1 Wednesday, 14 January 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning to everybody in and around the
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
9 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-81-T,
10 The Prosecutor versus Momcilo Perisic.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
12 Could we have appearances for today, starting with the
13 Prosecution, please.
14 MR. THOMAS: Good morning, Your Honours, and Happy New Year to
15 you and everyone in and around the courtroom. Barney Thomas appearing
16 for the Prosecution together with Carmela Javier.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, and for the Defence.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: Good morning.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning sir.
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: Happy New Year.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: To you too.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: I trust that everyone had an decent break and
23 some calm and some rest. I understand that Mr. Thomas certainly did and
24 I'm pleased about that. Appearing on behalf of the Defence today are Mr.
25 Novak Lukic, Tina Drolec, Daniela Tasic, Chad
1 and we have a new intern working with us today that's Mr. Eric Tully.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
3 Mr. Thomas any housekeeping.
4 MR. THOMAS: No, sir.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: No housekeeping.
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: None.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Your next witness,
8 Mr. Thomas.
9 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Your Honours, I call Major Bruurmijn,
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
12 [The witness entered court]
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning, sir. Will you please make the
15 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
16 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
17 WITNESS: HUBERTUS JOHANNES WILHELMUS BRUURMIJN
18 [Witness answered through interpreter]
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much sir. Good morning. You may
20 be seated.
21 THE WITNESS: [In English] Good morning.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may be seated.
23 Mr. Thomas, I see that the witness has given partly his names and
24 some partly his initials can we get the full names on the record.
25 MR. THOMAS: I will do that, Your Honour.
1 Examination by Mr. Thomas:
2 Q. Good morning, Major, are you comfortably settled there?
3 A. [Interpretation] I'm comfortably settled. Thank you.
4 Q. Can you begin, Major, please, with your full name and your date
5 of birth.
6 A. My full name is Hubertus Johannes Wilhelmus Bruurmijn. My date
7 of birth is 21 December 1964
8 Q. And, sir, what is your current occupation?
9 A. I am a military in the service of the Dutch Defence Services.
10 Q. What is your current rank?
11 A. I am a major.
12 Q. Major, we had listed, I think on our list of witnesses as a
13 lieutenant-colonel. I take it that was premature on our part?
14 A. Yes, unfortunately, it is.
15 Q. Could you tell us, please, a little of your military background
16 prior to your posting to Sarajevo
17 A. In January 1984, I entered -- when I had to do the draft I was
18 the platoon commander of a tank platoon, and during that period I liked
19 it so much that I signed on with the military. In 1987, as platoon
20 commander I was stationed for a reconnaissance platoon in Germany
21 there for four years. In 1991, I returned to the Netherlands and went to
22 a training centre to train others. And in 1993, I went to the School of
23 Military Information Services to train people in combat information
25 Q. And in 1995, Major, were you posted as part of the UNPROFOR force
1 to Sarajevo
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. When did you arrive in Sarajevo
4 A. I no longer remember the exact date. We initially arrived in
6 there for some more training, and subsequently some of us went on to
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I just get clarification. Was the witness a
9 member of UNPROFOR or UNMO?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was UNMO.
11 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: And while we are there, what does the acronym SMID
13 stand for?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] School of Military
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
17 You may proceed, Mr. Thomas.
18 MR. THOMAS:
19 Q. Following your training or period in Zagreb, how soon thereafter
20 were you posted to Sarajevo
21 A. Immediately after the training in Zagreb, which lasted at most
22 two weeks, somewhere between ten days and two weeks.
23 Q. And -- and what role were you posted to in Sarajevo?
24 A. As UNMO, so as United Nations Military Observer.
25 Q. Can you explain, please, for the Trial Chamber what that means.
1 A. As a military observer, you're unarmed and you're part of an
2 international team comprising between 10 and 14 people who were assigned
3 an area to patrol or to observe. I -- you live among the people, so
4 you're not stationed at an UN base, and you have to arrange your
5 accommodations, and from those accommodations either you man an observer
6 post or you patrol the area or you talk to the warring parties.
7 What matters most is to be the eyes and ears of the UN.
8 Q. So specifically what was your function?
9 A. I was a member of an UNMO team, and my main responsibility was to
10 observe and register what happened in the city and to compile a report
11 about that.
12 Q. And who did you report to?
13 A. There was an UNMO organisation sector headquarters in the UN
14 sector headquarters at the PTT building in Sarajevo, and that's where the
15 reports were submitted. Patrol reports were always in writing. Reports
16 of investigations into incidents were also in writing. Only if you were
17 in the observation posts did you submit your reports by radio of shooting
19 Q. And how long did you stay in Sarajevo
20 A. All together somewhere between five and six months, except for
21 leave periods.
22 Q. Do you recall the -- the end of the war with the signing of the
24 A. The moment the Dayton
25 believe that the signatures -- it wasn't -- it wasn't signed until I was
1 back in the Netherlands
2 Q. Okay. Can you tell us something about the training you received
3 in Zagreb
4 A. The training in Zagreb
5 affairs; for example, to see whether driving skills were adequate. You
6 were taught about connecting Motorola equipment used by the UNMOs. Your
7 English skills were tested and you were trained to analyse craters. So,
8 for example, how you could determine from which angle a grenade had been
10 Q. Now, when you talk about craters, what are you talking about?
11 A. Craters, traces that remained behind, either on paved or unpaved
12 surfaces following a grenade that fell and the impact of a grenade or
13 bottom with the consequence of an artillery or mortar grenade.
14 Q. And, specifically, what was your training in crater analyse
15 designed to enable you to do?
16 A. In crater analysis you learn, first of all, to determine how --
17 to determine what the trail looks like, what the crater looks like. And
18 the shards have flown away from the point of impact, so you learn to see
19 what the front end of the projection was and then you use two wooden
20 stakes to pull a line down the centre, and then you use a compass to
21 determine the main direction, from which the grenade arrived, from which
22 the impact came.
23 So, essentially, crater analysis teaches you to determine the
24 direction of origin of a grenade.
25 Q. Major, the translation I'm getting is that this is in relation to
1 grenades. Was -- was your crater analysis training limited to just an
2 examination of grenade craters or other types of shells?
3 A. It was about explosives that hit the ground from a certain
4 trajectory. They could be mortar or artillery grenades or bombs dropped
5 by air planes as well.
6 Q. During your time in Sarajevo
7 analyses to determine source or origin of fire?
8 A. Yes. I performed crater analysis both on artillery shootings and
9 mortar shooting and on improvised airplane bombs dropped with MRS
11 Q. Could you just explain the term you have just given us, regarding
12 the rockets, Colonel -- Major?
13 A. That would be MLRS and that stands for multiple rocket launch
14 system. MLRS and those are ordinarily rockets fired from a vehicle with
15 multiple rockets at once.
16 Q. Major, thank you. I'd like to return to that point a little
17 later on. But, first can you tell us what the -- or describe the
18 situation in Sarajevo
19 A. At that time, a cease-fire was in effect between the warring
20 parties, but shooting incidents regularly erupted between the parties and
21 these shooting incidents on the front lines might last one to ten
22 minutes, and then there was intensive firing.
23 In addition, at that point, many sniper incidents took place, and
24 what was remarkable to me was that the majority or, rather, all victims
25 that we examined were children or elderly people who were clearly present
1 as non-combatants.
2 In other respects the situation was quite surprising in the city
3 because the city had been under siege for three years by then. I
4 expected to arrive in an area where people lived exclusively from
5 shelters, but the population, nonetheless, tried to maintain a normal way
6 of life, although I do have to say that at one moment, things appeared
7 relatively normal in the city; and then, at other moments if there was a
8 threat of shelling or sniping, there would be massive panic, massive
9 fear, and within a minute, the streets could suddenly be empty.
10 Q. Major, just one further point of clarification. You've described
11 events affecting the population of Sarajevo. In what part of Sarajevo
12 are you describing? The part held by which forces?
13 A. My patrol area was limited to the Bosniak area of the city. I
14 was unable to move freely on the Serb side. In addition, the UNMO teams
15 were arranged officially as one team, but one team would have a group on
16 the Serb side and the other part of the team would be on the Bosnian
17 side. I was assigned to the Bosnian side.
18 Q. Now, you have describe add situation of a cease-fire when you
19 first arrived in Sarajevo
20 A. No. Some time in late May -- well, you might wonder what is a
21 cease-fire, if firing incidents happened regularly any way. However, by
22 late May, it was clear that the cease-fire was really over. There was
23 one day that both parties fired a lot of mortars and artillery at each
24 other, and from that point onward, it was, once again, an all-out war.
25 Q. From late May until the end of the war in 1995, was there any
1 change in that situation in Sarajevo
2 A. Yes. First of all, following -- or, rather, I believe it was
3 following that day when everybody started firing mortars and artillery
4 again, the UN issued various ultimatums both to the Bosnian and the Serb
5 sides. These concerned stopping the firing and for the Serbs to remove
6 heavy artillery for several kilometres. I don't remember that off the
7 top of my head anymore how many, but also for the Bosnians to place their
8 artillery in storage sites. And at that point, there were NATO
10 At first, only on the Bosnian Serbs and then another ultimatum
11 was issued and UNMOs were taken hostage by the Serbs and then the run-up
12 to Srebrenica started; and during that period, the incidents shifted from
13 sniping to more shooting mortars to the areas, shooting mortars at the
14 areas, excuse me.
15 In July, Srebrenica happened. After Srebrenica, NATO launched
16 massive air-strikes on the Serb installations and then the Croats started
17 up Operation Storm to conquer Krajina and that took us into August and
18 then October; and at that point it became clear that the Serbs were
19 loosing a lot of ground and the Dayton
20 What you see from April and May up to that period, is a build up
21 of hostilities culminating in the massive intervention by NATO an
22 operation storm by the Croats.
23 Q. How did these events that you described affect or not affect what
24 happened in Sarajevo
25 A. Yes, there was an effect both on the population, and it also
1 affected the number of incidents that took place in the city. As I said,
2 at first in April and early May there was sniping and incidentally firing
3 interactions on the front line, and then the firing incidents became more
4 intense at the confrontation line. And a Bosnian offensive followed.
5 Initially they gained some ground on the Serbs, but at the end of
6 that day or the day afterwards, the Serbs reversed that. Yes, it
7 certainly affected the population, especially around the fall of
8 Srebrenica. The population felt very much abandoned by the UN, and --
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: I object to the -- to the narrative form of the
10 answer as well as I'd like to get some clarification with regard to -- if
11 at all possible the dates that the witness is speaking to.
12 He has mentioned a Bosnian offensive without a date. Apparently
13 that offensive then was rejected, when that occurred we don't know. Then
14 it moved up to the fall of Srebrenica, which is a different issue in a
15 different location. If we could go perhaps -- proceed by question and
16 answer with regard to the general question that Mr. Thomas has asked
17 concerning the -- how the events affected what happened in Sarajevo
18 be fine. The answer is somewhat vague and elusive in form.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Actually what is your objection? You started off
20 by saying you object to the narrative form of the answer --
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I object to the answer
22 being non-responsive to the question asked and specifically, and it's
23 vague with regard to dates, since we're covering a long period of time
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Thomas.
