1 Friday, 31 October 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning, Madam Registrar. Could you call the
7 case, please.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
9 IT-05-88-T, The Prosecutor versus Vujadin Popovic, et al.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, ma'am. All the accused are present.
11 Prosecution today is Mr. Thayer, Mr. Vanderpuye. Absent amongst the
12 Defence teams I notice Mr. Ostojic and Mr. Haynes.
13 So good morning to you. Welcome back. We are going to proceed
14 with your testimony, after which then you are free to go. Yes.
15 Mr. Bourgon.
16 MR. BOURGON: Good morning, Mr. President. Good morning, judges.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning, Mr. Bourgon.
18 WITNESS: JOVO MARKOVIC [Resumed]
19 [Witness answered through interpretation]
20 Cross-examination by Mr. Bourgon:
21 Q. Good morning, sir.
22 A. [In English] Good morning.
23 Q. For the record, allow me to introduce myself my name is Stephane
24 Bourgon and along with my colleagues this morning, Ms. Nikolic and Marie
25 Claude Fournier. Together we represent Drago Nikolic in these
2 I do not have too many questions for you this morning, but by all
3 means if there is any question that you do not understand, please do not
4 hesitate in asking me to say the question over again.
5 Firstly, I would like to confirm or would like you to confirm
6 that we have had the opportunity to meet yesterday?
7 A. [Interpretation] Yes.
8 Q. Now, I read your expert report with great interest, and there is
9 one thing I would like to confirm from your report.
10 MR. BOURGON: And if I can have in e-court, please 4D607, pages 2
11 in English and 2 in B/C/S.
12 Q. Sir, your report will appear in front of you on the screen, and
13 I'd like to refer you to the before and last paragraph where you say the
15 "We must note that all the devices operating at frequencies
16 higher than 30 megahertz require optical visibility in order for the
17 connection to be established."
18 My question is the following: My understanding of this sentence
19 is that if there is a physical obstruction between two points, it is not
20 possible to establish radio communications using a device which operates
21 at a frequency higher than 30 megahertz, such as the portable handheld
22 radio that you mention in your report; is that correct?
23 A. Yes, that's correct. Bull I should also point out that it is
24 technically possible to establish communications by using these devices
25 if the distance is shorter. There are two elements that have to do with
1 wavelengths, special elements and surface elements as stated in my
3 Q. Thank you very much. Now, your testimony yesterday focused on
4 the use of the Motorola portable hand radio. Today, what I would like to
5 ask you about is the RUP-12 radio which was in use in the VRS in July
6 1995. And my first question in this regard is are you familiar with the
7 RUP-12 radio?
8 A. Yes, naturally.
9 Q. And can you help us in identifying at which frequency the RUP-12
10 radio is transmitting?
11 A. Yes. There are a number of variations when it comes to RUP
12 devices, but they all use the same range of frequencies.
13 Q. And do you remember or do you know out of experience at what
14 frequency the RUP-12 radio is transmitting?
15 A. Between 30 and 69.95 megahertz.
16 MR. BOURGON: If I can have in e-court, please, 3D513. This
17 document, Mr. President, is only available in B/C/S. We obtained it from
18 the internet. We will provide the English translation soon. If I can
19 have page 3 of this document.
20 Q. Sir, I would like to show you a document which will appear on the
21 screen before you. And I'd like you to tell us what exactly this
22 document represents.
23 MR. BOURGON: 513. That's the first page, if I can have the page
24 3 of this document, please.
25 Q. Sir, can you tell us what this document means to you?
1 A. This document shows the face of the RUP-12 device, and you have
2 certain technical details that relate to the device, technical
4 Q. And is the operating frequency of the RUP-12 radio mentioned on
5 this page?
6 A. Yes, it is mentioned on this page.
7 Q. And I take it that it corresponds to what you mention that the
8 frequency or the operating frequency goes from 30, 3-0, to 69.95
9 megahertz, and that is the third line in the left column of this
10 document; is that correct?
11 A. That's correct. It's from 30 to 69.95 megahertz.
12 Q. Now, sir, the radio depicted on this page, is that the RUP-12
13 radio that you are personally familiar with?
14 A. Yes. This is the RUP-12. It's not a variation of such a device.
15 Q. Sir, bearing in mind your knowledge of the RUP-12 radio, would I
16 be right in saying that using such a radio, it is not possible to
17 establish radio communications between two points if there is a physical
18 obstacle between the two?
19 A. As I have already said, all devices that use a freak above 30
20 megahertz will require optical visibility. There are certain exceptions.
21 It depends on the force of the antenna and the kind of antenna. And it
22 also depends on the surface, but if you have a device that can take into
23 account the configuration of the terrain it is possible. There are other
24 factors such as the weather, and there can also be features that reflect
25 or send back radio wavelengths; but in all such cases we are dealing with
1 shorter distances.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. BOURGON: If I can have in e-court please 3D93. And this is
4 a military map 1:100.000 of the Kladanj area, and I did the consult with
5 the Court Registrar yesterday to get one specific area of this map on the
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you for that, Mr. Bourgon.
8 MR. BOURGON:
9 Q. Sir, what I would like to do at this time is to show you a
10 military map of the --
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Just one moment, Mr. Bourgon. Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.
12 MR. VANDERPUYE: I'm sorry to interrupt my colleague, but I did
13 notice -- it's been pointed out to me that the witness mentioned
14 something about waves coming back to the surface, I believe I heard that
15 in the translation. It should have appeared between lines 17 and line 23
16 in his answer to Mr. Bourgon's question, and it doesn't appear in the
17 transcript. So I wondered if the witness could actually repeat his
18 answer to that question.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Can you look into that. Mr. Bourgon,
20 let's finish first the question that you were preparing on this map and
21 then you go to what Mr. Vanderpuye has just traced afterwards.
22 Thank you.
23 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President. We are just adjusting
24 the map now a bit lower so that we can see Baljkovica on the top. Just
25 like this, that's good. And a little bit to the left if you can, so that
1 Zvornik is more inside. Yes, that's perfect. Thank you.
2 Q. Sir, what I would like to do is show you a map of the Zvornik
3 area and ask you about the use of the RUP-12 radio in this area, and more
4 particularly if you look at this map in the Zvornik Snagovo area.
5 Firstly, can you tell us if you familiar with the area depicted
6 on this map?
7 A. Yes, I am familiar with this area. We have the surroundings of
8 Zvornik here; and it's a mountainous terrain, a hilly terrain.
9 Q. And based on your knowledge of this area, what can you tell us
10 about the possibilities and the quality of radio communications in that
12 A. On the basis of my experience, radio communications are very
13 limited in such areas when the terrain is of this kind. I am talking
14 about frequencies above 30 megahertz.
15 Q. And, sir, based on your military experience and technical
16 knowledge of radio communications, can you tell us if it's possible
17 looking at a military map, such as the one which appears before you, to
18 determine if there is optical visibility between two points?
19 A. Yes, it is possible to determine whether there is optical
20 visibility between two points, but in such a case it is necessary to
21 establish a profile of the configuration of the land.
22 Q. And the profile of the configuration of the land you mention,
23 that is established by looking at the contour lines; is that correct? Or
24 the very small lines that appear on the map; is that correct?
25 A. I can clarify this. The profile of the terrain is made by
1 linking up two points. And between the two points you have a look at the
2 altitude above sea level, or in this case on the map on the isohypse.
3 You also look at the distance between the most elevated points and the
4 most distant points in such areas.
5 Q. Now, can you confirm, sir, that on a 1:100.000 scale map, the
6 difference in elevation between each of the contour lines is 20 meters?
7 A. I think that the difference is 20 meters on this map, but at the
8 bottom of each map you have the equi distances, and it should say 20
10 MR. BOURGON: Maybe, just to be on the safe side if we can just
11 take this map and move it all the down to the bottom of the map to see
12 the legend at the bottom.
13 Q. Is that looking at the bottom of this map what you mentioned what
14 the difference in elevation between each of the contour lines is 20
16 A. Yes, yes, it's 20 meters.
17 Q. We are talking about elevation.
18 MR. BOURGON: If I can have the map back to where it was.
19 Q. Sir, what I would like to do at this time is simply to use an
20 example or one example, and ask you if you tell us by looking at the map
21 and the contour lines whether there is optical visibility between two
23 MR. BOURGON: If I can have the assistance of the usher, please.
24 Q. I will ask you, sir, to use a pen. Now, this is a special pen
25 that you can use to write on the screen, and I will ask you to make some
2 First of all, do you see Zvornik on this map?
3 A. Yes, I can see Zvornik on the map.
4 Q. And a little bit to the left and lower, do you see the area of
6 A. I see the Snagovo area.
7 Q. And do you see elevation 402 close to the letter N in the word
9 A. Yes, it's trig point 402.
10 Q. Using the pen that has been given to you, can you draw a small
11 circle around trig point 402?
12 A. [Marks]
13 Q. Sir, when we say "trig point" on a military map, what exactly
14 does this mean?
15 A. A trig point is a characteristic point. It has precisely
16 determined coordinates and an at attitude above sea level. And it should
17 always be the most elevated point in the area concerned.
18 Q. Thank you. Now, on the same map, much higher and a bit to the
19 left, can you see the word or the name Balkovica?
20 A. I can see Balkovica.
21 Q. And I would ask that you make a small circle around the letter K
22 of the word Balkovica using the same pen.
23 A. [Marks]
24 Q. And I would like you now to draw a line between the two points
25 that are there from Snagovo, trig point 402, to Balkovica, simply to join
1 these two points with a line.
2 A. [Marks]
3 Q. Now, to the left of -- to the right of the word Balkovica appears
4 the name Rebici [Realtime transcript read in error, "Ribici"], do you see
5 this, sir?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Can you draw a small circle around the letters -- the letter B of
9 A. [Marks]
10 Q. And then to draw a line from this point or the letter B in Rebici
11 and to link that up with elevation 402 in Snagovo.
12 A. [Marks]
13 Q. Now, I would like to use these two examples now, and of course we
14 do not have time to do a full profile of the land. But my question is
15 the following: Is there optical visibility, at first sight, between trig
16 point 402 in Snagovo and Balkovica on the line that you drew?
17 A. Well, first I have to say that the scale is 1:100.000 here and
18 usually you don't draw profiles of the terrain on such a scale. And in
19 this map a pinpoint on the map represents a 100 meters in real life.
20 What I can see on this sort of a scale is, and what I can see on the
21 basis of the trig points, the elevations, on this axis -- well, on this
22 basis I would say that it's probably impossible to have optical
23 visibility. But to claim this for certain, it would be necessary to make
24 a profile of the terrain.
25 Q. Now, sir, looking at the distance between those two points
1 Balkovica and trig point 402 in Snagovo, yesterday we established
2 together that the distance between those two points was close to 11
3 kilometres. Do you remember that we did this together yesterday, sir?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Now, on the basis of your conclusion that there is no optical
6 visibility between those two points and the distance of 11 kilometre, my
7 question is: If two persons are standing, the first one in trig point
8 4202 in Snagovo and the second one in Balkovica, is it possible to
9 establish radio communications using the RUP-12 radio?
10 A. Again, I have to say that when I have a look at this
11 Mr. President, the scale of which is 1:100.000, it's very difficult to
12 establish what the case would be.
13 But on the basis of the terrain, I can note that on the map this
14 is an area where is there are forests and mountains, but on this basis
15 the radio links between had these two points is probably not possible.
16 It's probably not possible to establish such links, but to be quite
17 certain it would be necessary to take measurements in the field.
18 Q. Thank you. Now if I look at the second line on this map, which
19 is the one that you have drawn between Rebici and trig point 402 in
20 Snagovo, can you tell me if by looking at first sight at the physiognomy
21 of the land whether there is optical visibility between these two points.
22 A. Looking at this map, the scale of which is 1:100.000, I -- I must
23 say that probably no. Probably no. But again, in order to be precise
24 here one would have to make measurements on the ground.
25 Q. Now, you say "measurements on the ground," but if I look for
1 example on this line, the line between Rebici and trig point 402 in
2 Snagovo, right in the middle I see that there is Planinci with a further
3 trig point beside this one indicating 528. Do you see this, sir?
4 A. Yes, I can see it. It's trig point 528.
5 Q. Can you draw a circle around trig point 528 near Planinci.
6 A. [Marks]
7 Q. And looking at the first line, I'd ask you to look at trig point
8 602 close to Potocani. Do you see this, sir? A bit lower than Potocani.
9 A. Yes, I can see it.
10 Q. Can you draw a circle around trig point 602.
11 A. [Marks]
12 Q. Now, bearing in mind these additional trig points which you have
13 just identified, how probable, because you use the word "probable," is it
14 that radio communications can be established between those -- on those
15 two axes, Balkovica-Snagovo and Rebici-Snagovo?
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, before you answer the question.
17 Mr. Vanderpuye.
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I object it calls for
19 speculation. The witness has answered repeatedly that he needs to take
20 field measurements, and he needs to do a terrain analysis in order to
21 answer this question.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you wish to comment, Mr. Bourgon.
