1 Wednesday, 30th October 1996
2 (10.00 a.m.)
3 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Wladimiroff, would you call your next
5 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Yes, your Honour. We call Dragan Petrovic.
6 DRAGAN PETROVIC, called.
7 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Sir, would you please take the oath that is
8 being handed to you?
9 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
10 whole truth and nothing but the truth.
11 (The witness was sworn)
12 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Fine. Thank you. You may be seated.
13 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
14 Examined by MR. WLADIMIROFF
15 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Wladimiroff, you may begin.
16 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Thank you, your Honour.
17 Q. Sir, can you tell the Court your name?
18 A. My name is Dragan Petrovic.
19 Q. Where do you live?
20 A. In Belgrade.
21 Q. Have you been engaged by the Defence as an investigator in the
22 case of Dusko Tadic?
23 A. Yes, I have.
24 Q. Have you been working with the Defence on location in Bosnia?
25 A. Yes, I have.
26 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Your Honour, I want to present Defence Exhibit D55
27 to the witness, please. (Handed). Sir, do you recognise that
1 A. Yes, I do.
2 Q. Who made that photograph?
3 A. I did.
4 Q. Where did you make that photograph?
5 A. In Kozarac.
6 Q. At a specific place in Kozarac?
7 A. Yes, in front of one of the houses in Kozarac.
8 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Your Honour, I want to show to the witness a map
9 for identification.
10 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: That will be Defence 97. The Prosecution has a
12 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, your Honour.
13 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Do you recognise that map?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. Can you tell us what map it is?
16 A. This is the map of part of Kozarac.
17 Q. Can you identify the triangle on the map?
18 A. Yes, I can.
19 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Your Honour, I want to tender this map.
20 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is there any objection to Defence 97?
21 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
22 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: It will be admitted.
23 MR. WLADIMIROFF: For the convenience of the Bench, I have three
24 additional copies. Sir, I will ask you to put the map on the
25 overhead projector and the usher may assist you in that matter.
26 I think we need a larger view, yes, the whole map, if possible,
27 a larger view of the map. Could it be enlarged? That is how it
28 is. Mr. Petrovic, could you point out the triangle on the map
1 for us?
2 A. Yes, this is the triangle right here. [The witness indicated].
3 Q. There is a pointer on your desk, as far as I know.
4 A. I do not see one.
5 Q. Could you point out the triangle again and hold it still for
6 just a few seconds?
7 A. [The witness indicated].
8 Q. Can you tell the Court where this photograph has been taken
9 from, from which point on the map?
10 A. [The witness indicated].
11 Q. Could you describe that point to the Court?
12 A. Yes, the photo was taken in front of the one of the houses in
13 Kozarac -- actually it was the pastry shop.
14 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Your Honour, I want to show a photograph to the
15 witness for identification, please. Can you tell us what you
16 see on that photograph?
17 A. Yes. This is you, Mr. Wladimiroff, in front of the pastry shop
18 from where the photograph has been taken from.
19 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Your Honour, I tender that photograph. I have
20 extra copies for the Bench.
21 MR. KEEGAN: No objection, your Honour.
22 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I am trying to get the transcript on my
23 monitor. It is not coming up on Judge Stephen's. It is not
24 coming up on any of our screens. There we are. OK. No
25 objection to Defence 98. That will be admitted.
26 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Is it right that your photographs which were
27 compiled into Exhibit D55 have been taken from the point where
28 the person on this photograph is standing?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. If you look on the photograph, the large photograph, the
3 compilation again, and if you also look on the map, can you show
4 on the map what we see on that large photograph? Could you use
5 the pointer again?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Start on your left hand.
8 A. OK. We see the house here on the left side, on the corner.
9 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Excuse me Mr. Wladimiroff, that 55 -----
10 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Enlargement.
11 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: OK. I am having difficulty following it.
12 I suppose you have the Court's copy of 55?
13 MR. WLADIMIROFF: We gave the Bench ----
14 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Sorry, Judge Vohrah has it.
15 MR. WLADIMIROFF: I see.
16 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Excuse me, I am sorry. You can go back then
17 and tell us about 55.
18 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Thank you, your Honour. Mr. Petrovic, would you be
19 so kind as to show on the map again with the pointer starting
20 with your left hand what we see on the photograph.
21 A. We see the house on the left side here, on the map, on the right
22 side we see the corner here where some bushes are in front of
23 the school and the triangle, the square, in Kozarac.
24 Q. Thank you. Could you lower the map just a bit ----
25 JUDGE STEPHEN: Just before that, would you be able to get the
26 witness to point out from where this photograph is taken?
27 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Yes, your Honour. You mean the small photograph?
28 JUDGE STEPHEN: Yes.
1 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Right. Mr. Petrovic, can you point out again on
2 the map where the small photograph was taken?
3 A. [The witness indicated] From somewhere around here.
4 Q. Thank you. Would you please be so kind as to lower the map a
5 little bit on the overhead projector, just a bit? Thank you.