1 MR. THOMAS: Well, Your Honour, the answer is certainly
2 responsive to the question that I posed. Clearly more specific details
3 are required, but I was allowing the major to complete his answer before
4 we filled in those gaps. But I recognise that we are getting a very long
5 answer from the major, and I can take him step by step, sir, through
6 the --
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you do recognise that, then cut him short where
8 you think he has given you a sufficient answer to your question. Thank
10 MR. THOMAS:
11 Q. Major, I'm particularly interested here in the effect upon the
12 civilian population, in terms of how these events translated into any
13 actions, if any, taken against the civilian population of Sarajevo
14 described a number of events beginning with the lead-up to Srebrenica and
15 then continuing through to the end of the war. Can you describe for us
16 what happened to the civilian population during that period.
17 A. Initially the civilian population was affected especially by the
18 sniping incidents. This instigated fear among the population. There
19 were several sites in the city where there was an elevated risk of being
20 shot if you even appeared there.
21 In the beginning, and I'm talking about April and early May,
22 utilities in the city such as electricity and gas were available, and, of
23 course, that had -- had an impact on the water facilities as well. After
24 the day of intensive shooting, both the gas and the electricity were cut
25 off from the Serb area. So there was virtually no electricity or gas
1 anymore in the city, and, of course, that negatively affected the
3 Q. Now, you described shelling that took place between the two
4 forces in May 1995. Was there any other shelling between the two forces
5 in Sarajevo
6 A. Yes. From that period in May, shooting was commonplace at the
7 city, so there were two different aspects here. On the one hand, some of
8 the shooting was directed at military targets, or, rather, short-term
9 military targets, so shooting at a confrontation line to achieve a
10 certain objective or at a vehicle that was positioned somewhere to
11 neutralize that vehicle, but then there were also multiple shells that
12 were fired in rapid succession and then there was some other attacks
13 that, in my view, targeted only the civilian population. Those were
14 single-shell attacks or a single bomb directed at places where there were
16 Q. How often would these attacks on civilians occur?
17 A. I can't give you exact figures anymore. I don't remember that.
18 When I'm referring to generalities, it wasn't daily, but it did happen
19 several times a week; and the majority of those shooting incidents took
20 place in the older section of Sarajevo
21 patrolled. I was at the west of Sarajevo
22 Q. Do you know what ordnance was used to carry out these attacks
23 against civilians?
24 A. The translation is in error.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: At this point based upon the witness' previous
1 answer, I'm going to object on the grounds of hearsay.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Thomas.
3 MR. THOMAS: Sir, I can lay a foundation for the question I've
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: By all means.
6 MR. THOMAS:
7 Q. Major, as a -- as an UNMO, were you privy to the reports filed by
8 other UNMOs in -- in Sarajevo
9 A. Yes. First, you would hear reports over the radio as soon as a
10 shooting incident took place. You could hear that, and all UNMOs were on
11 the same frequency, so you would hear what was happening and where an
12 investigating team had been sent. And in the period of June and July, I
13 spent six weeks at the headquarters or the headquarters sector in
15 writing reports received over the radio and to draft the daily sitrep and
16 that was also where all written reports were submitted by the teams; and
17 as a consequence that's where I read all filed all written reports as
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: What is a sitrep?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A situation report, explaining what
21 transpired that day in terms of general affairs and incidents and
22 predictions as to what lies ahead in the coming period.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I request that whenever you use acronyms that
24 were peculiar to your situation you explain them to us, sir.
25 MR. THOMAS:
1 Q. Major, then based on your own direct observations and the
2 information you received from other sources, can you describe for us or
3 tell us what type of ordnance was commonly used in the shelling attacks
4 against civilians?
5 A. It -- you mean what kind of munitions? Ordnance is munitions.
6 [In English] Sorry there are some translation problems at this point.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: You want to switch over to English there.
8 A. The English one which I saw on the screen, I can answer that one.
10 [Interpretation] The munitions used for shooting if we're talking
11 about the civilian population, consists primary of mortar shells and
12 several times improvised airplane bombs were used that were driven,
13 powered by MLRS.
14 As far as I can remember, I don't remember artillery shells at
15 the population.
16 Q. When did you first encounter air bombs?
17 A. We were aware from the reports that it was happening both around
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: It's -- it's --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On or around.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 1 June or 1 July.
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm going to object as non-responsive to the
24 question. The question is, When did you first encounter air bombs.
25 Which is to follow up with something else afterwards, that's fine. But
1 the question is quite specific as to when did this witness first
2 encounter air bombs.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, I just want to understand what
4 Mr. Guy-Smith --
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: The answer is non-responsive to the question
6 propounded. The question is when did you first encounter air bombs?
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is that a ground of objection? Surely.
8 MR. GUY-SMITH: The ground is that the answer is non-responsive.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you objecting to what the witness is saying or
10 are you objecting to what -- [Overlapping speakers]
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: The question is fine. I'm saying that the answer
12 is non-responsive.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's fine. Then just wait for your colleague
14 and see what he does with it.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH: I did wait for my colleague, and my colleague did
16 nothing with it. And because he did nothing with it, I'm moving to limit
17 the witness' answer when the witness is not responding to the question
18 propounded by my colleague.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Where did you wait, sir? Because the question was
20 asked at page 14, line 8:
21 "When did you first encounter air bombs."
22 "We were aware from the reports that it was happening both around
24 And at that time -- and at that time you intervened.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: That's correct because is not responsive to the
1 question. But the question deals with whether he went and encountered.
2 Does it say time specific question.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: My points is, you didn't wait for your colleague
4 to correct that.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: I looked at my colleague, and based upon my
6 perception of my colleague's body language, my colleague was not going to
7 do anything about it.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm sorry, Mr. Guy-Smith, we don't have the
9 perception of your colleague's body language on the record; so we cannot
10 deal with that at this stage.
11 May you proceed. Objection is overruled.
12 MR. THOMAS:
13 Q. Major, if you could continue with your answer, please.
14 A. Before July 1st, all I have is hearsay as to what type of
15 improvised munitions there might be. On 1 July, there was an explosion
16 there Hrasnica, and I went there; and together with a colleague in the
17 Bosnian authorities, I conducted an investigation, and our conclusion
18 based on that investigation, was that that was an air bomb that was fired
19 by MLRS rockets.
20 Q. Prior to 1st July 1995
21 capacity as an UNMO, were you aware of air bombs used against the
22 civilian population in Sarajevo
23 A. Yes, I was.
24 Q. What are air bombs?
25 A. The air bomb we're referring to here are airplane bombs that are
1 ordinarily dropped by an airplane on a target; and in this case, when I
3 that MLRS rockets are attached to in some way or another to fire it. So
4 you don't need an airplane to get it to the target.
5 Q. How are they launched, the ones that had been modified in the way
6 you describe?
7 A. The way to launch such bombs is that you need some rails that the
8 bombs and rockets are on top of. They're several metres long. They need
9 to be stable because you don't want the rails to drop halfway through the
10 trajectory. The rails will need to be elevated to achieve an ideal angle
11 for launching the bombs -- rockets because in my view, you can't
12 determine accurately the distance that the bombs will travel. There are
13 multiple procedures for doing this. One is to adjust the angle of the
14 launching rails and the other is changing the location from where you are
15 launching, and what we understood about this an once an UNMO explained
16 this to me who had seen one of the trucks is that the rails were mounted
17 on the rear of an open truck; and that sounds logical to me so that you
18 can displace the rails that way.
19 Q. Which forces had air bombs?
20 A. We never determined that the Bosnian had them or used them. The
21 only site that we determined they were being launched from were the Serb
22 positions, and my colleague that told me he had seen one of those trucks
23 once, he was on the Serb side.
24 Q. Now, the air bombs that were used against the civilians of
1 it random apparently?
2 A. I know that apparently there was an attempt to use air bombs to
3 destroy the TV station. There were various attempts. One landed passed
4 the TV station; two landed in front of the TV station. One hit an
5 apartment building 25 metres from where I had rented a room, and one
6 landed on Hrasnica, and I conducted that investigation, and based on
7 reports from colleagues, at least one and probably others landed in the
8 old area of Sarajevo
9 Q. Compared to, say, a mortar which you have described as having
10 been commonly used when civilians were shelled, what -- what is the
11 destructive power of an air bomb?
12 A. The destructive power is several times greater, if we're talking
13 about a mortar shell that might weigh about ten kilograms. The air bomb
14 used in Hrasnica weighed approximately 230 kilograms so it had a fair
15 greater destructive power.
16 Mortar shell can't destroy a house, but an air bomb, if it lands
17 on a house, will destroy the house entirely and surrounding buildings
18 will also incur heavy damages.
19 Q. You've touched on this point already, Major, but can they be
20 launched with any real accuracy?
21 A. The air bomb that I investigated, there was no -- there was no
22 guiding system to change course after it was launched. Ordinarily a MLRS
23 rocket derives its stability either from rotation or from a different
24 way, and the way that the bomb was attached to the rocket excluded
25 rotation and we didn't find any other traces. In my opinion, it's a
1 highly inaccurate weapon, and if you aim to destroy a specific target,
2 that way you'll need do it by trial and error, simply fire it, see where
3 it lands and launch the next one, fire it, see if you had the same
4 deviation and then correct for that deviation.
5 Q. You described the rocket or the air bomb that you investigated as
6 having no guidance system. The other air bomb, the air bombs you have
7 described as having fallen on Sarajevo
8 any of them had guidance systems?
9 A. Do you mean a different one from the one that landed in Hrasnica.
10 Q. You have spoken of number of air bombs that had fallen on
12 systems to your knowledge?
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Did the witness investigate those? Or go and
14 observe them.
15 MR. THOMAS: Your Honour, I think he answered it was from
16 information he received but rather than find that point in the transcript
17 I can cover that with him briefly as well.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
19 MR. THOMAS:
20 Q. Major, you described, in addition to the 1 July air bomb which
21 you personally investigated, you described your knowledge of other air
22 bombs which landed on Sarajevo
23 ones which you personally attended or investigated?
24 A. No, I didn't conduct any investigations on those. I did see the
25 report about one of those bombs.
1 Q. In relation to that report which you saw, in relation to the
2 other bomb, was there any mention of a guidance system on that air bomb?
3 A. No. That report did not mention a guidance system.
4 Q. In your dealings with other UNMOs, would you -- would you discuss
5 or share information about air bombs or air bomb incidents?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Were you ever given information that any air bomb had a guidance
8 system on it?
9 A. No. The only information about that once I saw photographs of
10 one of those air bombs, that was a different model that the one that
11 landed on Hrasnica. There were no indications that that had a guidance
12 system either. And in discussions, the only thing mentioned that -- was
13 that what was found was only mechanical in the sense that the rockets
14 were attached and apparently it was fired according to the principle of,
15 We'll see where that lands and possibly correct the path. But there was
16 never any question of a guidance system being attached to the rockets or
17 the bomb.
18 Q. Major, I'd like to turn now to the 1 July 1995 incident in
19 Hrasnica, of which you've already touched upon.
20 MR. THOMAS: Your Honour, this is scheduled incident number A8.
21 I wonder if we could have 65 ter Exhibit 2719 on the screen, please.
22 And, Your Honours, this is map 8 in the court binder, the Prosecution
23 court binder that has been provided to you.
24 Q. Major, do you have that match on your screen in front of you? Do
25 you recognise that map?
1 A. Yes. That's the map probably at a scale of 1:50.000 of Sarajevo
2 Q. Sir, at this point, can we please tender the blank map as an
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Map 8, is admitted into evidence. May it please
5 be given an exhibit number?