23 MR. BOURGON: There is no speculation. The witness can see that
24 there are obstacles there. He can explain what he has what he sees on
25 this map and that does not change the answer that my colleague referred
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. One moment.
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE AGIUS: We are fine with the question. We don't think it
5 calls for speculation, so the witness can answer it.
6 MR. BOURGON:
7 Q. So, sir, if we look at this first line. First, maybe, can you
8 tell us just to be on the safe side, if I look at Balkovica, even though
9 this is a difficult map because it's 1:100.000 - what is the elevation of
10 the circle that you have drown on Balkovica?
11 And I understand that might be difficult because the map is not
12 very clear.
13 A. That can be precisely established based on the lines on this map
14 that connect points with the same altitude. The map is not very clear,
15 though; and I cannot tell for sure, but it looks like the elevation is
16 about 240 to 250 meters.
17 Q. Can you write the number 240-250 beside the circle you have drawn
18 close to Balkovica?
19 A. [Marks]
20 Q. And now beside Rebici, can you tell us from what you can see on
21 this map what would be the height of or the elevation of Rebici?
22 A. I must reiterate that this is difficult to see on this map
23 because usually the profile of the terrain and elevations are taken from
24 1:50.000 scale map. But from what I can see here, I would say that the
25 elevation is about 300 meters.
1 Q. And can you write the number 300 beside Rebici.
2 A. [Marks]
3 Q. Thank you. Now, can you confirm that if you were given a
4 1:50.000 scale map, it would be possible for you to do a precise analysis
5 of the terrain between any two points on this map and tell us if there is
6 optical visibility?
7 A. Yes, but that would require more time.
8 Q. Thank you very much. That's very helpful. If I can ask you
9 simply to put your initials at the bottom of this military map as well as
10 today's date which is 31 October, 2008
11 A. [Marks]
12 MR. BOURGON: I would just like to note in the transcript,
13 wherever I mention the word "Rebici" it appears that the word "Ribici"
14 appears, so I just want to make sure that the correct word close to the
15 circle drawn by the witness is Rebici, with R-E.
16 Thank you very much. We won't need that if I can save this map.
17 Q. Sir, besides existing obstacles between two points, you've
18 mentioned that there are other factors which affect the possibility to
19 establish radio communications using RUP-12 radio. How does weather
20 affect such communications?
21 A. There are several factors that affect the possibility to
22 establish radio communications, one of those factors being the weather.
23 Q. And how does the weather affect the communications? Does it make
24 it better? What kind of weather makes radio communications better or
1 A. It all depends. There are tables showing that. It depends on
2 the frequency used. It depends on the time of the day or night, and the
3 weather conditions at the given moment.
4 Q. And sir you mention that this was, I think you mention a
5 mountainous area, what about the fact that two people would be in the
6 same area but in the middle of the forest. And because it would be July
7 there would be lots of leaves in the trees. Does that affect radio
8 communications also using RUP-12?
9 A. Yes, of course. Because when you conduct measurement in the
10 field, you take into consideration the position of the point in question
11 and the elevation of the antenna as well as what is to be found in the
12 surrounding area around the radio. And yes, the forest does affect the
13 possibility to establish radio communication.
14 Q. And, sir, using the RUP radio 12 with anything less than a full
15 battery charge, does that also affect negatively radio communications
16 using this device?
17 A. Yes, of course. The remaining power of the battery significantly
18 affects the possibility of establish radio communication.
19 Q. And would I be right in saying that the RUP-12 radio uses a
20 rechargeable battery which has a very well known problem called "memory
21 effect." Is that correct?
22 A. Yes, that is correct. The RUP-12 uses rechargeable batteries, a
23 nickel cadmium battery, and that nickel cadmium battery, one of its
24 characteristics is this memory effect.
25 Q. Can you tell us more about the memory effect, how does is this --
1 what exactly is this?
2 A. If you take the full capacity of the battery, and if you use the
3 battery up to 70 per cent, and then you recharge it, when the battery's
4 remaining power is down to 70 perpetrate again. In most cases, the
5 device will show that the battery is almost or completely empty. I
6 mentioned 70 per cent in this example, but in most cases this effect
7 makes itself felt when the battery is discharged to 40 or 50 per cent of
8 its capacity.
9 Q. Now, sir, can you confirm that although this RUP-12 radio, or the
10 battery of this RUP-12 radio, can be recharged manually that such a
11 charger is not issued along with RUP-12 radios within the VRS?
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Vanderpuye.
13 MR. VANDERPUYE: I would ask my colleague at least to clarify the
14 time-period that we are talking about.
15 MR. BOURGON: Will do, Mr. President.
16 Q. To your experience, sir, given where you were in the period that
17 you were at the military academy, for example, do you know that when
18 RUP-12 radios were issued to the VRS whether the manual recharger was
19 issued with it?
20 A. I don't know whether at that time manual chargers were issued,
21 because I wasn't present there at the time. But I can say that battery
22 chargers, according to the specifications and in standard practice, did
23 not come with the RUP-12 radio. As a rule, the batteries were charged at
24 certain places where there were stable sources of electric power. I'm
25 saying this -- I'm saying this to illustrate what the rules were for the
1 RUP-12 and what the proper use of the RUP-12 was. But what was really
2 happening in practice, I cannot tell because I wasn't present at the
4 Q. Thank you, sir. Now, to come back to the issue which was raised
5 by my colleague earlier, you mention about ground reflection being a
6 factor in establishing communications using the RUP-12 radio. My
7 question is the following: Even with all conditions optimized, from a
8 technical point of view, can you confirm that it is not possible to
9 establish radio communications between two points 10 kilometres away from
10 each other if there is no optical visibility?
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Gosnell.
12 MR. GOSNELL: Mr. President, I think that the question is too
13 vague as posed. I don't think there is sufficient parameters in the
14 question for him to answer this hypothetical question.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: I appreciate your intervention of course, but I am
16 not an expert on this subject; and I know very little about it and that's
17 from sailing and using radios during sailing, but that's different; so
18 perhaps the expert witness can tell us whether he has enough information
19 on which he can give a reason to answer or not.
20 Mr. Markovic.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I must say that when I personally
22 used those devices that it was possible to establish radio communications
23 over a distance even greater than 10 kilometres but in conditions of
24 optical visibility [Realtime transcript read in error, "optimal"] in this
25 case, based on the map that was shown to me about 10 minutes ago, radio
1 communication over that distance probably is not possible. But in order
2 to be able to say for sure, you would have to make field measurements.
3 MR. BOURGON:
4 Q. Thank you, sir, that's very helpful. I would like to move to a
5 final area about the RUP-12 radio. Can you tell us that when using this
6 radio, where does the sound come from on the radio?
7 A. There are two possible sources of sound. One is the receiver
8 that you can pick up, and the other source is a headset that come with
9 that device, normally.
10 Q. And, sir, how loud is the sound coming out of either the handset
11 or the headset, and how close do you have to be to hear what is going on,
12 on the radio?
13 A. Unless you are wearing the headset on your head and ears or if
14 the handset is not against your ear, you have to be very close to the
15 radio to be able to overhear the communication from the speaker --
16 speakers. Of course, when it's completely quite, then the distance is
17 somewhat greater.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. BOURGON: Before I move on to my next question, I would just
20 like to make a correction in the transcript. At page 16, line 21, the
21 witness said, "in conditions of optical visibility," and what appears in
22 the transcript at this time is "optimal visibility." I would just like
23 to make this clear.
24 If I can have in e-court please 3D513 this time. And once again
25 I would like to have page 1 in B/C/S and in English.
1 Lower, lower again. Yes. Thank you.
2 Q. Sir, using the same pen that was given to you earlier, do you see
3 on this picture before you the handset used with the RUP-12 radio, and
4 can you draw a circle around it?
5 A. Yes, I can see.
6 Q. If you can draw a circle around the handset.
7 A. [Marks]
8 Q. And can you put the number 1 beside this circle?
9 A. [Marks]
10 Q. Now, do you see in this picture the headset that you are
11 referring to and can you draw a circle around the headset?
12 A. Yes, I can see it.
13 Q. And can you put the number 2 beside this second circle.
14 A. [Marks]
15 Q. And if I can ask you to put your initials and today's date, and
16 if we can save this picture. At the bottom, if you can just put your
17 initials and today's date, 31 October, 2008
18 A. [Marks]
19 Q. Thank you. Now, sir, if a communicator or a signals men is using
20 the RUP-12 radio, and he has the handset in his hand, can a person beside
21 him hear what is being said on the radio?
22 A. Yes, but that person would have to be very close. In absolute
23 silence, the distance is somewhat greater.
24 Q. And when you say "very close," sir, are we talking about
25 centimetres or metres?
1 A. I am speaking about centimetres.
2 Q. And sir, when using the RUP-12 radio, if the signals man is
3 actually wearing the headset, can a person located beside him hear what
4 is being said on the radio?
5 A. The RUP-12, on its front panel, has amplification and that is
6 amplification for the handset. Usually, when you use the headset, the
7 radio operator, signal man, adjusts the volume in his headset according
8 to his own preference. A person standing next to the signal man could
9 hear the conversation if that person is very close. If a -- if the
10 handset is used, again in very quite silent conditions the distance is
12 Q. And again, sir, we are talking about a distance in centimetres;
13 is that correct?
14 A. Yes, centimetres. But if you're in a closed space then the
15 distance is somewhat greater.
16 Q. Thank you very much, sir. I have no further questions.
17 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Bourgon. Ms. Fauveau, do you wish
19 to cross-examine the witness?
20 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] No, I have no question for this
21 witness, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Mr. Krgovic, Mr. Josse?
23 MR. KRGOVIC: No cross, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Sarapa.
25 MR. SARAPA: No questions.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Mr. Vanderpuye.
2 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President, and good morning to
3 you and Your Honours.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning.
5 MR. VANDERPUYE: Good morning to counsel.
6 Cross-examination by Mr. Vanderpuye:
7 Q. And good morning to you, Mr. Markovic. My name is
8 Kweku Vanderpuye, on behalf of the Prosecution I am going to put some
9 questions in relation to your direct testimony and also in relation to
10 your cross-examination by my colleague, Mr. Bourgon.
11 If there is any question that I put to you that is not clear to
12 you please let me know, and I'll try to rephrase it in a way that we can
13 better understand one another. I am going to try to get through this, I
14 think, in an hour and a half but it may be a bit longer given my
15 colleague's cross-examination. In any event, let's get started. I think
16 I will work backwards first.
17 You were talking about the possibility of a person hearing a
18 conversation that occurs on an RUP-12 device just a moment ago, and you
19 indicated, I believe, you indicated on a couple of occasions that in
20 order for a person to hear a conversation, that is not the signal men
21 themselves, but they would have to be close to the signal man who is
22 either wearing a headset or holding a receiver; is that right?
23 A. Well, if you are close to the radio device and if amplification
24 is at the maximum volume, it's possible to hear the conversation through
25 the receiver.
1 Q. Do you know what the specification for the amplification volume
2 of an RUP-12 device are?
3 A. Not off-hand. I can't remember so many details. There are
4 specifications that can be verified it really isn't a problem. I am
5 telling you what I know on the basis of my experience. As far as
6 amplification is concerned, well, amplification is quite slight because
7 the device is used when you have the receiver or when you use the
8 headset. These are the ways in which the devices are used.
9 Q. Well, the RUP-12 is a mobile tactical radio device, right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. It can be deployed to combat situations, right?
12 A. Yes. And that is why you have headsets as part of the device.
13 Q. And in contemplation of deployment to combat situations, those
14 don't tend to be very quite environments, do they?
15 A. Could you please repeat that question? I haven't fully
16 understood it.
17 Q. You said that the amplification is very slight in an RUP-12
18 device, and I'm asking you, do you believe that to be true given the fact
19 that the RUP-12 device is a tactical radio device that is normally or
20 possibly deployed in combat situations which don't tend to be very quite
22 A. That's correct. That's why you have amplification on the headset
23 and on the receiver.
24 Q. All right. And so you said that you've based your conclusions on
25 whether or not a conversation could be overheard on one of these devices
1 on your experience?
2 A. Yes. All of this is based on my personal experience, but I must
3 emphasize the fact that people hear things differently. I can't really
4 say what distance such conversations could be heard by someone else, and
5 it also depends on the amplification at the time used for the front panel
6 of the device.
7 Q. And it also depends on the ambient conditions, the noise
8 conditions at the time that the device is used, right?
9 A. That's correct. It depends on whether you're in a vehicle, into
10 room, or outside. It also depends on the environment that you are in.
11 Q. And as you sit here testifying today, your answer is given
12 without respect to any of those variables, right?
13 A. That's correct. I don't know what all the variants were. I
14 mentioned all the variants I thought of.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. VANDERPUYE: If I could have 3D513 in e-court, please. Thank
18 Q. All right. This is a photograph of the RUP-12 that my colleague
19 showed you in his cross-examination. You identified the handset and the
20 headset in this photograph, I believe. Now, if you look on the left side
21 of that photograph you see a series of what appear to be sticks. Can you
22 tell us what that is -- or can you tell us what that is on the left side
23 of the photograph in the bottom?