6 Can you point on the map to us where the school is?
7 A. [The witness indicated].
8 Q. Thank you. Did you run a test on that triangle?
9 A. Yes, I did.
10 Q. Can you describe to the Court what was the test about?
11 A. The test was about whether it was possible to see somebody
12 walking across the street by the triangle.
13 Q. I am going to show a photograph to the witness for
14 identification, your Honour. As a matter of fact, I may show
15 him three photographs in order to speed things up. I suggest
16 that you mark them A, B and C. Do you recognise these
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 Q. Before we go into these photographs, can you show on the map
20 what actually happened during that test?
21 A. OK.
22 Q. Do it slowly with your pointer, please.
23 A. Sure. You walked from here, from this gate that you can see on
24 the photograph, across past the triangle and stopped here.
25 Q. Where were you?
26 A. I was still at the same position in front of the pastry shop.
27 Q. Did you take photographs of my movements?
28 A. Yes, I did.
1 Q. Are these the photographs in front of you?
2 A. Yes, they are.
3 MR. WLADIMIROFF: I tender these photographs, your Honour.
4 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is there any objection to 99A, B and C?
5 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
6 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: They will be admitted.
7 MR. WLADIMIROFF: I have extra copies for the Bench.
8 JUDGE STEPHEN: I wonder if the witness could point out the pastry
9 shop again on the map?
10 MR. WLADIMIROFF: I will, your Honour. Perhaps, witness, I can ask
11 you to mark on the map in front of you the pastry shop with a
12 pen that will be given to you by the usher or a marker. I think
13 that is a better idea indeed. The Prosecution has a marker that
14 is appropriate to mark the pastry shop in green. Thank you.
15 I will give you a yellow marker. Could you mark on the map
16 where I walked, where I started and where I ended?
17 A. This is where you started.
18 Q. Draw the whole line. Thank you. If we look to the first
19 photograph, can you describe what the photograph shows?
20 A. It shows you starting -- when you started your walk from the
21 gate and stopped at the triangle.
22 Q. So you took the photograph while I stopped?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. What does the next photograph show?
25 A. The next photograph shows that when you were standing right on
26 the triangle, on the point of the triangle.
27 Q. Did I walk or did I stop?
28 A. You stopped again.
1 Q. What does the last photograph show?
2 A. This is where you ended the process, where you stopped.
3 Q. Can you tell the Court on each photograph by putting the
4 photograph on the overhead projector where is the first thing
5 you photographed?
6 A. OK. Can I take the map down?
7 Q. Yes. Perhaps we could enlarge it a bit. Yes.
8 A. [The witness indicated].
9 Q. Thank you. Could you put the next photograph on the overhead
11 A. [The witness indicated].
12 Q. Thank you, and the last one?
13 A. [The witness indicated].
14 Q. Thank you. When were these photographs taken, made?
15 A. Sorry?
16 Q. In which month of the year were these photographs taken?
17 A. August.
18 Q. If you would be so kind as to put the map on the overhead
19 projector again, a little bit more upwards, higher?
20 A. It does not go any higher than this.
21 Q. All right. Can you show on the map where the church is?
22 A. [The witness indicated].
23 Q. Thank you. Did you inspect the neighbourhood of that church?
24 A. Yes, I did.
25 Q. What did you inspect?
26 A. To see whether there were lamp posts, whether there were posts
27 or poles at the church, in front of the church or on the road by
28 the church.
1 Q. Can you point on that map where you saw poles? Perhaps we can
2 ask you to mark it with a pink marker? If we can ask the usher
3 to assist you again to have this map completely on the overhead
4 projector so we can see what you have marked. Thank you. Your
5 Honour, I am going to show photos for identification to the
6 witness, and may they be marked as A and later on I will show B
7 and C.
8 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: That is Defence 100A, B and C, is it?
9 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Do you recognise that photograph?
10 A. Yes, I do.
11 Q. Do you see poles on that photograph?
12 A. I do.
13 Q. Do you see a pole in front of a house?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Can you put that photograph on the overhead projector, please,
16 on top of the map? Can you point to that pole in front of the
18 A. [The witness indicated].
19 Q. Thank you. I tender that photograph, your Honour, as 100A.
20 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Any objection?
21 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
22 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: 100A will be admitted.
23 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Can you show on the map the place of the pole you
24 just pointed out?
25 A. [The witness indicated].
26 Q. Thank you. Could you put the photograph on the overhead
27 projector again?
28 A. The same photograph?
1 Q. Yes. Do you see any lamp post on that photograph?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Do you see a lamp post on the other pole more in front of that
5 A. Oh, yes, yes, I do.
6 Q. Could you point that out, please?
7 A. [The witness indicated].
8 Q. I have copies for the Bench. If I now may present the next
9 photograph ----
10 JUDGE STEPHEN: I am sorry, but could you also get the witness to
11 show where this photograph 100 was taken?
12 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Yes, your Honour, I certainly will. Witness, you
13 have heard the question. Could you answer it, please?
14 A. Yes. Do you want to know the position from where it was taken
16 JUDGE STEPHEN: On the map, from where it was taken.
17 A. [The witness indicated].
18 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Thank you.