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours that will be Exhibit P439.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
8 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Your Honours. Thank you,
9 Madam Registrar.
10 And, Madam Registrar, or Mr. Usher, is there a way we can
11 enlarge, please, the bottom two thirds of the map, please?
12 Q. First of all, Major, can you point out for Their Honours where
13 Hrasnica is on that map?
14 MR. THOMAS: Maybe with the assistance -- we'll do it that way.
15 There is an electronic pen that you use, Major, if Mr. Usher can just
16 provide that to you. And tell us if the need the area enlarged a little
17 more. I think, in fact, that might be useful, Your Honours. Again, the
18 bottom half of the map of Hrasnica, all right.
19 Q. If we enlarge that area a little more, are you able to pinpoint
20 more accurately the scene of the incident on 1 July 1995? And if you
21 can't, please say so?
22 A. I can't do that more accurately. As far as I know that's one of
23 the houses that circles just a tiny bit too high. I think that was one
24 of the houses in the circle. But I cannot tell you 100 percent
25 accurately. I can no longer give the coordinates on the map of that.
1 Q. Before we go any further, could you mark the larger circle you
2 have drawn being the area of Hrasnica, with the letter a?
3 A. [Marks]
4 Q. And could you mark the smaller circle, being the area slightly
5 above, as I understand it, the scene of the air bomb impact as -- as B,
7 A. [Marks]
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Thomas, six months down the line when we read
9 this map, I'm not -- I can't guarantee I will be able to recognise that
10 structure as an A and a B.
11 MR. THOMAS: All right. I agree, Your Honour.
12 I wonder if we could start again.
13 Could we have P439 up on the screen, please, which is the blank
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Microphone not activated].
16 MR. THOMAS: Ah, perfect.
17 Q. Can you mark with a cross, please, Major, the scene of the impact
18 as best as you can recall it now.
19 A. [Marks]
20 Q. All right. Thank you.
21 MR. THOMAS: Your Honours, can we tender that marked map as a
22 Prosecution exhibit, please.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: The marked map is admitted into evidence. May it
24 please be given an exhibit number.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P440.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
2 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you, Madam Registrar.
3 Thank you, Mr. Usher, that is it all we need of your services at
4 the moment.
5 Q. While I'm asking the next series of questions, Your Honours, I
6 wonder if 65 ter 01383 can come up on the screen, page 4 it will take
7 some time to load, so I can use the time with other question.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: 65 ter?
9 MR. THOMAS: 01383 and the page that I'm looking for, Your
10 Honours is page 4.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
12 MR. THOMAS:
13 Q. First of all, when did you arrive at the scene?
14 A. It was in the evening of 1 July 1995. I no longer remember the
15 exact time, but it would have been around 2100 hours, perhaps a bit
17 Q. Is the scene in Bosnian-held part of Sarajevo or the Bosnian
18 Serb-held part of Sarajevo
19 A. It was in the Bosnian part of Sarajevo.
20 Q. Okay. And what was the purpose of your attendance at the scene?
21 A. Shortly before, there was a radio announcement by
22 Captain Frank Melum of an explosion at his UNMO team site. After that,
23 there were radio reports about injured from his team at that explosion
24 that there was a -- that there was an attack site and that he wanted
25 support at his location and the operations officer, a Danish captain,
1 Hansen, decided that he would head in that direction and he needed
2 somebody to accompany him; and at that precise moment I had finished my
3 duty officer shift, so he asked me to ride with him to Hrasnica, and we
4 -- the two of us got in the car and drove to Hrasnica.
5 Q. And what did you find when you arrived there?
6 A. There was substantial disorder. You see that on the photographs.
7 The top photograph reveals the site where the bomb exploded. There was a
8 shed garage there where you see the crater, and you can see that the
9 house behind it is seriously damaged.
10 The second photograph, and you see a white car in front of that,
11 that's the UNMO team house. He was staying on the first flight up of
12 that home and the ground floor, the landlord and his family lived; and
13 can you see that that building is seriously damaged. The car in front is
14 an UN car and as can you see it is seriously damaged.
15 Before that, when I arrived, there was still an armoured UN car
16 which was admittedly damaged but still drivable, and there was still
17 quite a few people milling about, and the majority of the UNMO team had
18 been evacuated to the hospital and the UNMO team leader,
19 Captain Frank Melum, was also on site. Also on site was the Bosnian
20 chief of police, together with a police officer. They were present in
21 the building.
22 Q. I want to take us through that one step at a time please,
24 Firstly, Major, sorry. Firstly, if we look at the top photograph
25 on the screen and if that could please be enlarged as much as it can be,
1 Mr. Usher.
2 First of all, you described a garage where the bomb had hit. Do
3 we see the garage in that photograph?
4 A. No. The garage is where -- was where you see the crater. That's
5 where the garage was. At least that is what I was told, because you
6 don't really see much left of that.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: And where is the crater? Can we point to the
8 crater, please.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Marks]
10 MR. THOMAS:
11 Q. Thank you, Major.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
13 MR. THOMAS:
14 Q. Before we go -- before we go any further, just dealing with the
15 crater, we see quite a large amount of shadowed area where you have
16 marked with the cross. Are you able on that photograph to -- to
17 basically draw the outline of the crater?
18 A. What I've indicated here are the contours and the general debris
19 that you see, to determine from which direction the shell landed. And I
20 could extend that a bit ... [Marks]
21 Q. All right. Thank you, Major. We'll come to your crater analysis
22 in a moment. But if we could scroll down, please, to the second
24 MR. THOMAS: Sorry, Your Honour, just before we do that, by
25 scrolling are we going to loose -- we are, I'm sorry.
1 Could we produce the marked photograph as an exhibit, please.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: The marked photograph is admitted into evidence.
3 May it please be given an exhibit number.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P441.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
6 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you, Madam Registrar.
7 Once that's done, Your Honour, could we please scroll down to the
8 second photograph.
9 Q. Now, Major, you describe someone as living in the top floor of
10 that building. You simply described him as he. Can you tell us who
11 occupied the top floor of the building?
12 A. Not the top floor. The first flight up, and that's where the
13 UNMO team resided. Under the aegis of Captain Frank Melum.
14 Q. And on the bottom floor you described the landlord and his family
15 as occupying that building. Is that right?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. And where, in relation to the previous photograph we've looked
18 at, is this house?
19 A. Using the previous photograph as a point of reference, this house
20 is to the left of that.
21 Q. If we scroll up, please, Mr. Usher, to the first photograph.
22 On the far edge, left hand edge of that photograph, do we see the
23 end of the same building, the UNMO building?
24 A. Yes, that would be the same house.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. THOMAS: Your Honours, could we produce this page of two
2 photographs as a Prosecution Exhibit.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: The two photographs are admitted into evidence as
4 an exhibit. May it please be given an exhibit number.
5 THE REGISTRAR: That would be exhibit P442, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
7 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Your Honour, Madam Registrar.
8 Q. As part of your duties at the scene, were you required to
9 investigate what had caused this damage?
10 A. Not at first. Ultimately, however -- no, excuse me. After all,
11 we were there to provide backup for Frank Melum's team but because all
12 his team members were either injured or no longer wanted to remain at
13 that site, I spent the night near Frank, and Frank did indeed have to
14 conduct the investigation of the impact and ordinarily these
15 investigations are conducted with more than one UNMO and I was the only
16 UNMO present, so that is why it was my duty to assist Frank the next
17 morning with the investigation.
18 Q. Were there casualties from this explosion?
19 A. Yes. Several UNMOs were injured by glass shards and in the
20 adjacent some people were injured as well. I'm not sure whether there
21 were any casualties.
22 Q. You mean casualties in the sense of fatalities?
23 A. That's correct.
24 Q. Okay. When did you conduct -- before I move on to the -- before
25 I move on to that.
1 Besides the damage to the building, or buildings, and besides the
2 obvious dealing with those injured, were there -- was there a lot of
3 activity around the scene when you arrived that evening?
4 A. There were still quite a few people out on the street. By then,
5 the police had calmed down and stabilized the area and didn't allow
6 anybody near the crater or into the house because shortly before that,
7 there had been at least two moments at which people tried to attack the
9 Q. Okay. Which team?
10 A. The UNMO team.
11 Q. All right. Once the area was secured, did you spend the night in
12 the UNMO house with Captain Melum?
13 A. Yes, I spent the night there. Captain Melum was worried that if
14 he left his team's site he would lose all the materials still present
15 there, given the two previous efforts to attack, so the population was
16 not truly favourably disposed because they assumed that the UNMO team or
17 the UN had been the target of that attack. So the captain was worried
18 that if he abandoned that team location, he would not be able to use that
19 location again, as the location for his team. That's the reason we spent
20 the night there and you wouldn't abandon an UNMO, you wouldn't leave him
21 alone at such a location.
22 Q. During the course of the evening, we don't need to go into what
23 Captain Melum told you, but during the course of the evening did you
24 discuss with Captain Melum what had occurred with the impact and the
1 A. Yes. We spent quite a while in the house clearing things up and
2 trying to correct things and damage, and we spoke extensively about what
3 had happened and what the consequences were and what would be possible
4 for the team in the future.
5 Q. The next morning then, did you and Captain Melum conduct an
6 investigation of the -- of the site?
7 A. Yes. We both conducted an analysis of the crater. At first, the
8 local police started analysing the crater, and we attended that and
9 examined what they did and then repeated that for ourselves, so that we
10 would have our own results as well.
11 Q. And when you say the local investigators, do you know which
12 organisation or agency they were from?
13 A. Yes, the local police. The Hrasnica chief of police was present
14 and his investigators performed the investigation.
15 Q. Now, in terms of your own investigation, in general terms, what
16 did you do? How did you conduct that investigation?
17 A. First you examined the dispersion pattern from the depth of the
18 crater, and you examine the pattern that the earth displaced the
19 wreckage, and you take a point of reference and from that point of
20 reference you move backward and you can span a line between that and then
21 you use your compass to establish the shooting direction and the path of
22 origin of the projectile; and then you look further into the hole to find
23 shards and other bits to see what type of projectile it was.
24 Q. Was -- was this the standard methodology that you had been
25 trained to employ?
1 A. Yes, that's how we learned it, and we had received an
2 instructional [as interpreted] map instructing that, if after a while,
3 you didn't know with 100 percent accuracy to do it then you could check
4 your map of instructions.
5 MR. THOMAS: Your Honours, I note the time. I'm just about to go
6 into the findings and now would be an appropriate time to stop.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. We will take a break and
8 come back at a quarter to 11.00.
9 Court adjourned.
10 --- Recess taken at 10.15 a.m.
11 --- On resuming at 10.46 a.m.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Thomas.
13 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Your Honours, could we please have 65 ter number 08595 on the
15 screen, please, page 2 of the English and page 2 of the B/C/S.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'd like to make a brief remark.
17 I see a small error in the translation on the transcript that
18 appears on my screen.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Where, sir?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The English translation reads an
21 instructional map. The English word shouldn't be instructional map it
22 should be aide-memoire. Map refers to a map, and this is an
23 aide-memoire, so a list of instructions.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, sir.
25 Yes, Mr. Thomas.
1 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, sir.
2 Q. Major, we have a document in English and in B/C/S on the screen
3 in front of you. Is this a document that you were able to review
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. Okay. And this was not a report that you yourself prepared. Is
7 that right?
8 A. That's also correct.
9 Q. But upon reviewing the contents of this document, and I'm talking
10 about the three pages that constitute the team report.