24 A. To the left you have a long antenna, a long rod for the RUP-12.
25 Q. And given your experience in radio communications, what type of
1 antenna is that?
2 A. It's the kind of antenna that you use when you are not moving.
3 And it's also used to establish communications at greater distances.
4 Q. Does it have a particular name, this antenna?
5 A. The antenna has a name. I can't quite remember it at the moment.
6 I think its AT, the letters AT followed by some kind of a number. The
7 specifications mention what the name of the antenna is.
8 Q. Are you familiar with a yagi antenna?
9 A. Yes. This is a directional antenna.
10 Q. And the antenna that's depicted in this photograph, is that a
11 directional antenna?
12 A. No.
13 Q. All right. Then what type of antenna is it?
14 A. It's the kind of antenna, the electro-magnetic waves of which
15 radiate in a circular fashion in relation to its axis.
16 Q. It's an omni-directional antenna, isn't it?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And it radiates electro-magnetic energy equally in all horizontal
19 directions, right?
20 A. Right.
21 Q. Thank you for that. By the way, what is the range of an RUP-12
22 radio device operating at full power?
23 A. I have to say that the range depends on a number of factors.
24 When you take all those factors into account, it's then possible to speak
25 about the device's range. All I can say, on the base of my own
1 experience, is that I used these devices for ranges on the second
2 retranslation station and without using an amplifier, the range I used
3 this device for was about 15 kilometres. And this was when a long
4 antenna was used.
5 Q. When you say "a long antenna," is that the antenna that was
6 depicted in that photograph or different?
7 A. Yes, that's the antenna we can see here to the left.
8 Q. And is it that the manufacture does not provide specifications as
9 to the operational range of the radio device? Is that why you are unable
10 to tell us what the range is aside from your own personal experience?
11 A. The manufacturer only tells you about the possibilities of the
12 device in tactical maneuver terrain. And when using it at maximum
13 capacity, and this all depends on the frequency that you select, when
14 using it at such maximum capacity the range should be around 12
16 Q. I am not asking you what you think it might be, I'm asking you
17 whether or not the manufacture specifies that particular information in
18 relation to the device. Are you aware of whether or not they do?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And it's according to the manufacturer, you say, that the device
21 has an operational range of about 12 kilometres?
22 A. As I said, I think that is the case. I can't be a hundred per
23 cent sure.
24 Q. All right. You were asked some questions about line of sight
25 communications, and when I say "line of sight," I mean optical
1 visibility. And I believe you said at one point that it's not possible
2 to establish radio communications from one point to another point in
3 frequencies above 30 megahertz, high frequencies, without optical
5 A. That's what I said, but there are other factors that influence
6 the situation, factors which I have mentioned in my report.
7 Q. In fact, you said that there were exceptions. And I wanted to
8 ask you a little bit about that. When you said that there were
9 exceptions to line of sight communications between point -- between one
10 point and another point, tell us what those exceptions are.
11 A. It's the way that electro-magnetic waves radiate. In space and
12 on the surface. The surface factor is as follows: When it calls to the
13 radiation of electro-magnetic wavelengths, it depends on the
14 configuration of the land, and it also depends on the type of antenna
15 used and the strength of the device. When it comes to the spatial
16 factor, well, the wavelengths radiate in space. It all depends, yet
17 again, on the strength of the device, the type of antenna used, and on
18 the weather conditions. When I say "weather conditions," I have in mind
19 all types of weather conditions.
20 Q. All right. Let me ask you first about some physical things. Are
21 you familiar with a concept known as reflection?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Okay. Why don't you tell us what that is.
24 A. Well, reflection means the reflection of electro-magnetic waves,
25 when they encounter objects.
1 Q. And that can effect the way the wave propagates in real life,
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. So effectively it's like bouncing, right?
5 A. Yes, but it depends on the strength of the device and also the
6 angle of reflection of the electro-magnetic waves.
7 Q. And it also depends on the nature of the surface that it's
8 bouncing of, right, whether it's smooth or pores or hard or soft, right?
9 A. Yes, naturally. A firm flat surface is the best, but it all
10 depends on the other kinds of obstacles that electro-magnetic waves
11 encounter when rebounding.
12 Q. Okay. So reflection is one phenomena that can cause a
13 communication to be established between two points without obstacle --
14 without optical visibility, right?
15 A. That's correct.
16 Q. Are you familiar with a concept known as refraction?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Can you tell us what that is?
19 A. If I've understood this correctly, if this is what you have in
20 mind, it is the refraction of electro-magnetic waves from the atmosphere.
21 Q. And what effect does that have on establishing communications
22 that are not line of sight communications between two points? Let me
23 rephrase that because I see how it came out in the transcript. What
24 effect does refraction of electro-magnetic waves have on establishing a
25 communication between two points that do not have optical visibility?
1 A. When using frequencies, up to 30 megahertz, shortwave
2 frequencies, it has a significant influence. But when you have
3 frequencies above 30 megahertz, the influence is significantly reduced.
4 Q. Now, you mentioned weather phenomena as well as having an impact
5 on you establishing communications that are not line of sight. And in
6 particular, what weather phenomena are you referring to?
7 A. What I had in mind were the current weather conditions, whether
8 it was cloudy or not, naturally I forget to mention the state of the
9 ionosphere at the time and this is something that we cannot influence.
10 This is something we cannot have knowledge about.
11 Q. Is that something that essentially can result in the
12 establishment of the communication between two points that are not in
13 line of sight?
14 A. Yes, it can influence the situation with regard to two points
15 that aren't line of sight points, but, naturally, you also have the
16 Fresnal effect, the so-called Fresnal effect, of the rebounding of
17 electro-magnetic waves that certain frequencies above 30 on megahertz.
18 Q. Okay. And the Fresnal effect can effect or disrupt, I should
19 say, the transmission of -- the transmission of a radio signal, right?
20 A. Yes. But the Fresnal effect is only used when calculating radio
21 relay communications that are used by directional antenna.
22 Q. Okay. And that interferes with the propagation of the wave
23 because there is -- there are objects on the ground such has as forest,
24 clutter, things of that nature, right?
25 A. That's correct. When there are certain obstacles it depends on
1 the position of both radio stations and the configuration of the terrain,
2 but it's on the basis of the configuration of the land and these are
3 positions that one takes into consideration the Fresnal effect when
4 establishing radio communications. But this is all in relation to
5 calculations made on a map, but to be a hundred per cent certain, you
6 have to go into the field and take measurements in the field itself.
7 Q. Okay. Now the Fresnal effect or the -- well, the Fresnal effect
8 itself is not the product of a weather phenomena, it's the product of
9 physical characteristics within the bounds of the radio transmission,
11 A. No, no. It has to do with the atmosphere, the state of the
12 atmosphere. Not the terrain. We have the spatial factor, it radiates
13 through space not over the surface, because the surface factor is not
14 that important.
15 Q. Okay. Now, are you familiar with the phenomena known as
16 temperature inversion?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. If you could briefly tell us what that is?
19 A. If I've understood you correctly, and if we have the same thing
20 in mind, it has to do with the differences in temperature at certain
22 Q. All right. Then maybe we don't have the same thing in mind.
23 What I am talking about is the difference in temperature in the
24 atmosphere from the ground in the direction towards the sky. And that is
25 the difference in temperature which would normally be expected when
1 radiating away from the Earth [Realtime transcript read in error,
2 "either"] would be that the atmosphere would tend to cool. What I am
3 talking about is a temperature inversion where the temperature of the
4 atmosphere radiating away from the Earth can heat up. Are you familiar
5 with that phenomenon?
6 A. Yes. Temperature is non-linear in relation to height.
7 Q. Are you familiar with the effects of tropospheric ducting in
8 relation to temperature inversion?
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Can you repeat the two words?
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: Tropospheric ducting.
11 Q. -- in relation to the phenomenon of temperature inversion?
12 A. Could you perhaps clarify this, I am not quite sure what you are
13 thinking of.
14 Q. All right. What I am talking about is in terms of temperature
15 inversion, normally what you would have is a situation where a radio wave
16 passes through the atmosphere; and the atmosphere, as it passes through,
17 tends to cool as the radio wave travels away from the Earth, right? That
18 would be a normal situation. Does that sound right to you?
19 A. As far as I have understand you, and I have already said that the
20 temperature in the atmosphere is non-linear, it doesn't fall in a linear
21 away. It is non-linear. You have the ionosphere, troposphere, and the
22 temperatures in these various spheres vary from plus to minus.
23 Q. And what I am talking about in terms of tropospheric ducting has
24 to do with layer of cool atmosphere followed by a layer of warm
25 atmosphere when you are moving away from the Earth, so that when a radio
1 wave is discharged, it goes up through the warm atmosphere into the
2 cooler atmosphere above which sits again warm atmosphere. Are you
3 familiar with that type of sandwiching, if I can describe it that way,
4 sandwiching of these layers of warm air with a cool layer of atmosphere
5 in-between. Are you familiar with that?
6 A. Yes, I am familiar with the phenomenon. It is a phenomena that
7 exists; it's a phenomena that one encounters especially when
8 electro-magnetic waves are omitted at short wavelength.
9 Q. Isn't it this case, sir, that that type of ducting results in a
10 wave that would ordinarily be sent out into space or sent into the upper
11 atmosphere refracting back towards the Earth; and the effect of that is
12 to extend inordinately the range of a communication beyond what would
13 normally be expected?
14 A. Yes, that is correct. There are such effects.
15 Q. And it's also correct that that particular characteristic relates
16 to the propagation of waves in the very high frequency range and the
17 ultra-high frequency range, right?
18 A. Yes, that can happen. But as I said, this effect is most
19 pronounced in the short frequency range.
20 Q. Okay. I think -- I think it's time for a break, if that's all
21 right with the Court. This might be a good time to pause.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you we'll have a break now, 25 minutes.
23 --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.
24 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Vanderpuye.
1 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I just noticed what I
2 think is a mistranscription at page 30, line 5, and in my question I had
3 referred to -- referred to a wave refracting back towards the Earth and
4 it reads "either." I just wanted to make that correction to the record.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Yours might be line 5, mine is line 6.
6 So all right.
7 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: This is very interesting for me because it reminds
9 me of when I had the course of sailing, you have to do this subject.
10 Let's proceed.
11 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 Q. Good morning again, Mr. Markovic.
13 A. Good morning.
14 Q. Last I left it, we had mentioned you had indicated you were
15 familiar with this phenomena and that you believed that it affected short
16 frequency range, and I just want to ask you if you feel certain of that?
17 A. I said that it affects most strongly the short frequency range.
18 But the effect is present in the entire frequency range.
19 Q. All right. Thank you for that. Now, I want to refer you, if I
20 could, to your report. And you prepared this audibility report --
21 MR. VANDERPUYE: -- and that's 4D607.
22 Q. I'm not going to put it in e-court now because I want to ask you
23 some questions before that. But you said that you'd prepared audibility
24 report, what you call audibility reports in the past yesterday during
25 your direct examination. Do you recall that?
1 A. Yes, I remember. But as I said then, those were standard things
2 that used to be done before communication was established.
3 Q. Okay. So I take it that you prepared these types of reports in a
4 military context?
5 A. Yes, but only in the operational sense and it wasn't meant to be
6 a report.
7 Q. All right. Have you ever prepared an audibility report in a
8 scientific context, experimental or otherwise?
9 A. No, not experimental. But this was dealt with when I was at the
10 military academy.
11 Q. I take it, then, you haven't produced or published any scientific
12 studies, books, or papers in the area of radio networks,
13 electro-magnetics, or radio engineering; is that right?
14 A. Yes, correct.
15 Q. And can I take it, then, that you haven't prepared any of these
16 types of audibility reports in relation to or in contemplation of court
17 proceedings or other official judicial proceedings?
18 A. No, I have never done that. This is my first appearance in
20 Q. And, in fact, you prepared this report together with someone
21 else, right?
22 A. Yes, with a colleague.
23 Q. Okay. And are you aware of whether or not your colleague has
24 prepared any of these types of reports in relation to court proceedings
25 or any other official inquiries at judicial proceedings?
1 A. I cannot say because I have no knowledge of that, but I think
2 that he has not.
3 Q. Now, yesterday during your direct examination you noted a
4 correction to be made to your report. And in particular, it relate to do
5 a grid location, I believe. That's written in your report as 92.8,
6 and --
7 MR. VANDERPUYE: -- if I could have the report now in e-court.
8 It is 4D607. I think it should be on page 1 in both the English and
10 Q. Okay. And Mr. Gosnell asked you some questions, and I think you
11 pointed out that it was typographical error with respect to point number
12 2 that's in paragraph 1 where it says "44 degrees, 12," and then "92.8."
13 You indicated that was a typo and should read 42.8; is that correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And the same --
16 A. That is correct.
17 Q. And the same error appears also in paragraph 1 on page 3 and also
18 in paragraph 6 on page 3. Those all have to do precise location or grid
19 coordinates for point number 2, which is the Kravica warehouse, right?
20 A. Yes, that is correct. Unfortunately, when this first error was
21 typed it was only carried on. We found out too late about it.
22 Q. Okay. And I'm glad you kind of went to my next point which is
23 when did you find out about this particular typo?
