know if he was a member of the TO or not?
18 A. Madam, the whole of Konjic had its pride, and
19 whoever had a uniform, even ladies, they would put them
20 on. And who belonged to the TO in a town or a
21 municipality with 50.000 inhabitants, I know most of
22 those people, but who actually were members, I really
23 don't know. People found their own way to get a hold
24 of weapons, but how the paperwork was done, I really
25 don't know.
1 Q. Well, sir, my question had specifically to do
2 with the time that Mr. Landzo worked in Musala. Do I
3 understand you that you don't even know during the time
4 he worked for you, you don't even know if Mr. Landzo
5 was a member of the TO or not; is that correct?
6 A. Of course, at that time, he was a member of
7 the TO, because all of us who were working at Musala
8 had our military booklets. We started off as the TO.
9 Later on, we became the army, the fourth corps, the
10 sixth corps and so on.
11 Q. Let me, sir, repeat something that you have
12 answered. During the time that Mr. Landzo worked for
13 you, are you able to say whether or not he was a member
14 of the military police?
15 JUDGE JAN: Do you see, the question is a
16 little confusing. To begin with, the TO had no
17 military police. Later on, the TO had it's own
18 military police. So be a little bit more clear.
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I think he can only
20 confirm he was a member of the TO when he was working
21 with him.
22 MS. McHENRY:
23 Q. Sir, is it correct that when Mr. Landzo
24 worked for you, you don't know if he was a member of
25 the military police or not?
1 A. He couldn't have had two positions at the
2 same time. He could have been a member of the TO or a
3 member of the police. And as he was working with me
4 and Musala, he could only have been a member of the TO.
5 Q. So it's your understanding, sir, that
6 military police officers are not members of the TO; is
7 that correct?
8 A. No, no, you're confusing me.
9 JUDGE JAN: When you're talking of police,
10 there are two organisations there. The MUP, that is
11 also police; then the military police of the TO.
12 You're referring to a member of the military police of
13 the TO or a member of the TO?
14 MS. McHENRY: Yes. That's what I'm trying to
15 get at.
16 Q. Sir, isn't it the case that, at some point,
17 the TO had its own military police and persons could be
18 military police officers as well as members of the TO?
19 If that's not your understanding, just tell me.
20 A. I understand you fully now. A member of the
21 military police is, at the same time, a member of the
22 TO. And the military police, we know what the
23 assignments are of a military police. I said at the
24 beginning that I was never a member of the military
25 police. I wasn't a member at Musala. If Landzo was
1 with me in the unit, then he, too, was not in the
2 military police, but he was in the TO or the army.
3 Q. You indicated that Mr. Landzo started work in
4 Musala sometime in 1992. Can you give us an
5 approximate date or month when Mr. Landzo started
6 working as a guard in Musala?
7 A. I couldn't really tell you, but I know that
8 he spent quite a bit of time at Musala.
9 Q. Sir, would you agree with me then that before
10 he became -- well, let me just ask you. Before he
11 became officially a guard at Musala, would Mr. Landzo
12 sometimes come to Musala?
13 A. While I was in command, he did not, or at
14 least I didn't see him. Really, I didn't see him.
15 Q. Can you tell us, even within a month or two,
16 when Mr. Landzo started working in Musala?
17 A. It was the summer or maybe even the beginning
18 of the autumn, at the end of the summer, the beginning
19 of the autumn.
20 Q. Mr. Delic worked in Musala at some point,
21 didn't he?
22 A. Mr. Delic never worked at Musala.
23 Q. What was your exact title, sir, in Musala?
24 JUDGE JAN: He was the deputy commander.
25 A. Deputy warden of Musala and head of
2 MS. McHENRY:
3 Q. You indicated that Mr. Ismet Hebibovic was
4 your superior; is that correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. At least until sometime in November of 1992,
7 Mr. Mucic was Mr. Hebibovic's superior, wasn't he?
8 A. Until exactly which month, I couldn't say,
9 but he was.
10 Q. Do you know approximately what month
11 Mr. Mucic became Mr. Hebibovic's superior?
12 A. I don't know that. You would have to ask
13 Mr. Hebibovic.
14 Q. Do you know if it was before or do you know
15 who was Mr. Hebibovic's superior in June of 1992 when
16 you started working at Musala?
17 A. June '92? I'm afraid I couldn't answer that
18 question either.