11 MR. THOMAS: So I wonder if we could just go through the next --
12 or just briefly have the next two pages up on the screen as well, Your
13 Honour, please, one after another. And just, finally, the third page of
14 that same document.
15 Q. Now, that is a -- a report that records the observations and
16 comments of the UNMOs who were present at the house at the time of the
17 explosion; is that right?
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. Although you yourself did not prepare this report, to the
20 contents, nevertheless, are they consist with what Captain Melum
21 described to you throughout the course of the evening you spent with him
22 and your own observations, both that night and the day after?
23 A. Yes, that's correct.
24 MR. THOMAS: I'd like to turn, Your Honours, please, to page 7 of
25 the same document, both page 7 in the English and page 7 in the B/C/S.
1 Q. Major, do you recognise this document?
2 A. Yes, I do. That's the report following the crater analysis and,
3 as you can see, my signature appears at the bottom right. I signed that
4 as well.
5 Q. That contains what you found and a record of your findings, in
6 terms of direction of fire; is that right?
7 A. That's correct, and that also indicates what type of bomb was
9 Q. I want you to look at paragraph 2, please. And is there a
10 correction that you would like to maybe to paragraph 2?
11 A. Yes. I see there it reads that we believed - how should I put
12 this? - that the bomb and the driving object were deliberately released
13 during the trajectory. I don't believe that's correct. I don't think it
14 was deliberate. I think that the propulsion of the -- was released
15 during the trajectory but that it was not deliberate.
16 Q. Does that correction in any way affect your conclusions as to
17 source or direction of fire?
18 A. No, that would not affect them.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Thomas, I have difficulty with that
20 correction. My difficulty arises from the fact that this -- at the
21 bottom of this report, it is signed by two people and the core author is
22 not here to confirm the correction. What do we do about that?
23 MR. THOMAS: Maybe we can -- I can discuss the reason for the
24 correction a little with the Major, sir, and that might allow
25 Your Honours to resolve that conflict.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: I doubt it. I think I would need the core author
2 also to confirm the resolution of the problem.
3 MR. THOMAS: I can take it as far as I can with him, sir, and see
4 where that gets us.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: We are in your hands.
6 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, sir.
7 Q. You've described that the weapon involved was an air bomb and
8 given the details of that particular part of the projectile in your
9 report, and you also described that it had attached to it a rocket
10 assembly made up a pair of three different calibre rockets.
11 Can you explain to us what you found, in relation to the bomb, on
12 the one hand, and the rocket assembly on the other?
13 A. First of all, there were not three different calibres of rockets;
14 there were only two calibres. During the crater analysis, we found only
15 parts of the bomb, no tail piece that would ordinarily be attached to a
16 bomb, exclusively the smooth body of the bomb, nor did we find any item
17 such as electronic devices or other mechanical means to indicate that you
18 want the bottom to do something after a certain period of time, other
19 than the delayed mechanism causing the bomb to explode.
20 The rockets that we found, those were six MLRS rockets, and there
21 was a type of adapter plate that was used to attach the rockets to the
22 body of the bomb, and we did not observe any traces of an explosion there
23 or of anything to ensure a mechanical release. To me, that suggests that
24 there was a -- either a small explosion that separated the two or that
25 there was some timed released mechanism and that's why I don't entirely
1 agree with what I signed at the time in paragraph 2; namely, a deliberate
2 release of -- between the propulsion and the explosive.
3 Q. If there had been a release mechanism attached to this
4 projectile, would you have expected to have found any traces of that?
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes Mr. Guy-Smith.
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'll let it go.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. As I said previously, you
8 would have needed to see something at the attachment plate that would
9 have attached the rockets to the body of the bomb, or you would have seen
10 traces of a small explosive charge being detonated that separated the
11 two, and nothing along those lines was visible there.
12 MR. THOMAS:
13 Q. If you had found something of that nature, would that have been
14 recorded in a report such as this?
15 A. Yes. Specifically because that indicates how something is
16 launched or how the distance of such a projectile could be determined.
17 Distance might not be the correct word. It would be the effective
19 Q. Major, the translation I got was "effective conveyance." What do
20 you mean by that?
21 A. [In English] Effective conveyance well, I don't know the word
22 conveyance in this setting, but it would be the effective range or range
23 which you want to achieve.
24 Q. All right. Thank you, Major.
25 MR. THOMAS: Can we turn to the next page, please, Your Honours.
1 I'm sorry, we'll need page 9 in the B/C/S. No, my apologies. We have
2 the right page. And if the sketch could please be rotated.
3 Q. Do you recognise that sketch, Major?
4 A. Yes. [Interpretation] Yes, that's a sketch that I drew myself.
5 Q. All right. Of?
6 A. That's the sketch reflecting our assessment of how the complete
7 projectile appeared when it was launched, of which only the air bomb
8 impacted next to the house where the UNMOs were and the base plate
9 that -- and the rockets as they were found, 150 metres in front of it.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MR. THOMAS: Your Honours, could we please produce or tender
12 pages 2 through to 8 of 65 ter 8595 as an exhibit, please.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Thomas, all those pages that you are referring
14 to mentioned at various places, various kind of -- kinds of acronyms,
15 which I don't understand. If you look at the team report itself, from
16 the beginning of the report, in the last line of paragraph 2, there's SX
17 acronym. In the next paragraph, there's R2 at SX.
18 MR. THOMAS: Yes, sir.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: I don't know what R2 is. The next page is R1 and
20 DO at the bottom of the page. These are all acronyms that I'm not going
21 to know what they mean when I do read this report later, and I don't know
22 whether you are able to help us through this witness.
23 MR. THOMAS: I can certainly try to do that, sir.
24 Could we please begin with -- could we please have two up on the
1 Q. Now, Major, you will see in the second-to-last line of
2 paragraph 2, a reference to Captains Melum and Hache. Is that how you
3 pronounce his name?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Helped return them while Captain Silva reported the situation to
7 Do you know what SX stands for?
8 A. Yes. Sierra/X-ray was the call sign of the UNMO sector
9 headquarters in Sarajevo
10 Q. If we go to the second to last line of the next paragraph, there
11 is another reference to Captain Melum calling R2 at SX. Do you know what
12 R2 at SX denotes. We know what SX is; what is R2?
13 A. R2 was the radio call sign of one of the operations officers,
14 Romeo 1 was the call sign of a different operations officer. So those
15 denote officers.
16 Q. If we go to the next page, please, Madam Registrar, the last line
17 of that page -- sorry the last paragraph of that page, we see the
18 reference to DO.
19 A. DO is the abbreviation denotes duty officer.
20 Q. And in the final line of the same document on the next page, do
21 we see -- I'm sorry, we see the reference to MPs.
22 A. MP is the abbreviation for military police.
23 Q. Okay. Can we go, please, to page 7, which is your crater
25 First entry paragraph 1, under paragraph 1 we see grid BP 839,
1 525. Can you tell us, please, what that refers to?
2 A. Grid Bravo Papa and then the numbers denote the coordinates to
3 100 metres accuracy on the map.
4 THE INTERPRETER: Excuse me, the coordinates.
5 MR. THOMAS:
6 Q. Paragraph 2, that is main paragraph 2, not bracket paragraph 2.
7 We have reference to: "The weapon observed in flight by OP 4."
8 What is OP 4?
9 A. OP 4 denotes observation post number 4. That would have been one
10 of the observation posts manned by UNMOs.
11 Q. Thank you, Major. I hope I have covered them all sufficiently,
12 Your Honour.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Thomas.
14 MR. THOMAS: Thank you. In which case could we please produce
15 pages 2 to 8.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Pages 2 to 8 -- sorry. When you say pages 2, do
17 you mean the -- starting from team report.
18 MR. THOMAS: Yes, sir. I didn't refer to the cover page.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Pages 2 to 8 of that document are admitted
20 into evidence. May it please be given an exhibit number.
21 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P443, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
23 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 Q. Now we know that your conclusion was that this was an air bomb
25 modified in the way that have you described?
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Excuse me, sorry, Mr. Thomas.
2 Madam Registrar, the transcript says that will be Exhibit 443.
3 Is it 443 or 433?
4 THE REGISTRAR: It is 443, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: 443. Thank you so much.
6 You play proceed, Mr. Thomas.
7 MR. THOMAS:
8 Q. Major, can you please explain for us your conclusion as to the
9 line of fire. Where -- what direction had this air bomb come from? And
10 tell us if you need to refer to your analysis.
11 A. First, on the morning of 2 July, we performed the crater analysis
12 and that analysis yielded a direction, and if I'm correct it was between
13 280 and 320 degrees. The only reason I still remember that is because I
14 re-read the reports again yesterday. My memory is not that great. The
15 place where the rockets were found, so from the propulsion system at
16 approximately 150 metres from where the bomb exploded is along the same
17 lines so between 280 and 320 degrees; and if you carry that through, and
18 look at the observations from the observation post 4, then everything is
19 consistent, and there was nothing contradicting the conclusion that --
20 that the angle was between 280 and 320.
21 Q. Are you able to say, having made those findings, where the source
22 of fire was?
23 A. That would have been the Ilidza area, which was then in the hands
24 of the Bosnian Serbs.
25 MR. THOMAS: I wonder if we could have Exhibit P440 on the
1 screen, please.
2 Q. Major, you will recognise this as the map you had earlier marked
3 with the impact site. What I'd like to you do is identify for us on the
4 map where you considered the source of fire to be.
5 MR. THOMAS: And if we could have the left-hand half of the map
6 blown up, please.
7 A. The Ilidza area is approximately that area.
8 Q. Would you mark that, please, with the letter I, so we can
9 distinguish it from the other marking that we have there.
10 A. [Marks]
11 MR. THOMAS: And can we produce that, Your Honours, as a
12 Prosecution Exhibit.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: The map as marked.
14 MR. THOMAS: The map as marked for the second time.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: The map as marked for the second time as admitted
16 as an exhibit. May it please be given an exhibit number.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P444.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
19 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Mr. Usher, that's ... thank you,
20 Mr. Usher.
21 Q. Major, in the area where the air bomb landed, were there any
22 military targets?
23 A. At the exact site where the air bomb landed were no military
24 targets as far as I know. The only target of military value in the
25 surroundings was the Famos factory where I have heard that the Bosniaks
1 to produce munitions or weapons.
2 Q. And how far was this area which was hit by the air bomb from the
3 Famos factory?
4 A. I couldn't give you a precise answer. I would have to guess.
5 Q. Was it on the same firing line?
6 A. Approximately.
7 Q. I want to look, please, at document number 65 ter 04799, please.
8 MR. THOMAS: If we could have that on the screen.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: Before there's any answer given, I would object
10 to the relevance of this document being shown to this witness at this
11 time and ask for an offer of proof and any arguments to be made be made
12 outside the presence of the witness.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Thomas.
14 MR. THOMAS: I have no objection. I do want to be heard on the
15 matter, sir. I have no objection to the major leaving the courtroom
16 while we engage in that discussion.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Bruurmijn, can you excuse us for some few
18 minutes. We'll call you back.
19 [The witness stands down]
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: As I understand the exhibit being shown, this
22 exhibit involves an order dated the 6th of April, 1995 from
23 Dragomir Milosevic. We are dealing with an incident in July of 1995, and
24 based upon a plain reading of the order itself, it has no relevance to
25 the questions that have been asked of this particular gentleman. And
1 specifically, I refer the Court to the order which is to immediately
2 prepare a launcher with an aerial bomb and transport the bomb for
3 launching, and it is in response to specifically the fact that there have
4 been Muslim forces for the past three days attacking various positions.