24 A. I became aware of the error when it was -- when I was informed
25 that I might have to appear before this Tribunal, and then I once again
1 took a look at this report to check whether it coincided with everything
2 that we did on the ground. And when I was looking up the coordinate on
3 the topographic map, I became aware of the error.
4 Q. And about how long ago was that, a week, a couple of weeks, could
5 you tell us more precisely?
6 A. I cannot say precisely, but it may have been some 10 days ago.
7 Q. And when was it, if ever, did you notify the Defence counsel
8 about this particular typographical error?
9 A. I believe I notified the Defence last week in a phone
11 Q. Okay. Have you become aware of any other errors having reviewed
12 your report?
13 A. Yes. I can -- I don't have it here and now, it's on the scanned
14 map in the 1:50.000 scale that the Kravica warehouse was a little -- was
15 moved a little, but it's a very difficult -- but it's because it is very
16 difficult to find the coordinates on a scanned map. But we entered the
17 data that we -- that we established on the ground using the Garmin device
18 which is used by the criminal police. If I may explain, it is very
19 difficult to establish geographical coordinates on these maps because
20 these maps are mostly old, from the 1980s and for a precise determination
21 of coordinates some parameters had to be entered; but we exclusively
22 relied on geographical coordinates established by means of a GPS.
23 And we only indicate on the map where the individual spots were
24 located. We entered circles on the map.
25 Q. All right. Thank you for that. Of course you realise that on
1 preparing technical reports such as this one that it's important to be
2 thorough in your analysis and to be objective and careful, right?
3 A. Yes, that is correct. And we tried to act in accordance, we
4 mostly based our work on the accurate establishment of the spots where
5 communication was possible. That's why there were two of us on the job,
6 to establish to which point audibility was possible.
7 Q. All right. And to that effect you know that it's important to
8 meticulously document the procedure that you undertook, right, in
9 preparing the report and in conducting the test?
10 A. Yes, that is correct. I stated the exact coordinates where we
11 were located when we were testing the communication. I repeat that those
12 are geographical coordinates established by means of a Garmin GPS.
13 Q. It's also important in a report, technical report as this one is,
14 to identify the methodology that you used in conducting the tests that
15 are reported, right?
16 A. Yes. The methodology is one of the things that is part of the
17 report. This is a short report with some annexes merely to show the
18 configuration of the terrain where we worked. But I repeat that we based
19 our work on a simple test of radio communication, which means from the
20 geographical locations where my colleague and I were present where we
21 checked the communication physically using radios on the ground. And we
22 entered the coordinates of our precise whereabouts at any given moment.
23 I think that weather conditions would not have affected the test results
24 given the short distances at which we were operating.
25 Q. All right. Thank you for that. It would be important to put
1 this kind of information, that is the methodology, how you did the tests,
2 under what circumstances you did the tests, what devices you used, how
3 you used them, in a report, right?
4 A. That is correct, but this was left to us to assess the best way
5 of conducting this test. This is what we came up with. We think that
6 this was the best and the simplest way to conduct the test.
7 Q. All right. But you are aware, of course, that in the absence of
8 that kind of information it makes it difficult to understand how the test
9 was carried out, it makes it difficult to repeat or replicate the results
10 of the tests and the results of the procedures that are employed in
11 conducting those tests. You would agree with that, right?
12 A. I agree that it's impossible to replicate this type of test. The
13 only thing that can be replicated is the geographical coordinates or
14 locations and at the very same locations radio communication can be
15 tested. There are the exact coordinates, and if you use the same kind of
17 Q. All right. Well, let me just jump ahead a little bit and then
18 I'll come back to this. But you've testified here today that there were
19 a number of factors, environmental factors that influence the possibility
20 to establish a radio communication from one point to another, right?
21 A. Yes, of course. That's what I've said. Those are the general
22 factors that influence any kind of radio communication.
23 Q. And one of those factors happens to be, well, the weather.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And the weather is relatively fluid, it changes from time to
2 time, right?
3 A. Yes, that is correct. That's one of the things that we cannot
5 Q. And those changes in weather can have an effect, clearly, on
6 whether or not you are able to receive or transmit -- well, I suppose,
7 receive a radio signal at any given moment, right?
8 A. Yes, that is correct. But I must stress that weather conditions
9 play a role exclusively when communication is established over a longer
10 distance. And if you use devices that operate on short frequencies and
11 if you use radio relays. Talking about this type of equipment, the
12 weather conditions affect them very slightly.
13 Q. In any event, it would be important to record what those weather
14 conditions were, wouldn't it? As a matter of being accurate and complete
15 in your analysis, right?
16 A. If we want to have a full analysis, a 100 per cent analysis
17 including all details, we would have to -- we would require the weather
18 conditions from a metrological station in -- nearby, because I cannot
19 establish the weather conditions myself. I can only tell what I can see
20 from the place where I'm located at that moment. All other conditions
21 such as air, humidity, cloud, altitude, temperature, require more precise
22 measurements at the given moment and on that location because those
23 factors can differ from place to place.
24 Q. Well, you say, "if we want to have a full analysis, a 100 per
25 cent analysis," is there something wrong with that from your point of
2 A. No, there is nothing wrong with that. But that would have
3 burdened the report because I think that the weather conditions would not
4 have greatly affected the results in this report between the two spots at
5 that moment. Weather conditions do affect communication, but they would
6 not have a significant impact in this case given the distance, if that's
7 what you mean.
8 Q. All right. Well, one way to determine whether or not weather
9 conditions have an impact in given transmission is to have repeated the
10 test on different day, wouldn't it be? Wouldn't that be a reasonable way
11 to determine whether or not weather is a factor in the test results that
12 you managed to obtain?
13 A. Yes, of course. You can take a reference point, or something,
14 and test all power, make a trial on that day with all the data from
15 metrological station and then --
16 THE INTERPRETER: The witness should be asked to speak a little
17 slower please and repeat what he just said.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Mr. Markovic, the interpreters are
19 having a few problems. If you could repeat your answer and also speak
20 more slowly, please. Thank you.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise if I speak fast. I'll
22 try to slow down. So let me repeat.
23 It would have had an effect, but we would have to take a
24 reference point on a certain day, get information from a metrological
25 station about the conditions in the atmosphere at specific geographic
1 coordinates. By using the same frequencies and the same radio devices,
2 make several measurements, compare those reports, and then we would have
3 exact whether the weather conditions, as one of the factors effect radio
4 communication between two coordinates and to what extent in terms of
6 MR. VANDERPUYE:
7 Q. All right. Well, the report that you prepared proposes to
8 establish the audibility of radio signals from various locations along
9 this Konjevic Polje-Bratunac road. As a general proposition, certainly
10 not just on the 17th of September as I think the date that you tested.
11 And the reason why I ask this question is in order to determine what the
12 conditions are or radio reception as a general perception on that road,
13 it would make sense to test what those properties are on more than one
14 occasion on one day in September of 2008. Would you agree with that
16 A. Yes, I would agree, but I've said as much already that several
17 measurements would have to be made, and I didn't mean on the same day but
18 under different weather conditions and at different times of day. As I
19 chose, the time-period and the weather conditions, the results were as
20 you can see in this report.
21 Q. All right. Based on your report -- let me just back up, I'm
22 sorry. Based on your report, it appears that you conducted these two
23 types of testing, one had to do with the use of a computer model
24 programme and the other had to do with the field testing as you've
25 described. That's correct, right?
1 A. We used a computer programme to illustrate the results
2 graphically, what things look like on the ground. But for detailed, 100
3 per cent accurate establishment of the possibility of radio
4 communication, we tested radio communication directly at the locations.
5 Q. All right. I just want to ask you some questions about the
6 computer based analysis that you did or representation. The programme
7 that you used in this case is what's called a HerTZ Mapper programme,
9 A. Yes, correct.
10 Q. A HerTZ Mapper programme is a commercially available radio
11 network modeling tool, and it can be used by radio engineers, planners,
12 network designers, and so on and so forth, right?
13 A. Yes. There are various computer programmes. This is a standard
14 programme of an older generation. We used what we had at our disposal at
15 that moment. We use a digital maps for that programme which I -- and
16 these digital maps are not the same as topographic maps. And not all
17 altitudes are entered into these digital maps. That's why we used this
18 programme only, as I said, to represent graphically what the audibility
19 of radio communication under ideal conditions would be. And we obtained
20 our real results by directly testing the radio communication on the
22 Q. All right. Now, it's fairly common knowledge among people in the
23 field that these types of commercial programmes are available and they
24 can be used to establish at least theoretical possibility of
25 communications from point to point, right?
1 A. Yes, there are various kinds of programmes. Some programmes are
2 meant to be used only for certain types of radio devices. This is a
3 general programme. Some programmes use radio defusion stations to
4 establish the possibility of propagation of radio waves at a certain
5 spot, to establish theoretically which area can be covered. And when
6 we -- when we tried to establish the range of some devices, then we used
7 that programme to see what we can expect so as to be able to prepare.
8 Q. All right. And so the programme can be used to establish, for
9 example, the theoretical possibility of communications between two
10 stationary points, right?
11 A. No. This is used exclusively and in this case for the testing of
12 the propagation of radio waves of an emitter at maximum power at a given
13 geographical coordinate.
14 Q. Are you saying that the programme that you used can't determine
15 whether or not you can establish connectivity between a point to point
16 radio -- a point to point communication? You can't establish that
17 through the programme that you used?
18 A. No. That cannot be determined. You can only determine the
19 propagation of electro-magnetic waves, but you must also take into
20 consideration that digital maps do not fully coincide with topographical
21 maps because they do not contain all altitude points.
22 Q. What version of this programme might I ask that you were using?
23 A. I'm not fully sure. I think it's HerTZ Mapper 2.0, but I'm not
24 certain. We can verify that.
25 Q. Are you aware that the HerTZ Mapper programme has the possibility
1 to enter myriad variables in order to determine relatively accurately or
2 more accurately the possibility of communication from point to point
3 radios, mobile radio communications; are you aware that the programme has
4 that possibility in this day and age?
5 A. Yes, of course. I think aware of that. This is a programme with
6 many possibilities. I am not an expert for this programme as I have
7 stated. We used that programme to graphically illustrate the propagation
8 of radio -- electro-magnetic waves on the ground. And an exact test of
9 radio communication was made by our presence on the ground at specific
10 geographical coordinates and by using the radio devices in question.
11 That's what we stated in our report and -- but you're right, the HerTZ
12 Mapper programme has huge possibilities for entering parameters and
13 obtaining results.
14 Q. All right. Well, I don't want this to be a secret shared between
15 us, but the parameters that that programme has available that you can
16 actually define and input range from the terrain data itself to whether
17 or not there is ground clutter, you can programme the -- you can
18 programme in whether or not the transmission occurs in a rural area, an
19 urban area, whether or not there is forest in the area, whether or not
20 there is water in the area, wood in the area, you can define what type of
21 propagation model, you can define whether that's in free space, you can
22 define whether or not you have the Fresnal effects, as you say, you can
23 define whether or not of you have the phenomenon known as troposcattering
24 or tropospheric ducting, as I mentioned. You can define all these
25 parameters in that programme and then some. That's true, isn't it?
1 A. Yes, your quite correct. That's true. But I have to point out
2 that even after having entered all such information you only get a
3 projection. But what actually happens on the ground is something that
4 you have to directly test there. This is just a model, a projection. It
5 can tell you what sort of things you can expect in the field, you're
6 quite right. But we carried out investigations on the ground. What we
7 did by using the HerTZ Map programme was just done to give you a graphic
8 depiction of what the situation was like on the ground.
9 Q. Well, in order to give us a graphic depiction of what the
10 situation was like on the ground you had to enter certain information,
11 right? The type of information you might want to enter is the power of
12 the transmitter; did you enter that information?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. What did you enter it as because we don't have a record of that
15 in your report?
16 A. As I have said, under ideal conditions it's are 5 watts. That
17 would be the maximum power of the device.
18 Q. That would be the maximum power of the device at a certain
19 frequency range; isn't that true?
20 A. Yes, let me clarify this immediately since I can see that it's
21 not quite clear. We entered the information, we entered the geographical
22 coordinates, and we entered information on the power of the device as
23 well as information on altitude.
24 Q. The device -- one of the devices anyway that you studied or you
25 looked at was the Motorola GP300, right?
1 A. Yes. GP300.
2 Q. The other device that you looked at was a -- was a Motorola
3 OP030, right?
4 A. Yes. These -- this is information, rather, that we took from the
5 front panel of the radio device manufacture had noted this information on
6 the front panel of the device. It wasn't information obtained from the
7 technical specifications.
8 Q. Did you review the technical specifications of the radios that
9 you tested in relation to the preparation of your report?
10 A. Yes. Only some details, though, not all of the specifications.
11 Q. Well, in respect to specifications of the Motorola OP030, you say
12 that you found out the power of transmission by looking at the radio
13 itself; is that right?