19 Q. Who was Mr. Mucic's superior?
20 A. I don't know that. So many commanders
21 changed in Konjic that I really don't know. Let
22 Mr. Mucic tell you.
23 Q. Sir, how do you know that Mr. Delalic was not
24 Mr. Mucic's superior if you don't know who his superior
1 JUDGE JAN: How does that question arise?
2 MS. McHENRY: Ms. Residovic specifically
4 MS. RESIDOVIC: I did not put such a question
5 ever. I asked who was the gentleman's superior and
6 whether Mr. Delalic had any connection with Musala. So
7 I object to this kind of questioning.
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I don't see the
9 deduction that because he doesn't know whether he was
10 there or not, he must know who was superior? He
11 doesn't have to answer.
12 MS. McHENRY:
13 Q. Sir, you indicated that there were some
14 prisoners in Musala who had come from Celebici;
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Do you know if these persons were considered
18 prisoners of war by the Bosnian army?
19 MR. MORAN: Objection, Your Honour. That
20 calls for a legal conclusion that this court has to
22 MS. McHENRY: Your Honour, if he says he
23 doesn't know, he doesn't know, but I am asking if he
24 knows at the time --
25 JUDGE JAN: Suppose he says "yes," would that
1 prove that they are prisoners of war? Suppose he says
2 "no," would that prove that they are prisoners of
4 MS. McHENRY: No, Your Honour, but I believe
5 how the Bosnian army viewed them is directly relevant
6 and --
7 JUDGE JAN: If you had some general of the
8 Bosnian army, you could have asked him.
9 MS. McHENRY: Your Honour, we did ask them,
10 and this person worked there. If he doesn't know, he
11 can say he doesn't know, but I certainly am allowed
12 to --
13 JUDGE JAN: He was at a much lower level.
14 MS. McHENRY: Your Honour, if the witness
15 says he doesn't know, certainly I won't --
16 JUDGE JAN: Suppose he says "yes," then --
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Ms. McHenry, you can
18 leave this question out and ask something else.
19 JUDGE JAN: Suppose he says "no," would that
20 prove they are prisoners of war?
21 MS. McHENRY:
22 Q. Sir, you indicated that prisoners were in
23 Musala to protect them; is that correct?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. Can you just explain what you mean by that?
1 A. I'll try. Whether you will understand me, I
2 don't know. The prisoners were placed there for the
3 following reason. After all, that was the beginning of
4 the aggression. All the media were reporting on rapes,
5 killings, expulsions, and so on. Let me avoid
6 enumerating all the details. Many people from Konjic
7 came from municipalities managing to escape the knife,
8 the bullet, or the shell. When they came there, they
9 wanted to go in and beat the prisoners. Can that be of
11 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I think it should be.
12 It's for protective custody, and the whole municipality
13 was against them.
14 A. You're right, Your Honour.
15 MS. McHENRY:
16 Q. I assume that these persons who were
17 detained, they weren't free to go? They weren't free
18 to leave Musala, were they?
19 A. No, they could not leave. They were not
20 allowed to leave Musala for reasons I've already
22 Q. Did those reasons have to do with the fact
23 that you said that they were carrying arms, or did it
24 have to do with your desire to protect the prisoners?
25 A. Madam, all the detainees who were kept at
1 Musala were caught with weapons on them. The Serbs who
2 lived in Konjic, who stayed in Konjic, many of them
3 didn't take weapons, and they still lived there. Many
4 people who were there in the camp, they still come to
5 Konjic. Every day they are coming to Konjic, even now.
6 Q. You indicated that sometimes when you were at
7 Musala, you went to the frontline, and sometimes
8 Mr. Landzo went with you. How frequently did
9 Mr. Landzo go to the frontlines with you,
11 A. I don't know the precise number. I said it
12 twice. Whenever I asked for volunteers, Mr. Landzo,
13 whom I can see here, volunteered, together with some
14 others who, unfortunately, are dead.
15 Q. At the frontline, what did Mr. Landzo do?
16 A. I see, Madam, that you don't know what the
17 frontline is. On the frontline, you have trenches; you
18 have machine guns. Mr. Landzo, who was in charge of a
19 place, either in the winter or in the summer, he had to
20 spend two to six hours there watching enemy trenches so
21 that we were not surprised by the enemy. And he had to
22 shoot if necessary and kill.
23 Q. So he shot. Did he ever help dig trenches or
24 did he just keep guard and shoot if necessary?
25 A. Of course all the trenches were dug by
1 ourselves and by the local people.
2 Q. Do you remember whether or not Mr. Landzo
3 ever helped dig a trench?
4 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, I'm going to
5 object to the relevance on this.
6 A. I can't tell you.
7 MS. McMURREY: I can't see the relevance of
8 whether he dug a trench or not, Your Honour.