5 So it is a fact-specific order dealing with an incident-specific issue,
6 is my initial submission.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Would you like to make a full submission,
8 Mr. Guy-Smith, so we don't keep standing up and down again.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: Surely.
10 This matter was fully litigated in the Milosevic case, and not
11 only was it fully litigated in the Milosevic case but the specific order
12 which is now been shown to this witness was relied upon by the
13 Prosecution with regard to the shelling of a residential area in Hrasnica
14 on the 7th of April, 1995
15 discussed in the Milosevic judgement from paragraphs 475 through and
16 including paragraph 495. The specific order which is being presently
17 shown to this witness is noted in footnote 1787 as P226, order by RSK
18 commander to prepare air bomb launcher dated 6 April 1995.
19 So it has been relied upon by the Prosecution for the purpose of
20 dealing with a very specific incident. That incident there has been a
21 finding of in a prior trial before the Tribunal, and it therefore has no
22 relevance whatsoever to these, proceedings, with regard to an incident
23 that occurred months after the order was issued.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Thomas.
25 MR. THOMAS: Two preliminary points first, Your Honours. The
1 first is that it is not intended to produce this witness -- produce this
2 exhibit or tender this exhibit through this witness. Plainly he is not
3 in a position to authenticate a RSK order.
4 Secondly, Prosecution does not rely on there exhibit or wish to
5 discuss the exhibit with is this witness for the purpose of demonstrating
6 that this order relates to this shelling which occurred on the 1st of
7 July, 1995.
8 The probative value of the exhibit and the relevance of the
9 exhibit lies in establishing that the Ilidza Brigade of the
10 Sarajevo Romanija corps had the capability to launch air bombs from the
11 location described here by Major Bruurmijn, that they had that capability
12 prior to the 1st of July, 1995; and therefore by demonstrating that they
13 had the capability to launch -- that they had air bombs, that they had
14 launchers, that they launched from Ilidza, that they plainly could have
15 launched at Hrasnica because that is actually specifically mentioned in
16 this particular order all provides corroboration for Major Bruurmijn's
17 find that source of fire was Ilidza because the capability can be
18 demonstrated as having existed at Ilidza.
19 My purpose in putting the document to him was to ensure that that
20 is a correct interpretation of that document. To ask him is what is
21 contained in that document consistent with the scenario that you have
22 reported on 1st July. We're not saying it is the same incident, but it
23 is important that if this document is to be relied upon for corroboration
24 that he can say, Yes, what is being described in that document is
25 effectively what did end up happening on the 1st of July. They had that
1 exact capability.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: So when you say at paragraph 42, line 1:
3 "My purpose in putting the document to him was to ensure that
4 that is a correct interpretation of that document.
5 Which document are you talking about?
6 MR. THOMAS: Of the order. In other words, my reading of the
7 order is that the Ilidza Brigade is being asked to launch an air bomb
8 from their position in Ilidza towards Hrasnica.
9 Now I need him to confirm that that happens to be the scenario
10 that he has described as relating to the 1 July 1995 incident.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: But he has told us the scenario, Mr. Thomas.
12 MR. THOMAS: He has, yes.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: I understand what you say the purpose of tendering
14 this document is.
15 MR. THOMAS: Yes.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: I just don't understand why you want him to give
17 an interpretation of this document.
18 MR. THOMAS: This document --
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: This document speaks for itself.
20 MR. THOMAS: I understand that, Your Honour. And I agree with
21 that, Your Honour. I do not want to be in a situation, however, where
22 the Prosecution is later relying on this document as corroboration of
23 Mr. Bruurmijn's findings and then being met with the objection well,
24 Major Bruurmijn was never provided or never cross-examined on this
25 particular document, the order, because it was never put to him. He was
1 never asked to confirm, and he was never asked to comment on it.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
3 Any reply Mr. Guy-Smith? None.
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm sorry, I apologise. I was double-checking
5 what Mr. Thomas just said.
6 I would -- I would never make the objection Mr. Thomas is
7 concerned about because I don't believe the document is relevant for the
8 purposes of this individual's testimony. He told us how he arrived at
9 his conclusions from where the air bomb came.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. I guess Mr. Thomas has explained the purpose
11 for wanting to tender this document not --
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: I don't think it is appropriate to come through
13 this witness. I don't think it is relevant as regards to this witness,
14 and I don't think this witness is in a position to speak to the document.
15 If I were to cross-examine the witness about the document - something I
16 would not do - but if I were to do that, I would probably -- I probably
17 be faced with objections with regard to whether or not the information
18 contained in this particular document is information upon which this
19 witness can testify. It's outside the purview of his knowledge, and it
20 is speculative. Any examination with regard to this would be
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you done? Thank you very much.
23 You may call the witness in.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 [The witness takes the stand]
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry about that, Major. Some of the vicissitude
2 in the trial.
3 The objection is overruled.
4 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. Major, we have a document on the screen which you yourself are
6 not the author of; correct?
7 A. That's correct.
8 Q. Now you had the opportunity to read this document yesterday in
9 English; is that correct?
10 A. That's also correct.
11 Q. I want to ask you some -- or a question about this document, but
12 I think given that you're testifying in Dutch, I should read it. It is
13 only a short document so that you get the complete Dutch translation
14 which you did not have yesterday; is that all right?
15 A. That's correct. I saw only the English version.
16 Q. Okay. The document is addressed from the Sarajevo Romanija Corps
17 command that is headed strictly confidential number 20/04-118, dated 6
18 April 1995, and addressed to the Ilidza Infantry Brigade.
19 It reads:
20 "For the past three days, Muslim forces have been attacking the
21 positions of the 2nd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade and the attacks are
22 particularly pronounced in the sector of the Famos factory.
23 "Several of our soldiers and a large number of civilians have
24 been wounded.
25 "In order to thwart the enemy and give them a warning them so
1 they are forced to accept this truce, I hereby order:
2 "1. The Ilidza Brigade will immediately prepare a launcher with
3 an aerial bomb and transport the bomb for launching. The most profitable
4 target must be selected in Hrasnica or Sokolovic colony where the
5 greatest casualties and material damage would be inflicted.
6 "Inform me personally of the readiness for implementation of this
8 And it is signed and stamped by the RSK Major-General
9 Dragomir Milosevic.
10 Major, you gave us your conclusions as to the nature of the
11 weapon, the line of fire, and the source of fire in relation to the air
12 bomb on the 1st of July, 1995. Given those findings, do you have any
13 comment to make in relation to this document that is now on the screen?
14 A. Yes, the assignment issued in this order corresponds with what we
15 saw. There's an assignment here to prepare an air bomb for launch and to
16 fire it in the Hrasnica or the Sokolovic area, and the assignment was
17 issued to the Ilidza unit. So all these data correspond with what we
18 found there.
19 Q. All right. Thank you very much, Major. I have no more questions
20 for you at the moment. My learned friend of the Defence will have some
21 questions for you.
22 MR. THOMAS: Thank you, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you not tendering this document?
24 MR. THOMAS: I'm sorry, Your Honours, it was not my intention to
25 tender it as this witness cannot authenticate the actual order itself.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
2 Mr. Guy-Smith.
3 Cross-examination by Mr. Guy-Smith:
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you.
5 Q. Major, I would like to start off where you just left off, with
6 regard to the document that was just up on the screen, and as I
7 understand it, you were given the document while you were involved in a
8 proofing session; correct?
9 A. The session yesterday afternoon. Yes, that's correct, or rather,
10 yesterday morning.
11 Q. And before you were given the document, were any comments made to
12 you about the purpose of you reviewing that document?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Was it handed to you in a series of other documents?
15 A. Yesterday morning, I was presented with multiple documents. This
16 one was among them.
17 Q. And when you read it yesterday morning, after you read it, did
18 you have occasion to comment to anybody concerning what you'd read?
19 A. I made a remark about this document to the Prosecutor.
20 Q. And who was that?
21 A. The man seated at my right.
22 Q. For the record -- could you identify for the record, that's
23 Mr. Thomas; correct?
24 A. That's correct.
25 Q. And when you made a comment concerning this document, what did
1 you tell Mr. Thomas?
2 A. I was surprised that this document existed because from my
3 perception it was extremely stupid as a commander to set this assignment
4 forth in writing.
5 Q. Is that what you told Mr. Thomas yesterday?
6 A. Yes, I did.
7 Q. Did you discuss whether or not you would be testifying at all
8 about this document when you came to court?
9 A. Mr. Thomas told me that he might present this document at the
10 hearing to me the next day.
11 Q. Apart from telling Mr. Thomas that you thought it was an
12 extremely stupid thing to do, was there any other discussion with regard
13 to your review of this document during your proofing session before you
14 came to court?
15 A. Mr. Thomas asked me the same question that he did -- that he just
16 asked me here in court, whether this assignment corresponds with -- or
17 correlates with the conclusions I reached following my investigation of
18 the aerial bomb.
19 Q. And what did you tell him?
20 A. I gave him the same answer as I just gave now: Yes, this does
22 Q. How long was your proofing session yesterday?
23 A. I arrived in this building at about 10.30, and the session lasted
24 until 12.00 or 12.15.
25 Q. And after the session was over, was a document compiled for your
1 review and signature concerning the meeting that you'd had with
2 Mr. Thomas?
3 A. That's correct. The signature session took place that afternoon,
4 after 1400 hours.
5 Q. And the document that you read was a document that you read in
6 English; correct? The signature session? You read a document concerning
7 what you had discussed with Mr. Thomas. That document was in English;
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. You had no difficulty reading that document, now, did you?
11 A. That's also correct.
12 Q. And you understood the information that was contained in the
13 document as representing a complete recitation of the information that
14 you had discussed with Mr. Thomas during your proofing session; correct?
15 And by complete I don't mean verbatim. I don't mean word for
16 word. I mean topics. It covered topics and articulated the topics that
17 you had discussed with Mr. Thomas; correct?
18 For example, this order. For example, the document that we have
19 been referring to, the one that you believe to be stupid.
20 A. I couldn't say with 100 percent accuracy whether that document
21 was listed as well. It wasn't clear to me that the document being
22 compiled was intended as a reflection of everything discussed at the
23 time. We reviewed previous statements of mine and those statements were
24 set forth in writing and I signed them.
25 Q. Well, within the context of the information that you reviewed
1 yesterday and that you discussed with Mr. Thomas, you made some very
2 specific remarks with regard to the 1st of July, 2nd of July, 1995,
3 crater analysis, didn't you?
4 A. That's correct.
5 Q. And you included in that the following, which is the findings of
6 the Bosnian police, your own crater analysis, the radio message of an
7 UNMO who had heard rockets launched from Ilidza the night before enabled
8 you to make a determination about the source and method of fire; right?
9 That's what you said.
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. Did you not include in any manner, shape or form the analysis
12 that you just went through with us today concerning this particular
13 order, did you?
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Thomas.
15 MR. THOMAS: I would direct my -- I'm sorry, Your Honours. If my
16 learned friend has the proofing note, I would direct him to the entries
17 under 65 ter number 4799 on page 2.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm looking at them.
19 MR. THOMAS: Okay. In that case, I object to the question and
20 the manner that has been put, Your Honour. If my learned friend has a
21 proposition to put to the witness about just how much he spoke or just
22 how much is recorded in the proofing note about this order, then he
23 should put the contents of the proofing note in that respect to
24 Major Bruurmijn first.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: He has told us that you engaged in a question and
1 answer -- excuse me. I don't wish to argue with Mr. Thomas.