14 A. Let me clarify this to make it simpler and easier. When it comes
15 to the technical aspect -- well, since we have a communications
16 administration, we asked them to programme those radio devices for us so
17 that they were used on certain frequencies. In order to check the
18 communications system. In the case of the GP300 device, we used channel
19 number 1, and we asked them to programme the channels at random by using
20 that frequency range. And with regard to the programme that you
21 mentioned, well, we input the frequencies. But regardless of that fact,
22 we tried to establish communications by using a number of channels and
23 the results were absolutely identical.
24 What the maximum force of output was at the time is not something
25 I could inform you of since there are a number of factors that can effect
1 this. It depends on the battery, the antenna, and the frequency. We
2 tried to ensure that the batteries were fully charged, and we tried to
3 simulate optimal conditions. The results obtained, the devices we used,
4 well, you have information on the results obtained and the devices used
5 in our report. As for all other technical specifications, well, we did
6 not note them since we tried radio communications by using a number of
7 channels. So whatever frequency we used, the results at those distances
8 were absolutely identical.
9 Q. All right. Well, you say in your report, and this is at page 2
10 of your report, and I'll just read it. I don't know necessarily that we
11 need to display it, but you say that:
12 "These devices alone have the maximum power output of 5 a watts
13 which depending on the land configuration in real conditions at the
14 tactical and maneuver soil," it says in my copy, "Theoretically amounts
15 to two to five
16 report. Do you see that in your report?
17 A. Yes, I do.
18 Q. Now, with respect to the range of those portable devices, from 2
19 to 5 kilometres, did you get that the manufacture specifications for the
20 radio or did you get that from some other source?
21 A. No, didn't receive this information from the manufacturer. These
22 are things that we dealt with in the course of my education at the
23 militarily academy, all handheld radio devices of this type, regardless
24 of the manufacturer, were assumed to be devices that could be used in
25 tactical maneuver terrain in order to establish communications at
1 distances between 2 and 5 kilometres. We didn't take into consideration
2 [as interpreted] the technical specifications for all the reasons that we
3 have mentioned --
4 Q. All right.
5 A. -- in my presentation.
6 Q. You also mention in page 2 in your report as my colleague
7 Mr. Gosnell went over with you yesterday, that you had established that
8 there were no active amplifying inter-stations that could amplify the
9 range of the radio connection --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Gosnell.
11 MR. GOSNELL: I'm sorry, Mr. President. The transcript reads,
12 and I believe the translation came through as "we didn't take into
13 consideration the technical specifications," I'm informed that the
14 witness said that "we did not rely on the technical specifications."
15 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Do you confirm that, Mr. Markovic? We
16 are talking of lines 17 to 19 of page 45.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. We didn't rely on or base
18 ourselves on the technical specifications.
19 MR. VANDERPUYE:
20 Q. All right. Well, then maybe I should rephrase my question.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
22 MR. VANDERPUYE:
23 Q. Did you review the technical specifications of the devices that
24 you tested in relation to the range that you mention on page 2 of your
25 report? And if you, what did you say?
1 A. I don't have the technical specifications for those devices, but
2 on the basis of our request we asked our communications centre to provide
3 us with devices that used such frequencies and that had such an output
4 strength. And that is why we did not rely on technical specifications.
5 Q. So as you sit here today, you can't tell this Trial Chamber what
6 the technical specifications for the Motorola GP300 or the Motorola OP030
7 are with respect to the stated range by the manufacturer; is that what
8 you're saying?
9 A. Well, look. I can't remember all the technical specifications
10 when you're provided with the technical specifications of a radio device.
11 Well, the material is voluminous, you are provided with all the details
12 of the device. I really can't remember all that information, but you do
13 have access to all the technical specifications. All I can say is that
14 when I was drafting the report, we tested the devices at given
15 frequencies and these are the results that we obtained.
16 As for what you are requesting, well, it would require checking
17 communications by using the entire range of frequencies, entire specter.
18 We would have to go a few megahertz above and a few megahertz
19 below the range in order to be quite certain about the results. Such
20 tests are practically impossible if we were to take into consideration
21 all these frequencies. It would be very difficult. When you change the
22 frequency and when you change the battery, the device acts differently.
23 The radio devices that I worked with, the specifications of which I was
24 familiar with, are devices I -- I used. For example, it says "100 watts"
25 for the technical specifications, but the instructions for maintaining
1 the device say that at certain frequencies, and when using certain
2 antenna, you have a force of 120 watts -- strength of 120 watts.
3 What I can tell you, on the basis of my experience, is that the
4 manufacturer always mentions that certain conditions should be taken into
5 account when you use these devices. Perhaps he added certain extra
6 parameters or perhaps he reduced the parameters. There are thousands of
7 factors on the radio device itself that could result in such a situation.
8 We used a number of channels, that's all I can repeat. We obtained the
9 same results at a certain geographical location. We established that was
10 impossible [as interpreted] to establish communications.
11 Q. Mr. Markovic, with all due are respect --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment.
13 Mr. Gosnell.
14 MR. GOSNELL: I sincerely apologise too my colleagues for having
15 to interrupt. I am informed that there are a number of transcription or
16 perhaps translation errors in the first half of that answer, in
17 particular at line 8, or 9, the witness inserted the word "almost" before
18 "impossible." Clearly, that's very important, and I wanted to put that
19 on the record now.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: The place where I have -- the line where I have the
21 word "impossible" is line 11. I don't know about what line is it in your
22 transcript, Mr. Gosnell?
23 MR. GOSNELL: On my screen, it does appear to be line 9.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: It starts with, "Such and such results are
25 impossible," that's what we are talking about, no?
1 MR. GOSNELL: I believe so, but I have to confess it just
2 disappeared from my scene.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: But anyway, you need to be to freeze your screen in
4 order to be able to -- anyway, it's on mine, I am sure they will find
5 exactly the location. Thank you.
6 Mr. Vanderpuye.
7 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 Q. Mr. Markovic, with all due respect, you prepared this report in
9 contemplation of two very specific portable radio devices. These aren't
10 just any portable radio devices. You've actually stated the model number
11 in your report. You prepared this report in contemplation of its
12 submission to a Trial Chamber constituted to try a case of this
13 seriousness; and you tried this report in contemplation or bringing some
14 modicum of certainty to the question of whether or not certain radio
15 communications are possible along this Konjevic Polje-Bratunac Road from
16 very specific and pinpointed locations.
17 With all due respect, you've come to court today having read your
18 report and being prepared to testify; and you tell us you can't remember
19 the specifications of the devices that are the subject -- exclusive
20 subject of your report?
21 Tell us, Mr. Markovic, why is it that you didn't take field notes
22 or get or obtain copies of the manufacturer's specifications with respect
23 to these two very specific radios?
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Gosnell.
25 MR. GOSNELL: Your Honour, I object to the editorial remark
1 before the question. It's not related to a question. It's comment on
2 the witness's testimony, and it's improper.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you wish to comment, Mr. Vanderpuye.
4 MR. VANDERPUYE: No, Mr. President.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE AGIUS: We are not as disturbed as you are by it,
8 Mr. Gosnell. After all, we are in cross-examination. So let's proceed.
9 MR. VANDERPUYE:
10 Q. Can you answer the question, sir?
11 A. Could you please repeat the question. On a number of occasions I
12 said that I wasn't claiming anything for certain. I wasn't saying that
13 it was 100 per cent certain. I said that whenever checking radio
14 communications there are several factors, and we can never be 100 per
15 cent certain about the results. I said that at the beginning of my
16 testimony, and I'll now repeat that whenever checking radio
17 communications and especially at shorter distances -- well, just a few
18 centimetres can affect the results, a few metres on the basis of my
19 experience. Certain radio communications cannot be established: When
20 you move a metre or the left or to the right then radio communications
21 could to a certain extent be established. I am just telling you about
22 what we did in the field.
23 We drafted a very simple report to present here in a simple
24 manner how we operated, and to show that we checked radio communications
25 at those geographical coordinates alone --
1 THE INTERPRETER: The witness is kindly asked to slow down a bit
2 for the sake of the interpretation.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- and there is something else I
4 should add. We didn't go into detail technical specifications, and
5 you've been insisting on this because you thought that it was not
7 And I think that all the factors that we have mentioned here
8 effect the situation with regard to that radio device. And in the end,
9 when operating at such distances and when using such radio devices, the
10 Motorola GP300 or some other kind of device, well, the results would not
11 have been significantly different. The results would have been different
12 had a very powerful device been used, because the propagating of
13 electro-magnetic waves long the surface, because of such propagation
14 perhaps the results would have been different. The results that we have
15 presented here are the results that you can see in the report.
16 Q. Understood, Mr. Markovic. Understood.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Markovic, please again, recommendation to slow
18 down because of the interpreters, please.
19 MR. VANDERPUYE:
20 Q. My question, was, sir --
21 A. I apologise. That's quite a lot of information, so sometimes I
22 start speaking a little more rapidly. I'll try to slow down.
23 Q. My question, Mr. Markovic, was did you maintain field notes when
24 you conducted the field test? And you can tell us yes or no. You did or
25 you didn't.
1 A. We kept notes with regard to where we were located when checking
2 the communications.
3 Q. You say and you did mention earlier that moving a metre to the
4 left or a metre to the right can effect the reception or communication.
5 Did you record that in your field notes because it's not in your report?
6 A. As I have already said, when checking communications at point 6,
7 it was impossible to establish radio communications while we were in the
8 vehicle. When we left the vehicle, when we got out of the vehicle, and
9 you have to agree with me that this would involve moving a few metres
10 away from the vehicle, when we did this we established communications.
11 And the ratio was 2:1 [Realtime transcript read in error, "to"].
12 Q. And I want to know if you recorded this in your field notes. You
13 can answer that yes or no.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Gosnell.
15 MR. GOSNELL: I apologise again for interrupting. The result
16 ratio is not expressed correctly in the transcript. It was 2:1 at line
18 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. It's line 22 in mine. So the end of
19 the previous -- of the last answer of the witness, and the ratio was 2:1
20 instead of what we have in the transcript, which is the ratio was 2:1.
21 Thank you. Let's proceed.
22 MR. VANDERPUYE:
23 Q. Mr. Markovic, you can answer yes or no. Did you record these
24 results in your field notes?
25 A. I recorded quite a lot of information. And in my report I think
1 I wrote down that communications were checked in and out of the car. I
2 probably had this information noted in my notes when working in the
3 field, too. Otherwise I wouldn't have been able to draft this report as
4 I did, because we checked communications both in and out of the vehicle.
5 Q. I take it you couldn't have been at the transmitting end and the
6 receiving end at the same time. That's fair to say, right?
7 A. Of course, it's physically impossible. As I said at the
8 beginning I did this together with my colleague. He was at positions 1
9 and 2, and I was at point 6.
10 Q. And did your colleague move a metre to the left or a metre to the
11 right when he was at positions 1 and 2, and is that recorded in the field
12 notes? That's what I want to know.
13 A. Well, those would be his notes. I don't know whether he moved a
14 metre or two. I assumed that he moved a metre or two away because this
15 is quite usual when checking communications. You move a couple of metres
16 to the left or to the right to check communications. But as to what he
17 did exactly, I can't be certain because I was 4 kilometres away from him.
18 Q. All right. And you didn't review his field notes before you put
19 this report together. That's fair to say, right?
20 A. I didn't have a look at all the details of his notes. Naturally
21 he kept notes at the location because he also had a GPS device on him in
22 order to determine the locations concerned. But naturally, I'll just
23 repeat that this is usually done when establishing radio communications.
24 You try to change your location, to move around a bit, in order to
25 establish communications. My colleague was at the geographical location
1 stated here, and he probably moved; but I can't claim that for certain or
2 with a hundred per cent certainty.
3 Q. All right. Let me move to a different area. If I could draw
4 your attention to Annex 8 and 9 of your report.
5 MR. VANDERPUYE: That is -- page 14 and 15 in both languages.
6 Actually, what I'd like to do is to compare the two of them, and that
7 would mean to putting up page 14 in one and page 15 in the other
8 language. Thank you. I wonder if we could zoom in a little bit on both
9 of them so that the colour part is broader. Thank you very much.
10 Q. Yesterday on direct examination you were asked about these two
11 particular diagrams and you indicated that -- or you were explaining the
12 colour scheme, and you said, "The areas in blue is the areas where it is
13 only theoretically possible to establish communications," for my
14 colleagues this is page 62 of yesterday's transcript. I don't think the
15 pagination corresponds, but in any event it was page 62 line 20 through
16 page 63, line 3.
17 And you say: "The blue areas are where it's only theoretically
18 possible to establish communication; however, the communication is poor
19 or extremely poor."
20 And you say: "The grey areas are where it is absolutely
21 impossible to establish any sort of communications with the devices I had
22 at my disposal."
23 Do you remember that testimony, sir?
24 A. Yes, I remember, and that is correct. But this is only a
25 theoretical assumption which needn't mean it is that way in practice.
1 Q. All right. I just want to establish that you recall that
2 testimony. Now, if you look at these two diagrams, you look at the one
3 on the left which is annex 9 in your report. You can see the grey areas,
4 for example, near the area that's depicted -- where you can see the
5 number 12 or 1-2. You see those grey areas?