19 JUDGE STEPHEN: In which direction?
20 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Could you point out not only where you were
21 standing but -- right, the direction.
22 A. From here towards the lamp post.
23 Q. Thank you. I am going to show you another photograph -- 100B,
24 that will be -- for identification. Do you recognise that
26 A. Yes, I do.
27 Q. Do you see a pole on that photograph?
28 A. I do.
1 Q. Could you put that photograph on the overhead projector, please
2 -- a little bit more to the right so we see the map? Thank you
3 very much. Can you point to that pole, please?
4 A. [The witness indicated].
5 Q. I tender this photograph, your Honour, as 100B?
6 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Any objection?
7 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
8 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: 100B will be admitted.
9 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Did you notice any lamp or lamp post on that pole?
10 A. No, none.
11 Q. If you go back to the previous photograph and put that one on
12 the overhead projector too, we see in front of that house two
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Could you describe the difference between those poles?
16 A. This is the old pole and this is the new pole.
17 Q. Thank you. Could you put back on the overhead projector 100B,
18 please? Thank you. What kind of a pole is that, an old one or
19 a new one?
20 A. It is a new one.
21 Q. Is there an old one?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. What do we see, the old one or the new one?
24 A. We can see both.
25 Q. Thank you. If you go to the map, can you point out on the map
26 what we see? Which pole on the map do we see here?
27 A. [The witness indicated].
28 Q. Thank you. Can you point out from which point that photograph
1 was taken?
2 A. [The witness indicated].
3 Q. Could you point out the direction?
4 A. [The witness indicated].
5 Q. Thank you. I am going to show a third photograph, your Honour.
6 Did I give the Bench photographs of the church?
7 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: No.
8 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Then I will give you those photographs too.
9 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Petrovic, could you point out to me on 100B
10 the second pole?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. I see one but ......
13 MR. WLADIMIROFF: It is a little bit difficult.
14 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I see, behind it. OK. That is the old
15 pole ----
16 THE WITNESS: Yes.
17 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: --- behind it? OK. Thank you.
18 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Witness, could you look at the third photograph
19 that has been given to you?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Do you recognise that photograph?
22 A. Yes, I do.
23 Q. What do you see on that photograph?
24 A. I see two poles on that photograph taken in front of the house.
25 Q. An old one and a new one?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. Is that right?
28 A. Yes.
1 Q. Could you put that photograph on the overhead projector,
2 please? Can you point out to us these poles?
3 A. Yes. This is the old one and this is the new one.
4 Q. Right. I tender that photograph as 100C, your Honour.
5 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Any objection?
6 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
7 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: 100C will be admitted.
8 MR. WLADIMIROFF: I have three photographs for the Bench again.
9 [To the witness]: Can you point on the map which poles we see
11 A. [The witness indicated].
12 Q. Thank you. Can you point out from which point the photograph
13 was taken?
14 A. [The witness indicated].
15 Q. Adding the direction of -- yes. Thank you. Do you see a lamp
16 post or a lamp on this last photograph?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Do you see one on the old one?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Perhaps you would take the photograph from the overhead
21 projector in your hands and inspect the photograph?
22 A. Yes, sorry. On the old one. If you want, I can point out
24 Q. Yes, please do.
25 A. [The witness indicated].
26 Q. Right. If we go back to the map again, we see three poles
27 marked on your map, is that right?
28 A. Yes.
1 Q. If I start on the pole that is south of the church, could you
2 point to that pole, please, for us on the map?
3 A. You mean this one here?
4 Q. South of the church. Right. Does that pole have a lamp?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Go to the next pole. Does that pole or one of the poles over
7 there have a lamp?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Go to the next pole. Does that pole, one of the poles over
10 there, have a lamp?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Thank you. While being there taking these photographs and
13 inspecting the poles, did you speak to the priest who was living
14 on the compound of the church?
15 A. Yes, I did.
16 Q. Did you discuss with the priest the lamps and the poles?
17 A. Yes, I did.
18 Q. Did you ask the priest whether there was a lamp on the pole in
19 the mid of the three poles in front of the church?
20 A. Yes, I did.
21 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Excuse me.
22 MR. KEEGAN: I was waiting until the finish of the question and the
23 answer, but then I am going to object if he is going to testify
24 for the priest, your Honour, as hearsay which is not directly
25 relevant to .....
26 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Wladimiroff?
27 MR. WLADIMIROFF: As a matter of fact, your Honour, according to your
28 ruling, we found that we were allowed to go this far.
1 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: We look for indicia of reliability, of course,
2 and we admit any relevant evidence that has probative value.
3 Some hearsay may have probative value as long as there is some
4 indicia of reliability. I suppose he is a priest.
5 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, your Honour.
6 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: That was raised in ----
7 MR. KEEGAN: It is also my understanding that this was one of the
8 witnesses on the witness list who refused to come and testify
9 themselves, so I think that does raise an issue of the
10 reliability of the witness.