2 The witness has told us that they engaged in a
3 question-and-answer proceeding with regard to this order, and as I am
4 reading this particular document, page 2, I -- if what you are suggesting
5 is the language. The witness confirms this document is consistent with
6 the July 1st scenario as being the sum total of the information.
7 I need some help here from Mr. Thomas.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm sorry. You realise that you gentlemen, the
9 three of you, are talking about a document to which the Bench is not
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: I appreciate that.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: And I don't know what you're talking about.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: And it's going to make it very difficult for this
15 Bench to rule on something that we don't know nothing about. We are told
16 that there is a reference to 65 ter 04799 to the extent that we able to
17 determine what that is supposed to mean. This is supposed to be this
18 document that is now in dispute.
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: Let me give assistance in that regard, Your
20 Honour because I didn't -- I didn't believe I would be in this particular
21 situation today.
22 Q. The proofing note indicates that you confirm that this document
23 is consistent with the July 1st scenario. That's what the proofing note
24 says. When you signed the proofing note, did you understand that to mean
25 that that dealt with the question and answer colloquy that you went
1 through with Mr. Thomas concerning the order of Dragomir Milosevic.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith, before the witness answers, you had
3 put a proposition to the witness that the document on the screen, which
4 is no longer there, had never been mentioned in the proofing note. Your
5 colleague referred you to the part of the proofing note that refers to 65
6 ter 04799.
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: I understand -- I understand the Court's concern,
8 and I'm modifying the line of examination.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. You may proceed.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you.
11 Q. Do have you my question in mind or shall I?
12 A. [In English] No, I'm fine.
13 Q. Or -- I thought that might be the case.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we have 65 ter 04799 back up on the screen.
15 Q. Okay. When you -- after you read the document and you had made
16 the comment that you had made about the document, which is that you
17 thought it was stupid, you and Mr. Thomas had a conversation concerning
18 potential questions he might ask you and answers you would give
19 concerning this particular document; correct?
20 A. [Interpretation] That's a very long question. Mr. Thomas asked
21 me whether it was consistent with the findings established on 1 and 2
22 July, 1995, and indicated that he might use this document before the
23 Court. I don't remember any more questions that he asked about that
24 document along the lines of, And I'm going to ask you that question
25 tomorrow. He showed me the document and said, I might be using this in
1 court tomorrow.
2 Q. And when you -- when you -- when you saw the document and heard
3 him say that, what was your response to him, with regard to the use of
4 this document? Did you say, Well, this document confirms my findings?
5 A. I said that this document corresponded with what I observed on 1
6 and 2 July, and I expressed surprise at the content of the document.
7 Q. And that's what you told us before, with regard to the wisdom of
8 having such a document in existence?
9 A. Correct.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Major Bruurmijn, when you nod, it doesn't get
11 recorded that you are agreeing, so could you also say yes or no to
12 indicate whether you are agreeing or disagreeing.
13 A. I will.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, thank you.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH:
16 Q. From June -- if I understood your testimony correctly. Not from
17 June, in June and July you had the duty to draft daily sitreps for your
18 unit; is that correct?
19 A. In that period, I was a duty officer, and one of my tasks was to
20 prepare the daily UNMO headquarters Sarajevo Sector sitrep.
21 Q. And that was something that you did every day for the month of
22 June and for two weeks in the month of July; is that a fair statement?
23 A. That's correct.
24 Q. You prepared a specific sitrep concerning the July 1st incident
25 that you investigated; correct?
1 A. No. I don't think I was the one who compiled that sitrep, but
2 that was because I was in the field with the UNMO team, and therefore was
3 not at the headquarters as duty officer.
4 Q. Did you have a chance before that sitrep went out to take a look
5 at what was memorialised with regard to the July 1st incident?
6 A. No, I did not see Frank Melum compile the draft.
7 Q. And have you had an occasion at any time since the July 1st
8 incident to take a gander at that particular sitrep? Sorry gander is a
9 bit informal, take a look at?
10 A. Yes. Because from 2 July, I was, once again, active as the duty
11 officer, and all reports submitted in writing were physically present at
12 the Sector HQ in Sarajevo
13 Q. Thank you. You told us that -- that the day when everybody
14 started firing mortars and artillery again - this is on page 9 - the UN
15 issued various ultimatums both to the Bosnian and Serb sides.
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. What ultimatums did the United Nations issue?
18 A. I can't give you a precise renditions of the ultimatums, but the
19 gist was that the heavy weapons either had to be removed from a certain
20 range around the city. That wasn't possible for the Bosnian side. They
21 didn't control that part of the city. And the Bosnians units had to
22 place their weapons in UN storage sites, and if that didn't happen, then
23 NATO air-strikes might follow.
24 Q. Were you aware that, on July 2nd, a weekly situation report was
25 issued concerning the question of Bosnian heavy weapons operating from
1 near UNPROFOR facilities having significantly increased.
2 A. Not on that specific date, but I know that in that period, the
3 Bosniaks were firing mortars to the Serb side. One of the mortar
4 installations of the Bosniaks was 50 metres next to the PTT building,
5 which were the sector headquarters of the UN in Sarajevo; and I know that
6 they were fired from that position, but I can't give you an exact date.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: What is the PTT building; what does PTT stand for?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Post telegraph and something else.
9 The former postal building in Sarajevo
10 was set up as sector headquarters by the UN.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
12 Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we have 1D00-4539, page 3 in e-court. And
14 I'm referring to the bottom of the page. If we could have the very last
15 part of the page where it says location of Bosnian weapons a problem,
16 made a little bit larger.
17 Q. Is this information, the information that is contained there,
18 which is:
19 "Since the Bosnian offensive began two weeks ago the number of
20 Bosnian heavy weapons operating from near UNPROFOR facilities has
21 significantly increased?
22 "Some people in UNPROFOR see this as an effort by the Bosnians to
23 draw counter-battery fire on to UNPROFOR which would then be drawn into
24 convict with the Serbs. Others note that there has been a general
25 increase in the number of activity weapons and that the density of heavy
1 weapons is not greater around UNPROFOR facilities than it is elsewhere."
2 Is this something that you in your capacity for UNMO as an
3 observer had cause to discuss or have concern about, in terms of trying
4 to make intelligence decisions about what was going on, on a day-to-day
6 A. This was certainly cause for concern among the UNMOs, including
7 me. I just mentioned that a mortar was positioned next to the UN sector
8 headquarters in Sarajevo
9 pertained before I became a duty officer and to which I returned
10 afterwards, there was a mortar installation 50 metres away from the
11 observation post. So, yes, we were concerned about that.
12 Q. And just for purposes of clarity of the record, I'm sure that my
13 colleague will agree, the date of this report is dated 2nd of July, 1995,
14 and if the Bench would like to see, we can pull up page 1, just so that
15 you can see the date.
16 Looking at the up at the right-hand corner where it says: Date.
17 Could you confirm for us that the date of this report is the 2nd of July,
19 A. Yes, I can confirm that.
20 Q. Thank you very much.
21 Now, in terms of -- in terms of dealing with the issue of
22 ultimatums, were you in a position where you heard that the
23 United Nations was issuing ultimatums with regard to what NATO was going
24 to do, or whether there was some -- the division as between
25 United Nations and NATO, in terms of ultimatums?
1 A. The ultimatums issued were issued by the UN to the warring
2 parties because they realised that having an ultimatum and deploying the
3 means mentioned in this ultimatum; namely air-strikes would severely
4 affect the units on the ground. That's why we were informed when an
5 ultimatum was issued and when it would expire. We were given a list with
6 code words that we could refer to when we heard a certain code word. On
7 the radio, for example, we knew that a ultimatum had expired and that
8 within 24 hours, air-strikes might follow; and then there was another
9 code word indicating that an air-strike would ensue within a shorter
10 number of hours. So, yes, we were aware that ultimatums had been issued
11 as well as the time-frame for potential air-strikes.
12 Q. Could you tell us as you sit here today how many ultimatums you
13 recall being issued that passed, before there was ultimately an
14 air-strike? Put in other terms, how many times you heard a code word
15 that says --
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: I didn't hear that; what's the question?
17 MR. GUY-SMITH:
18 Q. Or how many times you heard a code word that said and I went
19 "wheeee," which obviously won't translate on the record, but gave you
20 some relief that there would be no bombing from international forces?
21 A. I couldn't tell that anymore. What I remember that is on three
22 occasions ultimatums expired and was followed by air-strikes, but I can't
23 give you an exact number now.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Were you given a code word when nothing was going
25 to happen?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't remember anymore. We were
2 given code words indicating the number of hours within which something
3 would take place. I don't remember there being a code word that -- to
4 indicate that an operation had been cancelled.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
6 MR. GUY-SMITH:
7 Q. So if an ultimatum, once again we're speaking a bit
8 hypothetically because you can't remember. But you do recall ultimatums
9 being given; correct?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. And are you testifying now that every time you recall an
12 ultimatum being given during your tour in the region, that there was an
14 A. No.
15 Q. On those occasions when an ultimatum was given, and there was no
16 air-strike, how did you receive information regarding the fact that the
17 ultimatum had been satisfied, through other negotiations or something
18 else had taken place whereby they were not going to be engaging in
19 air-strikes? How did that happen?
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: I just asked the question and he said no such word
21 was given.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: I understand that he didn't have a code word, so
23 I'm trying to find out if there was some other method of communication
24 they engaged in, apart from just a code word.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The only thing I can remember is
1 that sometimes ultimatums expired or, rather, you knew the date and the
2 time that the ultimatum was supposed to expire; and sometimes we heard
3 that it had been extended to give parties additional time, but I can't
4 remember any indication that an ultimatum had expired but that no
5 air-strike would follow.
6 MR. GUY-SMITH:
7 Q. So if there was a modification of the ultimatum that wouldn't
8 come to you in terms of a code word. That would come to you in some
9 other terms as you said its been extended, or there's been further
10 negotiations, or something else was going on so the ultimatum is not
11 going to take force and effect; right?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: Would this be an appropriate time?
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
16 We will take a break and come back at half past 12.00.
17 Court adjourned.
18 --- Recess taken at 12.03 p.m.
19 --- On resuming at 12.31 p.m.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you.
22 Q. I'd like to go to the incident of July 1st, 1995, that you
23 investigated. But before that, just to make sure that I understand your
24 testimony, prior to the July 1st incident, you had never investigated
25 personally an alleged air bomb incident; correct?
1 A. That's correct.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith, lest we forget, and now that it is
3 not on the screen any longer. What do you intend doing with ID 004539,
4 page 3.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: Oh could I tender that. I apologise.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: That document is admitted into evidence. May it
9 please be given an exhibit number.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D24.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you very much, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: You're welcome.
14 You may proceed.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH:
16 Q. And before this investigation, the training that you had received
17 with regard to bomb or shelling analysis had been for a period of a
18 couple of weeks; correct?
19 When you first arrived in the region?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. And you've told us that -- one of the ways that you can determine
22 information concerning where shelling or a bomb has come from is by
23 examining the crater itself; right?
24 A. That's correct.
25 Q. There are obviously other manners in which you can determine the
1 direction from which the particular bomb came from. For example, if you
2 saw it flying in the air.