6 A. [No interpretation]
7 Q. All right. You see them in others areas all over the map. But
8 in particular if you look at the one where it says 12 on annex 9, and you
9 look at the outline of the blue areas where it says 12 on Annex 8, you
10 can see that they actually correspond identically. In other words, those
11 grey areas are on Annex 9 are the blue areas on Annex 8, exactly, right?
12 Pixel for pixel.
13 A. I suppose that is the case, but this isn't due to any of my
14 doing. But these are again theoretical representations only to render
15 our report more plastic. I -- I have no influence on this. We
16 physically tested radio communication, but my colleague entered the
17 parameters and the programme. I was there, of course, but he entered the
18 parameters, and we wanted this to be an illustration of our work, a
19 graphical depiction. How the programme computed that and represented it
20 on the digital map has nothing to do with me.
21 Q. All right. Well, what I'm saying or what I'm asking you, I
22 guess, is isn't it the case that the grey areas that are depicted in
23 annex 9 are simply showing you what the difference is between the two
24 devices and not as you stated yesterday areas where it's impossible to
25 establish communications with the devices that you had? Isn't it I
1 simply the case that Annex 9 is an overlay of Annex 8?
2 A. I cannot answer with certainty. I can only say that the same
3 data was entered at different geographical locations but what the
4 programme made of it is shown here. I cannot influence that. We only --
5 we used the same parameters with different frequencies.
6 Q. All right. So are you telling us that you're not sure what the
7 grey areas depict?
8 A. No. When we were using this, an explanation is -- can be found.
9 It says that the grey areas are those where communication is not
10 possible. But to be sure, you would have to go to the very spot and
11 physically test communication on that frequency. Even though this is
12 grey or even -- or possibly blue, that does not mean that communication
13 is either possible or impossible. It is only a computer model which
14 shows the terrain and what the propagation of electro-magnetic waves is
15 roughly like, but we relied exclusively on a physically test.
16 Q. And thank you for that?
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Gosnell.
18 MR. GOSNELL: Again, apologise for interrupting, but I believe
19 there is a problem with the translation. I don't want to project what
20 the issue is, but I can put it like this, and I think it won't cause any
21 harm; I believe there was an inversion of the adjectives in relation to
22 the first two nouns mentioned in the second sentence of lines 10 and 11.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Can you be more precise? Let's identify which
25 MR. GOSNELL: I'm sorry, Your Honour, I understand it's lines 12
1 and 13 on the other --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, mine 12 and 13 starts "I cannot answer with
3 certainty ..."
4 MR. GOSNELL: Correct. And then it's the follow sentence, and I
5 believe -- or I'm led to believe that the adjectives used there are
6 actually inverted in relation to the first two nouns. And I don't want
7 to say specifically to you out loud what I'm specifically saying or
8 referring to.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: You under normal circumstances I would read it as
10 this to the witness, have it translated to him, and ask him for his
11 comments. But I want to be to make sure that there is no repetition of
12 it when it is translated.
13 Mr. Markovic, sometime back, about a minute ago, you were asked
14 the following question: "Isn't it simply the case that Annex 9 is an
15 overlay of Annex 8?"
16 And your answer, according to the transcript, was as follows:
17 "I cannot answer with certainty. I can only say that the same
18 data was entered at different geographical locations, but what the
19 programme made of it is shown here. I cannot influence that. We only --
20 we only used the same parameters with different frequencies."
21 I take it this has been translated to you now. Does it
22 correspond to what you actually said previously in your own language? Or
23 do you want to explain further to us.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that, but at different
25 geographical coordinates is wrong. It was at the same geographical
1 coordinates. In this case, I referred to point 2.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Is that what you had in mind, Mr. Gosnell? Because
3 I think it's different. I think you can be direct and make it clear.
4 MR. GOSNELL: From the context of the annexes, and I'm sure my
5 colleague will agree, it's clear that this -- it can't be same data at
6 the same geographic locations. That's simply not correct. And I think
7 if we understand the context, it's clear that the adjectives were
8 actually inverted. But I'm sorry for being so blunt about that in front
9 of the witness.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. It's okay, I mean. At the end of the day we
11 want to see clear on this. Mr. Vanderpuye.
12 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: And thank you, Mr. Gosnell.
14 MR. VANDERPUYE:
15 Q. All right. Mr. Markovic, I'm going to try and speed things up
16 because I can see that my time is practically up, but I think I will ask
17 the Trial Chamber for its indulgence.
18 Okay. One of the things that's contained in your report is a
19 soil profile. And you said before that the terrain can influence a radio
20 transmission. You will be able to receive a radio transmission. Yes or
21 no, right?
22 A. Yes, that's correct.
23 Q. And one of the soil profiles that you generated in this case, you
24 generated, let's see, Annex 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: If I can have Annex 1 in e-court, please.
1 That's at page 7. All right. If we could move, I think to the left of
2 the screen it would be easier to see.
3 Q. This is depicted in your report as a soil profile on the road
4 communication. It says, "Sandici-Kravica warehouse." It says is start
5 point here is Sandici and that the ending point is 1.2 kilometres away
6 from the point of reference. I take it that's from left to right. Is
7 that right?
8 A. Yes, from left to right.
9 Q. And the graph indicates the certain data points with respect to
10 the soil profile. And that's why it has those, well, irregular angles as
11 opposed to a more smooth contour, right?
12 A. Yes. Unfortunately the programme we use is limited because it
13 can't represent contours smaller than 2 kilometres. It was very
14 difficult for us. We had to take a larger area. This was intended for a
15 graphic depiction of the contours of the terrain. But it is 3
16 dimensional, so it's difficult to see here. But you can suppose based on
17 these peaks what the terrain was like. This contour does not follow the
18 road, though, it follows the optical lines. The line of sight.
19 Q. Thank you, for that. Now, what this shows is that from the
20 starting point, which is Sandici, that the soil rises, right? It goes
21 from 200 to 290 or so metres and it rises over a distance of say 500
22 metres, some 50 or so metres; is that right? That's the first data
24 A. Yes, that's correct. But I must stress again that digital maps
25 were used that were not topographic maps and did not contain all details.
1 We only used what was in the map by default, and that's what we
3 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... I just want to make sure
4 that I am interpreting this graph correctly and what it shows is a rise
5 in the elevation of the soil over a distance in the direction of Kravica
6 from Sandici. That's correct.
7 A. Just a moment, please. Yes, the starting point is at 282 metres.
8 Q. And from there it rises to -- well, close to 400 metres. You can
9 see that in your diagram. That's true, right?
10 A. Yes. That's what the computer programme shows, but if you can go
11 to the place itself, the surrounding hills and mountains dominate the
12 spot where we were.
13 Q. All right.
14 MR. VANDERPUYE: If I could have in e-court please 65 ter 2986,
15 and it's page 49 of that document. All right. If we could just blow up
16 the image on the right to fill the screen, that would be helpful, with
17 the captions, that might even be more helpful. All right. Thank you
18 very much.
19 Q. What's depicted in this photograph is a shot where you can see
20 the Sandici meadow and you can see Kravica warehouse. That's marked by
21 arrows, and from that point where you see the arrow pointing down to
22 Sandici meadow of the Kravica warehouse, can you identify this incline
23 that's depicted in your terrain profile in Annex 1 in your report?
24 MR. VANDERPUYE: Maybe we could just blow it up in the direction
25 of -- in the right corner of this.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can see that this is Sandici
2 meadow and that this is the location we are speaking about. And the
3 profile, is such that the height contour is fall toward Sandici and to
4 the Kravica warehouse. The diagram is a two-dimensional representation
5 and does not take into consideration all lower height contours that can
6 in turn be seen on a topographical map. And that's why communication
7 between the two points is possible, and we indeed mentioned that it is
8 five -- over five, or in other words 100 per cent.
9 MR. VANDERPUYE:
10 Q. All right. Well can you identify the incline that's depicted in
11 your annex? Maybe you want a pen so that you can circle this and mark it
12 for us.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Usher. Yes, you want to correct the
14 transcript? I said Madam Usher when I should have said --
15 MR. GOSNELL: No, Mr. President. I don't wish to do that.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: I apologise to the usher, anyway.
17 MR. GOSNELL: I believe in order to make this representation or
18 objection that the witness is going to have to leave the room.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, because he understands English as you put it
21 Mr. Markovic, you need to leave the courtroom for a short while.
22 We'll call you back very soon.
23 [The witness stands down]
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Gosnell.
25 MR. GOSNELL: Mr. President, I think it would be in all fairness
1 to the witness it would be better to put a topographic map to him. I can
2 see just from the angle of this photograph that it's rife with confusion.
3 He easily could make an error, and these arrows might mislead him to draw
4 a line from one direction from the other. This is a question also of the
5 difference between two dimensions and three dimensions. I think in many
6 respects it would be easy for the witness to make a mistake in respect of
7 this photograph, and I don't think that would fairly reflect what appears
8 in Annex 1. And so I think in fairness witness, he ought to be shown a
9 topographic map and then he could do this more accurately and explain it
10 in a way that would be helpful to the Chamber.
11 This is just leading the witness into a confusion that I don't
12 think is particularly fair.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you wish to comment, Mr. Vanderpuye.
14 MR. VANDERPUYE: I can respond briefly, Mr. President.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
16 MR. VANDERPUYE: I mean, it's established on the record that
17 witness drove on the road. The witness is actually at the specific
18 locations that are depicted in this map. Not only does he have a
19 personal familiarity with the area because he was actually there, he also
20 has absolute familiarity with the document that he produced and to the
21 extent that the document establishes a familiar feature of the land which
22 he ostensibly drove on. He should be able to identify it, and I don't
23 think it's the source of any confusion whatsoever.
24 And also, to the extent that he's confused he can certainly state
25 that. And he's set up exhumation net works before, he's fully familiar
1 with how to interpret what he sees on a photograph with what he sees on
2 had a graphic representation that he generated and what he sees on a
3 topographical map. So it's not the source of any confusion whatsoever to
4 this witness, and I would object to the interruption.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Gosnell.
6 MR. GOSNELL: Well, object to that objection. I think it's a
7 potentially fair objection.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Go straight to the point.
9 MR. GOSNELL: I will, Your Honour. I've been to this location
10 myself and I could easily make a mistake. Based upon the angle of the
11 photograph, he's never seen this photograph before. This does create a
12 certain perspective which I would suggest could be misleading to the
13 witness. If he had seen this photograph before or if we have any
14 information on the record that he's seen photographs from any angle that
15 would assist him in familiarity with the train, fine. But we know that
16 he's worked off topographic maps and that he applied his physical
17 location at the spot to those topographic maps, and that's how he came up
18 with Annex 1 and 2 and the other annexes. So I think with the greatest
19 respect to my learned friend opposite that this is misleading and it
20 would be best to use a topographic map.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: But can't you take this up on redirect and show him
22 a topographic map yourself.
23 MR. GOSNELL: Certainly, Your Honours, but, nonetheless, there is
24 still in my view unfairness that is going to arise if he draws the line
25 in the wrong direction. And then of course the Prosecutor is going to
1 pounce on him and suggest that he doesn't know anything about this.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. We believe having followed this witness now
5 for a few hours that he is fully capable of letting us know if he feels
6 confused by this photo that we have on the screen. And in any case, you
7 can take this matter up on redirect using whatever material you deem fit,
8 Mr. Gosnell. So let's bring the witness back into the courtroom,
10 [The witness takes the stand]
11 MR. VANDERPUYE: May I proceed, Mr. Mr. President?
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, please. I was just trying to find I think you
13 have to go back to lines 19 to 21 of page 60.
14 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: That's where you were.
16 MR. VANDERPUYE:
17 Q. My question to you, Mr. Markovic, is whether you could identify
18 the incline that's depicted in your Annex 1 from this photograph? And if
19 you can't, let us know.
20 A. I cannot do that because this is a two-dimensional image, and it
21 was taken from a certain angle. This doesn't correspond to the real
22 situation on the ground. I don't know to what extent anything I could
23 draw would be accurate, because if we look at a two-dimensional image,
24 altitudes can look differently. Whatever I mark here would not
25 necessarily correspond to the real situation.
1 MR. VANDERPUYE: Could I have 65 ter 23871, please. 877, sorry.
2 I'm sorry, 3877.
3 Q. What I am showing you is a map that was generated by our mapping
4 unit based upon the information grid coordinates that were provided in
5 your report. From point 1 Sandici meadow to point 2 Kravica warehouse.
6 In addition to that, what you see at the bottom of your screen is a soil
7 profile from those two locations.
8 Contrary to your Annex 1, what you see from the initial location
9 towards the direction of Kravica warehouse, is a decline in the elevation
10 of the soil as opposed to a rise.
11 MR. VANDERPUYE: Now, I wondered if we could zoom in on the top
12 half of this screen.
13 Q. If you are able, based upon the line that you can see from
14 Sandici meadow to Kravica warehouse to identify what's depicted in your
15 Annex 1 as a rise in the elevation level. Where would you have observed
16 that at the time that you conducted these field tests? And of course, if
17 you are unable to do that let us know.
18 A. Just a moment, please. We mentioned in the report that this
19 point is at a lower elevation than the point at Sandici.