11 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I will overrule the objection, Mr. Keegan. We
12 will hear it. As we have indicated, our rules allow us to hear
13 evidence. If we determine that it lacks the probative value,
14 then we can exclude it. The objection is overruled.
15 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Thank you, your Honour. Mr. Petrovic, you may
16 answer the question.
17 A. Sorry, can you repeat the question again?
18 Q. The question was whether you discussed with the priest living on
19 the compound near the church the poles and the lamps standing in
20 front of the church?
21 A. Yes, I did discuss it with him.
22 Q. Did you ask him whether there was a lamp on that pole or one of
23 the poles in front of the church?
24 A. Yes, I did.
25 Q. Did you ask whether there was a lamp from early 1992 on that
26 pole ----
27 A. Yes, I did.
28 Q. --- of those poles?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Where there lamps on those poles, according to what has been
3 told to you?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Which ones are they now, Mr. Wladimiroff, which
8 MR. WLADIMIROFF: That is the pole in front of the church, your
10 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: There is no lamp on 100B, is that correct, from
11 what we can see?
12 MR. WLADIMIROFF: That was evidence that was given to you.
13 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Then there was no lamp also in 1992?
14 MR. WLADIMIROFF: That is what has been told by the witness, your
15 Honour. That is all I ask, your Honour. Did I tender C?
16 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I do not know.
17 MR. WLADIMIROFF: If I have not, I ask you to allow me to tender it.
18 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Any objection to 100C?
19 MR. KEEGAN: No.
20 MISS FEATHERSTONE: It is in.
21 MR. WLADIMIROFF: All right. That is all I ask, your Honour.
22 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Fine, thank you. Cross-examination?
23 MR. KEEGAN: Yes. Thank you, your Honour.
24 Cross-Examined by MR. KEEGAN
25 Q. Mr. Petrovic, you said that you did this test on the square in
26 August 1996?
27 A. Yes, that is correct.
28 Q. Were you ever in Kozarac during 1992?
1 A. No.
2 Q. So you have no idea what the condition of the square is and the
3 shrubbery around the square during 1992?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Can you tell us what type of camera and lens you used to take
6 these photographs?
7 A. This was one of those automatic cameras which has a zoom lens.
8 Q. Do you know what setting the lens was on when you took these
10 A. I cannot remember but I know that the lens was on. It was
11 used. I really do not remember at what level or whatever you
12 call it.
13 Q. So you cannot testify to this Court what effect the setting of
14 the lens may have had on the perception of distance as it
15 appears in the photograph?
16 A. I know for a fact that the lens was used, zoom lens, a small
17 one, which one of those automatic cameras have.
18 Q. Did you yourself gain custody of this map of Kozarac that has
19 been tendered, Defence 97?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Where did you get it from?
22 A. From Mr. Wladimiroff.
23 Q. Do you know when or where he got it?
24 A. I do not.
25 Q. Do you have any idea of the scale of this map?
26 A. No.
27 Q. So you canít tell us the approximate distance from the
28 location where you took the photograph to the distance across
1 the square?
2 A. I could because I was there.
3 Q. Did you measure it?
4 A. No.
5 Q. OK. The Defence Exhibit 100, do you still have those three
7 A. Yes, I do. Sorry, which one are we talking about, the square or
8 the church?
9 Q. No, I am sorry, this is the church light poles, Defence Exhibit
10 100. Defence Exhibit 100C is the photograph which was taken
11 closest to the centre of town. That is just the picture of the
12 two poles.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. OK. From looking at the plan of the map and where you
15 approximately drew that light pole, there are no buildings
16 immediately adjacent to those light poles?
17 A. No, there is just the priest house behind the lamp poles.
18 Q. On the other side of those trees that we see?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. OK. Looking at that photograph, it is apparent that the
21 electrical wires are all connected to the old pole, the wooden
22 pole, not to the new pole?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. If we look at the picture of 100A which is the other end, the
25 photograph where you have the light poles and the house showing,
26 the roof of the house showing ----
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. --- it appears that the electrical wires, in fact, have now been
1 connected to the new pole?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. But there is still, apparently, a light fixture attached to the
4 old pole, although there are no wires going to that pole?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. When we look at the church picture, which is 100B, it appears
7 that the old pole is leaning over, having fallen over, and all
8 the wires have been connected to the new pole?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. In fact, it is actually a junction for the wires coming from the
11 two different directions on the street?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. But no light has been attached to the new pole?
14 A. No.
15 Q. When you were asking the priest, did you ask him when there was
16 a light on that old pole?
17 A. Before the war.
18 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Which war is that?
19 THE WITNESS: The war in 1992, your Honour.
20 MR. KEEGAN: If I may have just a moment, your Honour? Nothing
21 further, your Honour.
22 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Wladimiroff?
23 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Thank you, your Honour.
24 Re-examined by MR. WLADIMIROFF
25 Q. Mr. Petrovic, would you be so kind as to put the map again on
26 the overhead? It is still there, if we have the overhead
27 projector on? If we could have the map brought down, please, so
28 we see the triangle on it? Could you put your pointer on the
1 pastry shop where you have marked it? Right. Could you run
2 your pointer to the yellow line?