3 A. Yes, that's possible.
4 Q. And with regard to the issue of crater examination, the
5 importance of crater examination, in terms of determining direction of
6 launch, or, I should say this, point of launch, is that the crater itself
7 will have a particular kind of pattern which will assist you in
8 determining how the projectile actually hit the ground; correct?
9 A. That's correct. You cannot exactly determine the point of
10 departure. You can only establish from which direction it originated.
11 Q. And in terms of -- in terms of establishing from which direction
12 it originated, could you tell us, what are you looking for in terms of
13 crater pattern? What are the indicators that you use to determine
15 A. Because the shell or bomb penetrated the ground from a certain
16 angle before exploding, there will be a more acute angle and a sloped
17 angle; and the material blown away by the explosion will be projected in
18 a certain shape and pattern, and those are things you can consider in
19 performing a crater analysis.
20 Q. And with regard to the first thing that you've mentioned, which
21 is the issue of angle, does the angle that the projectile is seen to have
22 entered the crater or the ground, which made the crater.
23 Let me rephrase that.
24 Is the angle by which the projectile has hit the ground an
25 indicator of distance or direction from whence it came?
1 A. If you mean the angle at which the projectile hit the ground,
2 that's an indication for -- for -- steep drop or a slower drop followed
3 and that doesn't provide any indication other than that usually have to
4 deal -- you -- usually you're dealing with a mortar shell if the angle
5 is -- is acute and it's a -- usually an artillery bomb if it's -- if
6 there's a gentler slope of the path.
7 Q. And the angle that we're talking about, that would be -- that
8 would be generally defined as the impact angle; correct?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. Is it fair to say that the angle of impact assists in determining
11 the distance that the projectile travelled before impact?
12 A. The angle of impact but then again depending on what type of
13 projectile it is, whether it was a ballistic trajectory or a propelled
14 explosive, in this case, it was propelled, the projectile was propelled;
15 and then it's more complicated to determine based on the impact angle
16 what distance was travelled because you can recalculate it in ballistic
17 terms but not if the object was propelled.
18 Q. So if the object is propelled, what factors do you use in order
19 to determine the distance that the object travelled before impact?
20 A. There is no way to determine the distance in the case of a
21 propelled projectile. All you can do is establish the direction of
23 Q. Whereas in the other form of projectile you can determine
24 distance, I take it?
25 A. You can use ballistics to determine the distance travelled by an
1 artillery shell and the distance from which it was launched.
2 Q. So we're clear, it was an artillery shell you can determine the
3 distance; but when it is propelled, based on crater analysis, you cannot
4 determine distance; correct?
5 A. With an artillery shell you could determine the distance. I
6 can't do that because I don't have ballistics training. You need quite a
7 bit of mathematical knowledge. What we checked when we examined the
8 impacts was merely the direction from which the shell or bomb had been
10 Q. Okay. Now with regard to that, what you looked at, was among
11 other things, the impact angle in which the bomb hit the ground and the
12 impact angle is what you have described in that crater; correct?
13 A. Now the problem is which angle do you mean. The impact angle is
14 the angle of impact on the ground, so that enables you to determine what
15 was the front and what was the rear of the shell, when you determine the
16 angle it arrived at. But the elevation angle matters less. It is it
17 purely about determining the front and the rear so that you can set your
18 compass accordingly to determine the direction. So whether it impacts at
19 45 or at 60 degrees that angle doesn't matter. What matters is what was
20 the front and what was the rear.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we please pull up 443. I believe it's
22 page 6.
23 Q. And before --
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, by 443, do you mean --
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: Exhibit 443, yes.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: P443.
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: Correct.
3 Q. Now, with regard to the investigation that you engaged in, the
4 impact angle is not known; right?
5 A. Right. We didn't determine the impact angle, and that wasn't
6 what we were looking for either. We were looking to establish the
7 direction of origin.
8 Q. I appreciate that. You say with regard to the impact angle, you
9 say: "The impact angle is unknown, as the bomb struck a small concrete
11 So are we to take it that this means that what happened is when
12 the bomb hit, the first thing it hit was a small concrete garage?
13 A. The garage had a concrete floor.
14 Q. Well, I'm -- I'm reading what -- what the document say, sir.
15 That's all I'm doing. And it says: "The bomb struck a small concrete
17 It doesn't say anything about a floor, does it?
18 A. That's correct. As far as I remember, the floor was made of
19 concrete, not the rest of the garage.
20 Q. Okay. Did you -- is the photograph that we saw previously -- and
21 I'm sorry, I forgot the ... I believe it is P441.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: If we could have that up on the screen for a
24 Q. Is the photograph that you took of the crater a photograph that
25 reflects damage to the concrete floor of the garage that you're referring
2 A. As far as I know, this is not the photograph that I took myself
3 but the one taken by the Bosnian police. My photographs and negatives
4 are in the possession of the Yugoslavia Tribunal, but I don't see them in
5 the evidence here.
6 Q. Does this photograph, then, to the extent that it is of some help
7 to us, does this photograph reflect the concrete floor area that you're
8 referring to?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Okay. And is --
11 A. You don't see much left of that. It was just that I had been
12 told there had been a garage there. Frank Melum told me that. Because
13 as you can see on the photograph here, there is little traces left that
14 there was any building at all of this site.
15 Q. Do you know -- I appreciate that. But do you know what the
16 course of impact was of this particular bomb before it hit the concrete
17 floor area? Do you know what it went through beforehand? Did it go
18 through a concrete roof, did it go through a tile roof, did it go through
19 a wooden roof? Can you tell us what the height was of the roof when it
20 first -- the bomb first hit it? Could give us any of that information?
21 A. Negative. I do not have that information.
22 Q. And with regard to the photograph we are looking at here, this
23 photograph, you can't see any patterns of any explosion, can you? So
24 this photograph is not of assistance to us in determining the front or
25 back of the bomb, looking at the concrete area.
1 A. I disagree. If you look at the shadow section you'll see that
2 that's steeper than the area facing the photographer, so that indicates
3 to me that the photograph was -- excuse me, the bomb arrived roughly
4 along the path over the shoulder of the photographer.
5 Q. I take it that what you're telling us is that this photograph is
6 taken from a position where the photographer is looking directly on to --
7 looking directly towards the house. Is that your testimony?
8 A. That's correct. The photographer is facing the house next door
9 here, and if you look at the background, you'll see Mount Igman
10 foothills of Mount Igman
11 Q. Were you present when this photograph was taken?
12 A. I was.
13 Q. Are your photographs any more detailed, in terms of the impact
14 zone themselves than this photograph is, to the best of your
16 A. I couldn't say anymore. I surrendered those photographs in 1996,
17 and I saw them one time after that in --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Inaudible.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So I don't have those photographs
21 MR. GUY-SMITH:
22 Q. You didn't have a chance to see those photographs yesterday, did
24 A. I saw these photographs that are included here. I didn't see my
25 own photographs again.
1 Q. And you have no knowledge as to where your photographs are?
2 A. I know that the Yugoslavia Tribunal still has them.
3 Q. Fine. When you arrived at the bombing location, did you
4 determine whether or not it had an address? And by that, I mean did you
5 ever come across anybody identifying the address as being on
6 Bunici Potok Street?
7 A. Negative.
8 Q. Did you ever determine for yourself what the address was of this
9 bomb site?
10 A. No. In the military, you work less with addresses than with map
12 Q. Did you -- so the answer would be, no, you didn't determine that.
13 A. No, I did not determine the address.
14 Q. The first time that you were there was on the 1st of July, in the
15 evening hours, correct, sometime after 9.00?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. When you got there after a brief survey of the situation, you
18 made a determination with one of your fellow officers to go to the
19 hospital to check on the rest of your group; right?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. And when you left and went to the hospital to check on your
22 group, who was stationed at the house? Who was stationed at the bomb
23 site, securing the area?
24 A. As far as I know, that was Captain Hansen, and -- then I
25 accompanied Captain Melum to the hospital.
1 Q. So Captain Hansen remained behind. You went to the hospital, and
2 after you returned from the hospital, you returned to the bomb site area,
4 A. That's correct.
5 Q. How long a period of time were you gone?
6 A. I think it would have been a maximum of 30 minutes.
7 Q. Okay. The next day on the 2nd of July, would it be fair to say
8 that there was a joint and independent investigation going on concerning
9 this particular bombing? And by joint and separate I mean that you in
10 your capacity as UNMO were engaged in an investigation; at the same time
11 there were BiH police investigators present?
12 A. We were present while the Bosnian police conducted their
13 investigation. They didn't allow us to investigate first. And after the
14 Bosnian police had completed the investigation, we conducted our own
16 Q. And when the Bosnian police conducted their investigation, did
17 they share with you the fact that they had found damage in an area
18 approximately some 150 metres away from where you were investigating. As
19 a matter of fact, that's where they found the rockets; right?
20 A. Yes, that's correct.
21 Q. And it was the Bosnian police that found the rockets, not UNMOs
22 who found the rockets correct?
23 A. That is also correct.
24 Q. And the first time that you saw the rockets was at the police
25 station; true?
1 A. That's also correct.
2 Q. Did you see a photograph of the position of the rockets in situ
3 at the time that they were first discovered by the Bosnian police?
4 A. Negative.
5 Q. Okay. Did you discuss with the Bosnian police their analysis
6 that the air bomb had hit an area approximately 150 metres away and then
7 ricochetted over to the area where you ultimately found the bomb?
8 A. Yes. There was some discussion about that. The Bosnian police
9 assumed at first that there had been two rocket impacts. Where they
10 found the rocket bodies, they thought that was the second impact site.
11 We indicated, in part, because of the observations by OP 4 that only one
12 rocket had been launched, and at that the site where the rockets had been
13 found, no shell fragments appeared and, on the other hand, where the bomb
14 impact was, we didn't find any rocket components; so our conclusion was
15 that the two had -- belonged -- they belonged together. The Bosnian
16 police was not convinced of that.
17 Q. What about the issue concerning the ricochet, that the bomb, in
18 fact, hit an area 150 metres away from where it ultimately landed?
19 A. That would be possible that it impacted the ground first and then
20 ricochetted onward because I wasn't able to investigate that place. I
21 can't tell you whether that option is more or less probable. My
22 expectation was that it fell apart in the air so that the rockets landed
23 away from the bomb, but even with the ricochet theory, you would need to
24 examine the site where the rockets impacted; and the Bosnian police
25 didn't allow us to do that.
1 Q. I understand. With regard to the ricochet theory to the extent
2 that the ricochet theory was something that was being discussed, did you
3 take into account in the trajectory paths that you were hypothesising the
4 angle of ricochet from the area that the rockets were found,
5 approximately 150 metres away to where the bomb was found? Did you take
6 that into account in any fashion whatsoever? And I understand that you
7 weren't able to go to the actual area, but did you include that in your
9 A. At first we recalculated the path based on the crater analysis we
10 had performed, combined with the observations of OP 4 of a rocket that
11 they heard and/or saw, and if you draw a straight line along that path,
12 the rockets would still be -- the place where we found the rockets was
13 still along that line.
14 Q. You just added an additional factor, which is that OP 4 heard or
15 saw. So I'd like it talk to you for a minute about the issue of sound.
16 Now, could you tell us at what speed does this projectile travel,
17 if you know?
18 A. That's not known to me.
19 Q. Based -- based upon your information, can you tell us anything
20 with regard to the sound or sounds and period of time that they lasted or
21 were heard by OP 4?