9 A. I already told you that I can't tell you. I
10 don't know.
11 MS. McHENRY:
12 Q. Can you remember anything he did besides
13 stand and watch and then sometimes shoot?
14 A. What are you referring to, "shoot, watch"?
15 Q. You indicated that one of the things he would
16 do would be to watch the enemy trenches?
17 A. Yes, I understand you now. Of course, he
18 would shoot. I shot too and killed too to save my
19 family, my house. You would do the same.
20 Q. Sir, I'm not questioning what you did on the
21 frontline. I'm just asking you, in addition to that,
22 did you ever see Mr. Landzo do any other activities?
23 JUDGE JAN: Such as?
24 MS. McHENRY:
25 Q. Such as deliver reinforcements, deliver
1 weapons to someone in another position, march with you
2 from one position to another?
3 A. No, he did not. Short distances, yes.
4 Mostly we had the first battalion on the left bank of
5 the Neretva. We organised transportation to about 500
6 metres from the frontline.
7 Q. When Mr. Landzo went to the frontline, would
8 he usually get special transportation?
9 A. Mostly he did. It hardly ever happened that
10 we had no transportation. I can even give you the name
11 of the driver if you are interested in that.
12 Q. No, that's fine. Did you ever have any
13 conversation with Mr. Landzo about anything to do with
14 Celebici prison?
15 A. No, because I'm not interested in it.
16 Q. Did you even know that Mr. Landzo had ever
17 worked in Celebici?
18 A. I was told by others, or everybody that came
19 from there said that he was there with them. Some
20 dozen of them were transported, together with Broceta,
21 to where I was. My superior, he said that Esad was
22 with him.
23 Q. Did you ever hear any reports that detainees
24 were mistreated while in Celebici? I'm talking about
25 in 1992. Did you ever hear any reports that detainees
1 were mistreated in Celebici?
2 A. No, I did not. I heard about the murder of
3 Keljo and Klimenta and nothing else, and one of our
5 Q. Was it in 1992 that you heard about the
6 murder of Mr. Klimenta or was it later?
7 A. In 1992 or at the beginning of 1993.
8 Q. Do you know why certain detainees were kept
9 in Celebici and certain detainees were in Musala?
10 A. No, that wasn't my area. I wasn't in charge
11 of thinking about that.
12 Q. Sometimes detainees would be brought to
13 Musala from Celebici and you had no idea why. I'm just
14 making sure I understood you.
15 A. They were brought from there. I don't know
16 for what reason. Really, I don't.
17 Q. Now, did you yourself ever see Mr. Mucic at
18 Musala in 1992?
19 A. I think once or twice, I'm not sure exactly,
20 but once or twice.
21 Q. On the occasions when you saw Mr. Mucic in
22 Musala in 1992, what was he doing?
23 A. Mr. Mucic came once. I don't know exactly
24 the number of times he came. He brought some
25 certificates and he released a large number of
2 Q. Was there any other time that you saw him
4 A. I can't tell you.
5 Q. To your knowledge, did Mr. Mucic ever give
6 any instructions concerning how the prisoners in Musala
7 were to be treated?
8 A. I don't know that. As far as I know, the
9 warden doesn't know either, but he may know it better
10 than me.
11 Q. You talked about Mico Kuljanin. Why did Mico
12 Kuljanin have special privileges in Musala, if you
14 A. Why he had special privileges, I really don't
16 MS. McHENRY: Thank you. No further
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much.
19 Any re-examination?
20 MS. BOLER: Your Honour, I am going to have
21 some redirect. I wonder if I could just request a
22 short break to --
23 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: No, if you are not
24 ready, we will adjourn until tomorrow morning.
25 JUDGE JAN: I thought we could finish with
1 him today.
2 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I thought so but it
3 appears --
4 MS. BOLER: I spent time to get the witnesses
5 and go back and forth, so I just need a short break.
6 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You can get more tidier
7 tomorrow morning and then know how to organise your
9 MS. McMURREY: Your Honour, the registry and
10 I have worked out the fact that Dr. Verde will testify
11 without an Italian interpreter in the morning. So we
12 will proceed with Dr. Verde testifying in English.
13 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Following the
15 MS. McMURREY: Yes. It won't take long, I'm
16 sure. Thank you.
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: The Trial Chamber will
18 now rise and reassemble tomorrow at 10.00.
19 --- Whereupon hearing adjourned at
20 6.15 p.m. to be reconvened on Tuesday,
21 the 14th day of July, 1998 at 10.00 a.m.