3 A. [The witness indicated].
4 Q. Can you tell us what is the distance between the pastry shop and
5 that line, according to your experience of having been there?
6 A. 10 to 15 metres.
7 Q. Thank you. That is all I ask.
8 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Keegan?
9 MR. KEEGAN: Nothing, your Honour. Thank you.
10 Examined by the Court
11 JUDGE STEPHEN: This is much the best map we have had so far in
12 detail, Mr. Wladimiroff. Would the witness be able to point
13 out, first of all, the first aid centre?
14 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Witness, are you able to point out on this map the
15 first aid centre?
16 A. Does that mean the first aid centre in the school?
17 JUDGE STEPHEN: No, I mean sometimes called the hospital.
18 THE WITNESS: No, I cannot.
19 Q. Can you point out the Tadic home and cafe?
20 A. Yes, I can.
21 Q. Would you do that?
22 A. Yes. [The witness indicated].
23 Q. Am I right in thinking that the post office and picture theatre
24 are off this map, further up the Marsala Tita Street?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. What is the big building with "3536" on it which is on the
27 corner facing the triangle?
28 A. 35?
1 Q. "3536", it is numbered.
2 A. It is part of the school.
3 Q. That is part of the school as well?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Yes. Then the building, two buildings, up Marsala Tita Street
6 from 3536 on the same side of the road, is that the restaurant?
7 It has three little projections towards Marsala Tita Street on
8 that frontage.
9 A. Next to the 3537?
10 Q. Next to 3537, yes.
11 A. I am not sure whether it is a restaurant. It looks like a shop
12 to me, some sort of a shop.
13 JUDGE STEPHEN: Thank you. That is all.
14 JUDGE VOHRAH: Witness, if you look at the spread picture, can you
15 tell me where the school is? Can you point out where the school
17 A. Yes, shall I put it on the overhead projector?
18 Q. Yes, please.
19 A. [The witness indicated] This is the school.
20 JUDGE VOHRAH: Thank you.
21 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Petrovic, regarding 100B, which is the
22 church you indicated where you took that photograph from.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. That would have been across the street from the church?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. Some distance up from the church or directly across the church,
27 from the church?
28 A. It is across on the road.
1 Q. How many feet were you from the church when you took the photo?
2 A. Not very far. I do not know measurements in feet. I was a few
3 metres away.
4 Q. Did you see any kind of a plum orchard where you were standing?
5 A. Plum orchard?
6 Q. Do not ask me to explain!
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Were you on the road or were you next to whatever growth, if
9 there was any growth, there?
10 A. Sorry? I am sorry?
11 Q. Where were you when you took the photo?
12 A. I was on the road. I was on the road all the time when these
13 three photos were taken.
14 Q. OK. That would have been at how many feet or metres?
15 A. Five to 10 metres.
16 Q. Five to 10 metres. OK. Do you know when the new poles went up?
17 A. I do not.
18 Q. Do you know, what was the condition of the old poles when the new
19 poles were not there?
20 A. As far as I know, what the priest has told me is that they did
21 not have lights for a very, very long time there.
22 Q. That is in B, 100B?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. What about 100C, there is a light on the old pole?
25 A. The same thing.
26 Q. So the lights were there, but they just were not operative?
27 A. Yes.
28 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I have no further questions. Mr. Wladimiroff?
1 MR. WLADIMIROFF: No, your Honour, nothing arises.
2 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Keegan?
3 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, your Honour, thank you.
4 Further Cross-Examined by MR. KEEGAN
5 Q. Mr. Petrovic, the long D55 and the new Exhibit D99, those were
6 both taken on the same day?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Did you take both of them?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Tell me, if you put these two photographs one on top of the
11 other ----
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. --- can you explain to me why it appears that the group of
14 people who are in the triangle appear much to be farther away in
15 D99 than they do in D55? Did you change the lens setting
16 between taking those photographs?
17 A. Possibly, I cannot recall. But this also has -- just one
18 moment, please. Possibly, but this photocopy looks to be a
19 little bit enlarged, just a bit.
20 Q. May I ask you this: when you took the photograph of the poles
21 at the church which is D100B, do you recall what was behind you
22 when you took that photograph?
23 A. Which one was that, D100?
24 Q. Yes, that is the photo of the church. Do you recall what was
25 behind you when you took that?
26 A. Trees, house, bushes.
27 Q. Trees, houses and bushes. OK. Did you ask the priest his name,
28 this priest that you spoke to?
1 A. Yes, I did.
2 MR. KEEGAN: Out of an abundance of caution, your Honour, could we
3 have this paper given to the witness and could you write down
4 the name for us, please?
5 THE WITNESS: Sure.
6 MR. WLADIMIROFF: As a matter of fact, no protection has been asked.
7 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I was thinking the same. I thought that
8 Mr. Tadic had -----
9 MR. KEEGAN: I could not recall.
10 MR. WLADIMIROFF: There is no problem.
11 MR. KEEGAN (To the witness): Can you tell us the priest's name,
13 A. Mladen Majkic.
14 MR. KEEGAN: Nothing further, your Honour.
15 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Wladimiroff?