22 A. No. I believe that one of the reports mentions a report by OP 4
23 but I can no longer recollect whether they saw or heard it. I don't know
25 Q. Would the period of time in which one was able to identify sound
1 be a factor that could be utilised for determining distance from point of
2 launch? Put in other terms: The speed of sound has a particular
3 formula; correct?
4 So if you hear something you can make some determination of the
5 distance that is travelled?
6 A. Well, can you use sound but then you also need visual observation
7 to establish how far away from you something took place. If you have
8 sound alone, then, as far as I know, distance is impossible to determine.
9 Q. Okay. With regard to the issue of the demolition capability and
10 destructive capability of this particular device, do you recall
11 previously stating -- in a previous statement that the damage radius was
12 200 metres which you then corrected to 60 metres. Do you recall that?
13 A. I recall that we discussed the radius of the damage. We examined
14 the damage in the immediate proximity. You can see that in the
15 photographs of the damage. At a larger distance, so exceeding 60 metres,
16 windows were shattered, but we didn't investigate that.
17 Q. Would the fact that -- as a theoretical matter, would the fact
18 that the bomb hit point number 1 and then ricochetted for 150 metres and
19 then hit point number 2, effect the damage potential of the bomb on
21 A. Yes. And that depends primary on how the explosive's timer is
22 set. If the detonator is set too quick, then it might explode at the
23 first point of impact, but this one had a delaying device so that the
24 bomb wasn't detonated until several seconds after the impact. So in that
25 case, yes, it does make a difference how it impacts and where it impacts.
1 Q. Perhaps you could help me out here, because I'm a little
2 confused. Is the type of bomb that we're talking about here, is that a
3 concussion warhead projectile or is that a projectile that operates on a
4 delayed fuse?
5 A. This had a delayed fuse but that doesn't exclude it from being a
6 concussion projectile. It was specially designed to penetrate further
7 into a target before detonating. To give you an example if you have a
8 bomb with a quick detonator then it would explode the moment it touched
9 the edge of a branch. This one didn't. It was designed for maximum
10 penetration before exploding. And that's what the UNMOs state in their
11 report. First they heard a loud bang and thought that something had
12 fallen over somewhere, and after about ten seconds, they heard the
14 Q. And it's that particular information upon which you rely for this
15 to have been a delayed fuse bomb, right?
16 A. That's part of the information. The other part of the
17 information consisted of the shards dug up from the crater because for a
18 penetration bomb, the front end of the bomb has to be quite firm so that
19 it doesn't fall apart as soon as it hits something; and that was the case
20 with this bomb.
21 At the time I had Dutch manuals with me, describing all munitions
22 in use in the former Yugoslavia
23 descriptions in the book, I examined what corresponded with what, and
24 that's how I come up with the delayed fuse and what the -- what other
25 possibilities there were.
1 Q. Can you tell the Chamber as you sit here today in any fashion
2 whatsoever what you believe the distance that this particular bomb
3 travelled was?
4 A. No, I couldn't -- I couldn't assess that. We depended on the
5 observations of OP 4 to do the best we could. Based on the crater
6 analysis we could determine only the originating direction, and with
7 improvised explosives such as this one, I can't estimate how far it would
8 travel from the moment it was launched.
9 Q. And you can't -- apart from the issue concerning the potential
10 ricochet theory, you can't give us, as you sit here today, based often
11 your investigation, the angle of descent of this particular bomb, right?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. Lastly, I wanted to briefly touch on the issue of guidance
15 And you said during your direct examination was that there were
16 no guidance systems on any of the air bombs that you ever heard about,
17 and there was not a guidance system on this air bomb; right?
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. And as I understood -- as I understood your answer, you were
20 talking about a guidance system which was attached to the rocket or the
21 bomb; correct?
22 That's what you told us. You said there was never any question
23 of a guidance system being attached to the rockets or the bomb. It's on
24 page 19 and 20.
25 A. We didn't find any traces of something having been attached to
1 that bomb.
2 Q. Okay. Well, during that time in the history of artillery, there
3 weren't any guidance systems that were attached to any shells, mortars,
4 rockets, or bombs that corrected the path of such a projectile during
5 flight, were there?
6 A. Well, there are and there were at the time too. If we're talking
7 about artillery munitions, for example, there were copper head munitions
8 which are fired and then they second charge to seat their target. They
9 did exist, and we're not talking about an artillery shell here. This is
10 an air bomb. Air bombs have been equipped for some time with guidance
11 systems. For example, the AGM
12 II, the Germans were also experimenting with guidance systems.
13 Q. An AGM
14 of a truck, is it?
15 A. No. But that -- the 230-kilogram air bomb that we're talking
16 about was not initially that either.
17 Q. To your knowledge, was the air bomb that was the subject of the
18 incident on July 1st, 1995
19 A. No. My assessment is that it was launched from a rail and was
20 propelled by six rockets attached at the back.
21 Q. Isn't it a fact that during the time you were in Sarajevo, none
22 of the incidents, be they bombs or shelling, involved missiles that had
23 in- flight guidance. Excuse me, change missiles to projectiles that had
24 in-flight guidance systems used by the Bosnian Serbs or by the Bosnian
25 Muslims during the conflict?
1 A. The only air bombs used and dropped by airplanes during the time
2 that I was there were dropped by NATO planes and undoubtedly included
3 munitions that were guided.
4 As for munitions used by the Bosnians and the Bosnian Serb sides,
5 munitions were used, but these were anti-tank rocketed; and they were
6 used in the city as well, and there was a guidance system there.
7 Q. So it's your testimony that the anti-tank rocket system that was
8 used had an in-flight guidance system that was used by the Bosnians and
9 the Bosnian Serbs?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 A. That's correct.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: I have no further questions.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Guy-Smith.
15 Any re-examination, Mr. Thomas.
16 MR. THOMAS: Just one question, Your Honours.
17 Re-examination by Mr. Thomas:
18 Q. Major, would an air bomb of the type you investigated on the 1st
19 of July propelled by the rockets you found make a lot of noise in flight?
20 A. Yes, it would.
21 Q. Given that we're all civilians, apart from yourself, is there
22 anything you can compare it to so that we can understand how much noise
23 we're talking about?
24 A. Well, it's very difficult to describe the noise. The best
25 description would be a jet engine operating at full speed.
1 Q. Thank you, Major.
2 MR. THOMAS: And, Your Honours, just before we conclude,
3 Exhibit 65 ter number 4799 about which there has been a lot of discussion
4 already this morning, in case it is to be used later, it should probably
5 be MFI
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: We did not because I specifically asked you and
7 you said you were not tendering it.
8 MR. THOMAS: Not at this stage, Your Honour, and I misunderstood
9 Your Honour's question and I wasn't thinking about the need to MFI the
10 document. I apologise.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: You're welcome.
12 Then -- yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: That makes good sense to me.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Guy-Smith.
15 65 ter 04799 is marked for identification. May it please be
16 given an exhibit number.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P445, marked
18 for identification.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
20 Does that conclude your re-examination Mr. Thomas.
21 MR. THOMAS: It does, sir.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
23 Questioned by the Court:
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just one question that I would like to ask, Major,
25 and you may have answered this, but I just want to be sure that I hear
1 the answer again.
2 On this theory of a ricochet, what would the bomb have hit that
3 caused it to ricochet?
4 A. To cause a ricochet, it would have had to impact something hard,
5 as opposed for example to soft ground. If it had impacted soft ground,
6 it would have penetrated immediately. Ricochetting requires relatively
7 hard substratum and that could be either a road or a house, for example.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: From this distance of 150 metres where you were
9 not allowed to go, sitting where you are you, are you able to think of
10 any object that is so hard that would have caused it to ricochet?
11 A. There were houses and roads.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: But we see here it destroyed the houses here at
13 the tail-end. It didn't ricochet when it hit this house, this garage
14 here; and you're saying that this garage had a concrete floor, which I
15 would expect to be even harder than the wall of a house.
16 A. Yes. If it had encountered the wall a house, the object that it
17 impacts that's hard needs to be horizontal or not at a very steep angle
18 because otherwise it would -- it wouldn't ricochet. When it hits an
19 upright wall it would penetrate. So to ricochet, you need a hard
20 horizontal surface.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: A hard horizontal surface.
22 A. Correct.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: And what kind of hard horizontal surface can you
24 think of that was existing at that time, some 150 metres away?
25 A. It could be a house under construction without a roof but with a
1 very thick concrete floor.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: A concrete floor would not be horizontal, sir, it
3 would be longitudinal.
4 A. That's what I mean when I say horizontal.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, horizontal can't mean longitudinal. The two
6 are opposite.
7 A. Horizontal is, as you see the table in front of me. It would
8 ricochet from that vertical, depending on the angle it was projecting
9 along, it would ricochet from that.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you aware of any buildings that had no roofs
11 around the area but which had concrete floors?
12 A. Not specifically in that area. I know that one of the ways at
13 the time in former Yugoslavia
14 building your house. So many houses were inhabited but were not complete
15 yet, and sometimes they didn't have a roof, merely the concrete top -- of
16 the top floor, so to speak. So there were houses with a flat concrete
17 top but whether they were any in that area, I don't remember that.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, would it be your testimony that, on the basis
19 of the ricochet theory it would hit the concrete floor of an incomplete
20 building somewhere, ricochet to this garage that it destroyed, and
21 penetrate the concrete floor of this garage and not ricochet again?
22 Would that be your testimony?
23 A. That's correct. The ricochet theory is not necessarily my
24 theory. I still consider it possible that it would ricochet from a hard
25 concrete substratum depending on the thickness of the concrete. The
1 moment it would ricochet, according to that theory, it would still be
2 flying at a considerable speed because the rockets were still attached
3 but after the ricochet, it no longer had any propulsion and the speed
4 would diminish and that all influenced whether something penetrates or
5 ricochets. I'm not a scientist. It seems plausible to me.
6 However, my theory remains that because of the construction and
7 because it was an improvised device, it simply fell apart in mid-air and
8 the bomb continued somewhat further than the rockets. But I can't
9 exclude a ricochet theory.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: That very last sentence that you make, that you
11 can't exclude a ricochet theory, causes me concern simply because the
12 former part of your answer seems to say -- to say that the ricochet
13 theory is not -- is not plausible. Or didn't I understand you correctly?
14 A. Then I'm afraid that you misunderstood me. In my opinion, it is
15 possible but it seems less likely to me. What seems most likely to me is
16 that it fell apart in mid-air, but I can't exclude that it happened.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Any questions arising, Mr. Thomas.
18 MR. THOMAS: [Microphone not activated]
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Did you answer, Mr. Thomas.
20 MR. THOMAS: I'm sorry. No questions. Thank you, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: No, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
24 That brings us to the end of your testimony. Thank you very
25 much, Major, for coming to testify. You are now excused and may go now
1 well back home.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Alstublieft.
4 Mr. Thomas.
5 MR. THOMAS: So that concludes the evidence that the Prosecution
6 can put before Your Honours today. I believe it also concludes the
7 evidence that we can put before you this week given the personal medical
8 difficulties that arose in relation to a witness schedule for tomorrow
9 and which I believe the Chamber has been notified of.
10 So we are able to proceed again on Monday, sir.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
12 In that event, the matter stands adjourned to Monday, the 19th of
13 January, at 9.00, not at quarter past 2.00, in Courtroom II. Okay?
14 9.00, Courtroom II, 19th of January.
15 Court adjourned.
16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.25 p.m.
17 to be reconvened on Monday, the 19th of January,
18 2009, at 9.00 a.m.