20 Q. I see that in your report. What I'm asking you about is your
21 representation, your graphic representation in Annex 1 of your report.
22 That's what I'm asking you about.
23 A. You are back on the two-dimensional graphical representation
24 again. But if we look at it, then at 1.2 kilometres we will see that
25 this point is again lower than 828 [as interpreted] metres. You're
1 probably referring to the end point. It was only our goal to show
2 graphically the profile of the terrain in this section.
3 Q. All right. Mr. Markovic, thank you for your explanation. By the
4 way, you did actually drive there this road right between Kravica and
5 Sandici meadow?
6 A. Yes, several times on that day.
7 Q. About how far is it in your estimation?
8 A. 1.2 kilometres.
9 Q. Okay.
10 A. We -- that was the reading on the odometer in our vehicle.
11 Q. 1.2 kilometres.
12 A. Yes. We reset the counter at Sandici, and at Kravica we took the
13 reading. So this is the length of the road communication.
14 Q. Okay. And about how far is it from Kravica warehouse to Hrncici,
15 point 6 in your report on the road?
16 A. We took measurement on two occasions, from Krivaja to Sandici
17 it's 1.2 kilometres. And then we took measurements to Hrncici again, not
18 the village of Hrncici
19 was 4.000 metres.
20 Q. 4.000 metres from Kravica warehouse?
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, one moment. Mr. Gosnell.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no.
23 MR. GOSNELL: I'm sorry for interrupting on what may appear to be
24 a small matter, but I do think considering that we are talking about
25 numbers it's important. Line 1 of 65, the witness did not say 828
2 MR. VANDERPUYE:
3 Q. Did you say that the elevation point at Krivaja warehouse is
4 lower than the elevation point of Sandici meadow, right?
5 A. Yes. That's the information that we obtained by using the GPS.
6 Q. And the information that you have is in your report, isn't it, as
7 to the elevation between those two points. And what it says in your
8 report, just so the record is perfectly clear, is that at point 1, which
9 is Sandici meadow, you add an elevation of metres and at Kravica
10 warehouse, you add an elevation of 276 metres. That's right, isn't it?
11 A. No. 276 metres.
12 Q. All right. Maybe there was a translation error, but that's what
13 I said. Now, my specific questions in relation to those elevations has
14 to do not it with the elevation of the end points but the elevations of
15 the in-between points that are depicted in Annex 1 of your report, that
16 is the contour of the soil between. And what I want to know is if you
17 able to identify what's depicted in that annex as a rise in elevation
18 level between those points on the exhibit that I have before you now?
19 A. This isn't something we did, but we could have done it by using
20 the same GPS
21 and determined their altitude. As far as I understood the matter, the
22 report should only determine whether communications could be established
23 between Kravica and Sandici. We came to the conclusion that it was
24 possible to establish radio communications, and that's what we put in the
1 Q. All right. Thank you for that, sir.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: We have gone past half past 12.00, so we need to
3 have a break. Can I have an idea of how much more time you require,
4 Mr. Vanderpuye?
5 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, I apologise for the slow pace. I
6 am -- I'm trying to go faster. I think I have a number of exhibits yet
7 to go through with this witness, and I'm -- I don't think I can do it in
8 less than a half an hour or 40 minutes.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but we need to finish with him today.
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: I know. I will try to cut down some over the
11 break and see if I can just hit the essential elements.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. And Mr. Gosnell, do you have a
14 MR. GOSNELL: Certainly. And certainly particularly given that
15 this witness's report went into evidence and of course the examination
16 was limited in consequence. I would say I at least have half an hour of
18 JUDGE AGIUS: That means he will have to stay here, because we
19 are -- the subject matter is important. Unless you come to an agreement,
20 arrangement amongst yourselves to divide the remaining time, 45 minutes
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Try to the make an arrangement amongst
24 yourselves how to divide, and if we need to go past our time by a few
25 minutes, we will do that.
1 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
2 --- Recess taken at 12.35 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 1.03 p.m.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Mr. Vanderpuye.
5 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, we had
6 an opportunity to discuss --
7 JUDGE AGIUS: You're not going finish today, I understand.
8 MR. VANDERPUYE: Oh. You understand.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Let's proceed.
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 Q. Mr. Markovic --
12 MR. VANDERPUYE: Sorry, is there a problem?
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know if there is a problem.
14 MR. VANDERPUYE:
15 Q. Mr. Markovic, before the series of objections, I had asked you
16 about how far it was from Hrncici to Kravica. I just want to get from
17 you what that distance is along the road?
18 A. The distance was 5.200 metres up to the geographical location
19 that we reviewed to in the report.
20 Q. All right. Thank you for that. Now, let me move to a different
21 area. You were asked in your direct examination about whether or not
22 there were amplifying inter-stations in the area or along the road, and
23 you indicated that you had spoken to somebody in the police station who
24 put you in touch with somebody who was in the signals unit who informed
25 you that there were no amplifying inter-stations -- well, I guess in
1 Bratunac. You remember that testimony?
2 A. Yes, I spoke to the deputy commander of the police station. He
3 called a worker in the police station who was a communications expert [as
4 interpreted] at the time, and he confirmed this fact, this claim.
5 Q. And this communications expert, did you speak to that person
6 directly? --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction. The witness did not
8 state expert, communications official.
9 MR. VANDERPUYE:
10 Q. Communications official, did you speak to that person directly?
11 A. Yes. He entered the office. I don't know what the person's name
12 was, but he [Realtime transcript read in error, "I"] said that there had
13 never been any amplification -- amplifying inter-stations.
14 Q. I'm sorry, you said you don't know who the person's name was?
15 A. I can't remember. The deputy commander called that person and
16 that's what the person said. That's what I can tell you. That's what I
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Gosnell.
19 MR. GOSNELL: I'm sorry. Page 69, line 12.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
21 MR. GOSNELL: "But he said," not, "but I said." Or it may be
22 line 13.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you. That's important.
24 MR. VANDERPUYE:
25 Q. All right. You don't remember the person's name, is that right?
1 A. No, I don't.
2 Q. Do you know what his position was as a communications official?
3 A. I haven't got any information about the man. I have no access to
4 such information.
5 Q. Now, you indicated yesterday, I think, that you've commanded a
6 unit that has set up radio links before, right?
7 A. Yes. I was a commander of a platoon and a commander of a
9 Q. All right. And you know, of course, how important it is to be
10 able to establish communication links particularly during combat
11 operations, right?
12 A. That's one of the most important things one has to do. Yes.
13 Q. And it is also important to be able to set up communication links
14 during combat operations, such that the commander can communicate with
15 his subordinate units, right?
16 A. Yes. That is the purpose of establishing communications.
17 Q. And you also know there is a normal practice that when a unit is
18 sent into a combat operations that a communications unit establishes such
19 links or is sent with the combat unit for that purpose?
20 A. It depends on the decisions made by the commander.
21 Q. Well, in your experience would it ever be the decision of a
22 commander to participate in a combat operation and specifically instruct
23 you not to establish communication links?
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Gosnell.
25 MR. GOSNELL: Mr. President. It hasn't been established that the
1 witness ever was in combat where, or when.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye, he may have a point there.
3 MR. VANDERPUYE:
4 Q. Were you in charge of a unit that established communication
5 links, a platoon?
6 A. Yes, that's correct.
7 Q. And based upon what you were experienced while you were in the
8 army and while you were in school, did you ever come across some
9 information whereby a commander would specifically instruct a
10 communications unit not to set up communication links during a combat
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Gosnell.
13 MR. GOSNELL: I have to raise the same objection.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye. Do you wish to comment now?
15 MR. VANDERPUYE: I don't really see the nature of my colleague's
16 objection. This witness was a member of the armed forces, his specific
17 purpose as a member of the armed forces were his experience in the armed
18 forces provides somewhat --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Stop, stop. Go ahead.
20 Mr. Markovic, if you could answer the question.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] While I was the commander of the
22 platoon or company, I was never submitted such a request. I was a
23 commander of these units in peacetime and I never received such a request
24 nor would I understand the purpose of such a request. Why should someone
25 order me not to establish communications.
1 Q. Now, you know it's entirely possible to set up a repeater as a
2 practical matter simply by using two mobile radio. One to receive a
3 radio signal and one to transmit that signal on separate channel, right?
4 A. Yes. There are semi-automatic ways and automatic ways of
5 retransmitting the emission.
6 Q. And you can retranslate the emission at a higher power simply by
7 receiving it on a device that has an ability to transmit at a higher
9 A. Yes. Those are standard things that are usually used when you
10 have such communications systems. On the whole, one mostly used
11 retranslation stations or amplifying station, but I must point out that
12 retranslation stations are used under urban conditions, in urban
13 situations; but these kinds of radio device are used for units of this
14 kind, which, in order to increase the range, should use retranslation
15 devices. However, there is still the technical possibility for the
16 devices to function in simplex mode or from device to device in order to
17 clarify it more easily.
18 Q. All right. Now, according to your report you tested the Motorola
19 GP300 and OP30 based upon what you identified as a photograph provided to
20 you by the Defence. Right? That's on page 2 of your report.
21 A. That's correct. On the basis of that photograph I could identify
22 the antenna, I saw that it was attached to the device, and this is an
23 antenna that is only used for devices that operate on a wavelength of 0.7
24 metres. I couldn't identify the device itself because of the quality of
25 the picture. All I could recognise was the fact that the antenna
1 attached to the device operated on specific frequency range.
2 Q. All right. So you weren't ever told that Mr. Borovcanin had
3 stated previously that he had with him a GP300 radio, you weren't
4 provided with that information? And just to be clear, that's on the 13th
5 of July, 1995.
6 A. No. I had no such information. I used the GP300 devices what
7 was available to me at the moment. That's why I used that device. I
8 tried to find devices that were similar to all the other devices that had
9 similar characteristics to the devices that one could find in the area of
10 Bosnia and Herzegovina and of the former Yugoslavia
11 Q. So the devices you tested were based upon assumption of
12 identifying the antenna of something that you observed, right?
13 A. Yes. On the basis of identifying the antenna and the shape of
14 the device itself which shows that it's a handheld radio device, and the
15 antenna shows that this device operates on a wavelength of 0.7 metres.
16 That's what I could identify on the basis of the picture.
17 Q. Okay. Let me show you 65 ter 3856.
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: If we could just focus in a little bit where you
19 see the antennas.
20 Q. Now, do you recognise these -- first of all, do you recognise the
21 devices that Mr. Borovcanin has on him?
22 A. The picture is completely unclear. I can't recognise the device.
23 I can see that it's a handheld radio. All I can recognise is the antenna
24 on the device. It's very unclear. But an antenna that operates on a
25 wavelength of 2 metres resembles the antenna I can see in the picture.
1 Q. Well, how many antennas can you see in the picture?
2 A. Well, I see -- well, there is one that's a little longer.
3 Another that's somewhat shorter. I assume I should be able to see two
5 Q. You should be able to see two antennas or do you see two
7 A. I can see something that looks like two antennas. I can't claim
8 for certain because this is, after all, a photograph.
9 MR. VANDERPUYE: All right. Let's look -- take a look at 65 ter
11 Q. Is that image any better for you as to whether or not there is
12 one or two antennas?
13 A. Once again, the photograph is not very clear but it looks like
14 there are two antennas there.
15 MR. VANDERPUYE: All right. Let's take a look at 65 ter 3858.
16 If we can move a little bit over to the left. All right. Right there is
18 Q. Do you see did barrel of the gun? Immediately to the left of the
19 barrel of the gun, that's an antenna, isn't it?
20 A. It's very unclear. I can just see the upper part of something
21 that looks like an antenna.
22 Q. And immediately to the left of that, and right under
23 Mr. Borovcanin's white T-shirt you can see another antenna, can't you?
24 A. Well, yet again it's unclear. But I can see the contours of some
25 kind of an antenna.
1 Q. And what kind of antenna would that be?
2 A. Again, I can't be certain. The photograph isn't clear, but given
3 what I can identify, this has the characteristic look of an antenna that
4 operates on a wavelength of 2 metres.
5 Q. And what particularly characterizes an antenna that operates at a
6 wavelength of 2 metres in your view?
7 A. Well, it all depended on the manufacturer, but such antennas
8 would be about 50 centimetres long -- depended on the adapter. But they
9 were usually in a spiral form. And that spiral is covered by some kind
10 of rub or other kind of material.
11 Q. All right. But based on the images that you've seen can you
12 conclude as to what type of antennas you've seen?
13 A. I can only speculate on the basis of this photograph which isn't
14 clear. I assume it's an antenna that was used for wavelengths of 2
16 Q. Okay. That's fair enough. Now, it is the case that both antenna
17 and the power of the device influence the operational range of a
18 particular radio device; is that right?
19 A. Correct.
20 Q. And based on what you've seen here -- first of all, you haven't
21 seen these actual photos before have you?
22 A. No. These are the first times I've seen these photographs.
23 Q. So you have no idea, as you're sitting here now, exactly what
24 these radios are?