16 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Nothing arises, your Honour.
17 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is there any objection to Mr. Petrovic being
18 permanently excused?
19 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
20 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Petrovic, you are free to leave. You are
21 permanently excused. Thank you.
22 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.
23 (The witness withdrew)
24 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Kay, would you call the next witness?
25 MR. KAY: The next witness is Mr. Thomas Deichmann.
26 MR. THOMAS JEURGEN DEICHMANN, called.
27 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is he the witness listed as 38 or 39?
28 MR. KAY: Your Honour, I do not have the list in front of me, but
1 I believe so, as media expert.
2 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Sir, would you please take the oath that is
3 being given to you?
4 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
5 whole truth and nothing but the truth.
6 (The witness was sworn)
7 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Fine. Thank you. You may be seated.
8 Examined by MR. KAY
9 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Kay, you may begin.
10 MR. KAY: Thank you, your Honour.
11 Q. Could you give the Court your full name please?
12 A. Thomas Jeurgen Deichmann.
13 Q. How old are you, Mr. Deichmann?
14 A. 33 years.
15 Q. You are of German nationality?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. You live in Frankfurt?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. What is your occupation at the moment?
20 A. In Frankfurt?
21 Q. Yes.
22 A. Eppsteiner Strasse 6.
23 Q. You have given your address. I asked for your occupation.
24 A. I am sorry.
25 Q. It is all right.
26 A. What is occupation?
27 Q. What is your job?
28 A. My job is I am a journalist -- sorry.
1 Q. That is all right. If you can tell us, first of all, what your
2 reason for being called by the Defence to give evidence in this
3 case is?
4 A. I was asked by Mr. Wladimiroff to look at the German media, and
5 mainly how often they reported about the Tadic case since his
6 arrest in February 1994, and mainly concentrate about the
7 question how often he was shown with photos in TV. That was a
8 main thing I looked at. But I also did some research on
9 important printed media, like newspapers or journals.
10 Q. Did your study also take into account British newspapers?
11 A. I did a brief study with British newspapers as well, yes.
12 Q. Perhaps you can tell us a little bit about your background, what
13 employments and what your jobs have been, perhaps since 1990?
14 A. All right. I studied civil engineering with a diploma.
15 I finished in '89. I worked as a civil engineer at Technical
16 University in Darmstadt for a couple of months, and in 1990
17 I started working for a publishing house in Frankfurt for a
18 year. Afterwards, in 1991, I did work again as a civil engineer
19 in an office, civil engineering office, close to Frankfurt. At
20 the beginning of 1993 I only did work as a journalist.
21 Q. Since 1994 have you worked for the London International Research
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. What has been the feature of your employment with that Exchange?
25 A. Well, we concentrate on different, special topics and mainly
26 look at how the media report on these topics. So the first
27 major project we did was about D Day. So we looked at how
28 different papers in Britain, Germany -- I looked at the coverage
1 in Germany -- reported about D day. We even did a very good
2 report about this called "History as News" which was published
3 in Britain.
4 The second project was images of Japan which is nearly
5 finished called "Images of Japan" where we looked at the media
6 coverage about Japan in the new period in relation to the 50th
7 anniversary of bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The final
8 report (which will be published as well) is due to be finished
9 in a couple of months, I hope.
10 The third project we only just started, that we had a
11 launching meeting in London a couple of months ago, it is called
12 "Journalists at War", media coverage after post cold war
14 Q. You yourself, as a journalist and author, have you written for a
15 number of different publications within Germany?
16 A. Yes, altogether since 1993 about 30 different papers in Europe,
17 not only in Germany.
18 Q. Has also material written by you been cited upon television
19 programmes within Germany?
20 A. Yes. I have been invited to some programmes on the stuff I was
21 writing. I have also been invited to some conferences, or to
22 some, as an expert talking about the media, for example, how
23 they responded to censorship in the Internet at the beginning of
24 this year, or that the journalism school in Cologne, Institut
25 Fuer Publizistik. I did a brief introduction there and so, and
26 to radio stations as well I have been invited to talk.
27 Q. You have developed contacts with a wide variety of news stations
28 and newspapers within Germany?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And also within other countries in Europe?
3 A. Yes. So I could name a couple, if that is of interest.
4 Q. Please do.
5 A. In Germany, the biggest paper I was writing for was Die Woche, a
6 weekly paper, but I have also been writing for newspapers like
7 Hanoverische Zeitung, Die Welt, Die Tageszeitung. In Europe,
8 I have been writing for the Wiener Standard or the Grune
9 Amsterdamer, Helsingbor Dagblad in Sweden -- so quite a lot.
10 Q. You were instructed by the Defence to look at the media coverage
11 within Germany concerning the arrest and processing of Dusko
12 Tadic through the criminal justice system of Germany as well as
13 his appearance for trial at The Hague, is that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Has your background, expertise and experience been something
16 that you have been able to apply to this task?
17 A. Oh, yes, of course, because I covered the war quite extensively
18 the last couple of years and I already had a big archive and so
20 Q. I was going to ask you about that. Had you also been able to
21 have access to materials that had already been prepared by you,
22 to look at various features of the conflict within the former
24 A. Yes. So, what I just said, I did my own archive in the last
25 three or four years where I covered actually three or four daily
26 papers and weekly papers as well and I collected everything.
27 Q. Thank you. Have you prepared a report for the Defence which
28 sets out, in fact, the matters that you were asked to consider,
1 as well as the products of your research in relation to a
2 selected number of television stations within Germany?
3 A. Yes, I did.
4 Q. In addition to that, newspapers and magazines within Germany?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. As well information provided to you by others who had also done
7 research on this matter and with whom you had contact?
8 A. Yes.
9 MR. KAY: Your Honour, this is a report that contains a number of
10 facts, figures and details. The Prosecution have been served
11 with a copy. It will be information more easily digestible by
12 the Court if the report is given to you rather than having to
13 listen to it and absorb it, purely from the oral testimony of
14 the witness.
15 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: He is going to testify about the report?
16 MR. KAY: Yes.
17 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Testify about what is contained in the report?
18 MR. KAY: There are various appendices that provide the information
19 within the report.
20 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Any objection?
21 MR. KEEGAN: Just one second, your Honour, we have lost the
22 transcript again.
23 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Keegan, any objection?
24 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
25 MR. KAY: Thank you.
26 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: That will be Exhibit 101.
27 MR. KAY: 101. If we give it the suffix (A) and there are three
28 copies here for the Bench. Mr. Deichmann has his own copy and
1 the Prosecution has theirs already.
2 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Defence Exhibit 101A ----
3 MR. KAY: Yes, your Honour.
4 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: --- will be admitted.
5 MR. KAY: Mr. Deichmann, is it correct that the Tadic case was viewed
6 with great interest within the German media?
7 A. Yes, indeed.
8 Q. Not least because of the history of that country and the
9 atmosphere after 50 years of the war ending and internal debates
10 within Germany concerning events within the former Yugoslavia?
11 A. Yes. I think that is an important point or important points to
12 bear in mind. First of all, that in Germany everything that is
13 linked with the Nazi past, German Nazi past, is always of big
14 interest for the media and also for the public, for politicians,
15 and the Tadic case was very often linked with the German past.
16 So, for example, he was imprisoned in February 1994 in Munich
17 and he was supposed to be complicit to genocide -- is that the
18 right word?
19 Q. Yes.
20 A. So the term "genocide" was quite often in the public. There
21 were comparisons or articles mentioning and also TV programmes
22 that he was working in a concentration camp, so there was a
23 clear link. Also, that the work of the Tribunal itself was of a
24 very big interest for the German media also because they made
25 comparisons with the Nuremberg trials after the Second World
26 War. I think one point which maybe made it even more
27 interesting than in a normal period was that all these
28 anniversaries, 50th anniversaries, of the end of the Second
1 World War were expected to be celebrated, not only in Germany,
2 so there was actually more interest in this whole subject.
3 Q. Yes. From your research, if I just summarise it this way, at
4 the start of your evidence, would it be right to say, from your
5 experience and coverage of the media at that time in 1994 and
6 from your research, that you were able to determine that
7 pictures of Dusko Tadic had been shown regularly on German
8 TV ----
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. --- and pictures were regularly put in newspapers and magazines?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Also of interest within German society was the proximity of
13 Germany and the European Community to Yugoslavia itself and
14 Yugoslavia being considered as part of Europe?
15 A. Yes, I think that is another important point to bear in mind why
16 the media were very interested in the case. It was German
17 politics was very involved, like the European countries, in the
18 conflict and also it was Tadic, he was imprisoned in Germany.
19 So it was the first case which was, I think, worldwide reported
20 quite regularly about it.
21 Q. A third feature which would have been of interest within German
22 society was a number of agencies, non-governmental organisations
23 such as the Society for Threatened People, who had roots and
24 links and contacts within Germany and had bases within that
26 A. Yes, they did quite a lot of campaigning around the Tribunal
27 work and, for example, at the first hearing in November 1994
28 they even did a protest outside the building here and their
1 boss, Mr. Tilman Zuelch, was in TV very regularly.
2 Q. A number of prominent German public figures who are in control
3 of these organisations or the directors are, in fact, people who
4 frequently have access to the media?
5 A. Yes, quite frequently.
6 Q. You have set out in your report a number of such organisations
7 and what their influence is. I would like to now turn to
8 matters concerning television programmes. If you can perhaps
9 deal with, first of all, the TV stations that you are aware of
10 and their market share based on viewing figures? If you could
11 perhaps give those details to us?