25 A. I can only guess about the kind of antenna here.
1 Q. But it would be only a guess?
2 A. I do apologise, but the photograph really is not very clear and I
3 wouldn't like to make a mistake. But given the contours of this object
4 that I can see, it should be the antenna of a device that operates on a
5 wavelength of 2 metres.
6 Q. Okay. Now, you are aware that the Ministry of Internal Affairs
7 also used devices that were mobile radio devices, the type you might find
8 in a police car? You're aware of that, right, in 1995?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Okay. I want to show you a document and maybe you can help us
11 through this.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Gosnell.
13 MR. GOSNELL: I'm sorry, Mr. President. But apparently the
14 witness didn't receive a translation of the last two words that appear in
15 the transcript. So I think that's rather important to clarify now, on
16 page 76, line 9.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: And to which he answered "yes," no?
18 MR. GOSNELL: Yes, Mr. President.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: So I will repeat the question myself to you,
20 Mr. Markovic, and then you will repeat your answer:
21 "Okay. Now you are aware that the Ministry of internal affairs
22 also used device that were mobile radio device, the type you might find
23 in a police car? You are aware of that, right, in 1995?"
24 And did you answer yes or --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't hear the year 1995. I
1 wasn't there in 1995; and therefore, I cannot make such a claim. All I
2 can claim is what is based my own experience. After the conflicts, after
3 I moved from the Ministry of the Defence to the MUP, as to what happened
4 in 1995 -- well, I wasn't present, so I can't say what there was in
5 vehicles at the time.
6 MR. VANDERPUYE:
7 Q. Thank you for that, Mr. Markovic.
8 MR. VANDERPUYE: Could I have 65 ter 3855 in e-court, please. I
9 think we don't have an uploaded translation of this document yet, but
10 this appears to be a document that refers to the special police brigade.
11 Q. It's dated 1995. It's signed by Goran Saric. And it identifies
12 a number of devices that are being submitted for repair; is that fair to
14 A. Yes. Computers and radios as far as I can see.
15 Q. Okay. And in respect of the radios that are identified in there,
16 one such radio is the RS GM 300. Are you familiar with that device?
17 A. I don't know what RS stands for, but the GM 300, yes, I am
18 familiar with that.
19 Q. Okay. And the GM --
20 A. These are old models of the device, I assume.
21 Q. The GM 300 is a mobile radio, the type of which you myself might
22 find in a police car, isn't it?
23 A. I can only tell you about how things stand at present, but as to
24 what the situation was at the time I don't know whether police vehicles
25 had such devices. They have been -- mistakes have been made in the
1 document with regards to the names of these devices. Under 5, Yasu --
2 well, a certain number of numbers are missing here. It was probably
3 spelled in the way that the person who was typing up the document heard
4 the word. 4, RS Spektra, for example, I know of Spektra devices but you
5 have various kinds and I assume that the person who typed the document
6 spelled it as though he should or as she thought she should. Quite a few
7 mistakes have been made in what has been listed here.
8 MR. VANDERPUYE: Can I have 65 ter 3871 in e-court, please.
9 Q. I know this is not an idea photograph, but do you recognise the
10 device based upon the picture that you see in front of you?
11 A. Yes, I can recognise this device. It's a device that can be
12 fitted in vehicles and while I was working for the UN i had the
13 opportunity of becoming familiar with such devices.
14 Q. All right. And is it possible that the term RS that you've seen
15 in the document 3855 a stands for radio Stanica, radio station?
16 A. The abbreviation can mean various things, including Republika
17 Srpska and radio Stanica, but the abbreviation RS meant -- used to mean
18 radio system at the time when I was in the armed forces.
19 MR. VANDERPUYE: Could I have 65 ter 3783 in e-court -- 3873,
20 pardon the dyslexia.
21 Q. Again, this is not an ideal photograph but do you recognise what
22 is depicted there? I have a hard copy if it would assist you.
23 A. That isn't necessary. I recognise the device, but I had no
24 opportunity of working with it. And here it is correctly spelled, that's
25 why I said that in the document that we saw previously a number of
1 letters were missing.
2 MR. VANDERPUYE: And if I could have 65 ter 3874 on e-court.
3 Q. Yet even a worse picture. If I could, I have a hard copy of it
4 which might help you, if you recognise it.
5 MR. VANDERPUYE: And for the Court and my colleagues, I will try
6 to get better images up in e-court hopefully at the time of tenure.
7 Q. Do you recognise that radio as the Yaesu 2011.
8 A. I've never come across this device, but I can make out the
9 manufacturer. The manufacturer is known for this kind of a radio
11 Q. Thank you for that. And it is the case that these types of
12 devices have a greater output power, that is a radio frequency output
13 power than a portable radio, right?
14 A. I don't know the exactly specifications of this device, but I
15 know that all devices fitted into vehicles have a greater output power
16 because they have a more stable power supply.
17 Q. Thank you for that.
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: And if I could just go to 65 ter 3871, and it
19 should be the second page of that document. All right. If we could just
20 blow up the top part where it says, "general." That's good.
21 Q. Now, I apologise to you because I don't have a translation of
22 this document, but I do understand that you do speak English, and what I
23 want to refer you to is where you see in the third column -- third row,
24 RF output, and under that you can see it falls under a column that
25 indicates the frequency range of 146 to 174 megahertz. And if you look
1 at the first column you will see that it says "model series," and
2 different models and have corresponding different powers, up to 45 watts
3 and a frequency range of VHF, right? And similarly up to 40 watts and a
4 frequency range of UHF.
5 Now, I don't have much time left, but what I want to ask you is
6 it is true that those specific frequency ranges correspond exactly to the
7 frequency ranges that the Motorola GP300 can be tuned to?
8 A. Yes, but only in -- only for VHF.
9 Q. Are you sure about that?
10 A. What I know namely about the frequency range of Motorolas, I can
11 only state the wavelength, and that is 2 metres. This corresponds to
12 this frequency range. And so this, including a variation, so a little
13 above 146 and a little below 174.
14 Q. Okay.
15 A. I can just add because the GP300 uses a specific antenna, if a
16 UHF frequency -- if you wanted to use a UHF frequency then the device
17 would not be appropriate. But depending on the manufacturer, there may
18 be various models that function in a different frequency range, but I
19 have no knowledge about that.
20 MR. VANDERPUYE: All right. Well, if I could have in e-court 65
21 ter 3870. Thank you. Now, if we could just go down page where it says
22 "general specifications."
23 Q. I am going to read to you the frequencies that were on the
24 document that I just showed you concerning the GM 300. Those frequency
25 are from 146 to 174 megahertz, do you see that? In the specifications
1 here, under the VHF?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. 438 to 470 megahertz. Do you see that here under the UHF --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Gosnell.
5 MR. GOSNELL: Sorry, I withdraw that.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
7 MR. VANDERPUYE:
8 Q. Do you see that?
9 A. Yes, I can see that but these are different models.
10 Q. 403 to 433 megahertz, do you see that frequency range under the
11 UHF heading?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. 438 to 470 megahertz under the UHF heading, do you see that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. 465 to 495 megahertz under the UHF heading, do you see that?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. 495 to 520 megahertz, do you see that?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Okay. And just for the record I was reading from 65 ter 3871,
20 the previous exhibit, page 2.
21 All right. What I would like to show you is a video, and it
22 concerns a radio transmission that was received in a vehicle in which
23 Mr. Borovcanin was present on the 13th of July.
24 MR. VANDERPUYE: The 65 ter number of the video is 2000, 2000.
25 [Videotape played]
1 MR. VANDERPUYE:
2 Q. Now, first of all since you've been able to comment on the
3 quality and the nature of radio communications, tell us how it is that
4 you rate these particular communications as you've just heard on the
5 scale that you indicated before?
6 A. This would be about 5/4, but I wasn't there, so I only got the
7 sound through my headset which is amplified --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. For the record, the video-clip we saw
9 ends at 17 minutes, 18 seconds point 2. I understand that you asked for
10 about five minutes before the end to address the Chamber --
11 MR. VANDERPUYE: That is true.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: So I think we will need to stop here with this
14 Mr. Markovic --
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you have any further questions on this video?
17 MR. VANDERPUYE: I have one other video which I would like to
18 show him --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Then leave it until the next time.
20 MR. VANDERPUYE: But it's very brief. It's I think twice this
21 length, and I think that would be a good place to end, if we are able.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Then we do that next time.
23 MR. VANDERPUYE: If it's possible to do it --
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but how much longer will you keep us after
1 MR. VANDERPUYE: I just want to play the video and then ask one
2 question and then hopefully we can --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, yes, because that's what you told us. All
4 right. Go ahead, go ahead.
5 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Q. Okay. What I would like to play for you now is a slow motion
7 version of the same video.
8 [Videotape played]
9 MR. VANDERPUYE: At this point the video is -- the contrast is
10 changed, and I want to show that to the witness as well.
11 [Videotape played]
12 MR. VANDERPUYE: At this point video is now going to go in slow
13 motion with the contrast that has been adjusted.
14 [Videotape played]
15 MR. VANDERPUYE:
16 Q. What I want to do, sir, is direct your attention to the
17 right-hand side of the screen. If you look at the right-hand side of the
18 screen you can see a hand, in the hand a transmitting microphone. Do you
19 see it?
20 A. With all due respect, I'm not an expert in videos; and I cannot
21 really say whether that is a microphone or not.
22 Q. All right. But you are an expert in the field of handling radio
23 communication devices, right?
24 A. Yes, I can comment on radio devices and their technical
25 specifications, but videos, really, I saw something in one of the corners
1 but I cannot comment on that. And the image is blurred and very unclear.
2 Q. Would it be consistent with that image depicting a radio
3 microphone, such as the one depicted on the Yaesu 2011; would it be
4 consistent with a large antenna mounted on the roof of that vehicles in a
5 different image? Would you expect to see a hand held microphone in a
6 vehicle that possessed a large antenna, typically associated with a
7 mobile radio?
8 A. I must say that, first, I wasn't there. I went there last year
9 for the first time in my life. And what you've asked me, if there was an
10 antenna on the roof of the vehicle, it can be the antenna of a radio
11 device or that of an FM receiver, such as a civilian car radio.
12 And as for the handheld microphone, depending on the device, I
13 can mention one type of device. You mentioned the MT 1000, that is
14 compatible with a handheld microphone both for mobile stations and
15 mountable stations. These are the technical characteristics, but what
16 happened at the place where this video was shot I cannot say. Because I
17 haven't be there, and I cannot see well from this video.
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: Let me show you 3862 in 65 ter -- 65 ter 3862 --
19 and I'll leave it at that -- 63863, I'm sorry, and I'll leave it at that
20 for now. Is this 3863 -- 838. All right. How about 3862? It is 3863?
21 Okay. Thank you, all right.
22 Q. You see where the silver car is?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And you see the antenna mounted on the roof of that car, sir?
25 A. I can see the outlines of an antenna.
1 Q. You can see the outlines of an antenna?
2 A. Yes. I can see it, but I cannot say how long the antenna may be.
3 Q. Okay. Thank you, for that.
4 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, I appreciate your indulgence.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Have you finished or do you still have questions
6 for him?
7 MR. VANDERPUYE: I am very near, but I'm not.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you, we'll continue next week.
9 Mr. Markovic, we have to stop here for today. You will return on
10 Monday -- on Tuesday, sorry; and we'll take it up from there, but I'm
11 sure we will finish with you on Tuesday. Thank you.
12 Mr. Thayer.
13 MR. THAYER: Mr. President, good afternoon.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Very briefly, please.
15 MR. THAYER: We wanted to address the Chamber on a matter
16 concerning the motion from our friends on the Borovcanin team regarding
17 the -- their objection in request for guidelines concerning the use of
18 statements not in evidence. There was a subsequent motion on behalf of
19 the Nikolic team --
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
21 MR. THAYER: -- along some similar but also different lines.
22 What we wanted to do was ask the Court for permission to respond in a
23 consolidated manner based on the deadline that would run from the Nikolic
24 filing --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
1 MR. THAYER: -- I had some discussions with my friends from the
2 Gvero team, and I believe that they are in a position to file a
3 submission along a -- on the same subject matter. I don't want to
4 misquote my friend, but what we are, I think, are asking now is if we can
5 respond in a consolidated matter to all three upon the filings from the
6 submissions from our friends on the Gvero team?
7 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Mr. Josse.
8 MR. JOSSE: Very briefly, we will file on Monday, Your Honour,
9 happy to do that. But what a we didn't really want to do is be
10 disadvantaged in terms of replies or potential replies. I accept that
11 we'll need leave. Originally, I was simply going to file on the same day
12 the Prosecution were prepared to file their response, because we do take
13 a slightly different stance to my learned friend's. I think what we've
14 agreed is that we will file on Monday, that will enable the Prosecution
15 to respond to all three of us; and if we require it we, too, will seek
16 leave to reply in due course.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Fair enough, fair enough. No problem. No problem.
18 And we'll see about dates later on.
19 MR. THAYER: Thank you, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: We stand adjourned until next Tuesday, and I wish
21 to thank the staff for having been patient with us and overstayed by
22 almost 10 minutes. Thank you. Yes, Tuesday at 9.00 in the morning.
23 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
24 1.53 p.m.
25 4th day of November, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.