12 A. All right. The market shares are from August 1996 and the
13 biggest journal is RTL which is a private channel with 16.8 per
14 cent market shares. The second one is ARD, Erstes Deutsches
15 Fernsehen, the first programme which is not private. It is 14.6
16 per cent market shares. The third one is ZDF, the second German
17 television station, not private as well, with 13.8 per cent
18 market shares. The fourth is a private journal again, Sat1, Sat
19 Ein, with 13.5 per cent. Then ARD, the third programmes, which
20 are regional programmes belonging to the first programme in
21 Germany. They have got 10.3 per cent market shares. Then No. 6
22 is Pro7, a private channel again, with 9.0 per cent and RTL2 is
23 No. 7 with 4.2 per cent. I only listed n-TV as a private news
24 channel with only 0.3 per cent because I have some more
25 information about this later.
26 Q. So, in fact, the three dominant stations are RTL, ARD and ZDF in
27 that order?
28 A. In that order, yes, and if you look at news programmes, in
1 particular, it is a little bit changed. The order No. 1 is ARD,
2 No.2 is ZDF and No. 3 is RTL.
3 Q. Taking, first of all, then ARD which you have said is the most
4 important of the stations for news coverage, were you through
5 your contacts at that television station provided with
6 information from their computer concerning the period between
7 November 1994 and May 1996 and the reports about the Tadic case
8 on the main news programmes?
9 A. Yes, they provided me with a list which explained that in their
10 main programmes, which is Tagesschau at 8 p.m., Tagesthemen at
11 10.30 p.m., and then a weekly magazine, Wochenspiegel, they had
12 11 reports about the Tadic case, and at least eight of them used
13 photos of Tadic. That is altogether, and I could split it up.
14 Q. Yes. In fact, is that information provided in the form of a
15 computer printout that came from that television station ----
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. --- which has been labelled for your report as appendix 1?
18 A. Yes.
19 MR. KAY: Your Honour, again a copy of this has been provided to the
20 Prosecution and I put it before the Court as 101B.
21 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is there any objection?
22 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
23 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: 101B will be admitted.
24 MR. KAY: There are three copies for your Lordships.
25 [To the witness]: Have you actually been through the material
26 that was produced in computer printout form by that television
27 station and which has been labelled appendix 1, our Exhibit
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. This information was provided from the archives of the
3 television station, is that right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. They provide a service whereby references, key words as well as
6 photographic images, can be traced through their system and, in
7 fact, produced in a computer printout form?
8 A. Yes, that is actually what every TV channel or a newspaper can
9 do these days.
10 Q. Yes. Perhaps you could tell us then what you were able to
11 analyse from ARD and the news programmes of that television
13 A. All right. So, if you split these reports up in the main news
14 items which is Tagesschau shown at 8 p.m., there were three
15 reports in Tagesschau at different days about the Tadic case,
16 the first in November 1994, in April 1995 and in May 1996 and in
17 all of them they showed photos of Tadic. Additional information
18 which I got from another source is that in the average 8.19
19 million people watched the Tagesschau at 8 o'clock and there are
20 additional Tagesschau news reports, shorter ones, during daytime
21 at 2 p.m., 3 p.m., 4 p.m., 5 p.m., even in the morning as well.
22 Q. So the figure that you have just given us about the three
23 reports for the main daily news programme of ARD at 8 p.m. is
24 merely for that programme at 8 p.m.?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. Is it then also the case that the other daily slots for the
27 Tagesschau recycle the news throughout the day?
28 A. Yes, very often, but I do not have really material on this.
1 Q. These programmes to which you have referred, were they solely
2 about the defendant Dusko Tadic or were they also dealing with
3 wider issues but also contained references to Dusko Tadic?
4 A. Well, I would have to look at it again in more detail but, in
5 general, Tadic was mentioned at least, he was shown with a
6 photo. But some of them took it in a broader context, so there
7 were reports about the work of the Tribunal and then very often
8 in such a report Tadic was mentioned or shown with a photo. But
9 it was not all of them, so I did not look at it in this case,
10 purely on Tadic, on the Tadic case.
11 Q. In fact, in the evidence that you are about to give that is
12 often the case; some programmes specifically upon the defendant
13 Dusko Tadic, but other programmes dealing with general subjects
14 such as the Tribunal or attempts to arrest Dr. Karadzic, but
15 there would be at some stage a focus upon Dusko Tadic?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Could you also tell us about the other daily show containing the
18 day's news at 10.30 p.m. on ARD?
19 A. Yes. That is Tagesthemen at 10.30 and they had six reports
20 about the Tadic case, as we just discussed it briefly with the
21 Tagesschau, and five of them showed photos of Tadic, so one
22 without a photo, and these five were broadcasted in February
23 1994 on 13th and 14th, so twice in February 1994, that was
24 shortly after his arrest. Then the next one in November 1994.
25 That was after the first hearing. Then April 1995, that was a
26 period when Tadic was deferred to the Tribunal, and again in May
27 1996 when the hearings at the Tribunal again had a very big
28 coverage and that also is, in general, just a brief comment also
1 at the times when, in general, the media were very interested in
2 the case.
3 Q. As is the case with the Tagesschau at 8 p.m., is there also a
4 nightly news programme called Nachtmagazin where the material
5 from those other main news programmes is recycled?
6 A. Yes. That is true as well.
7 Q. Would that be right to describe that as a sort of round-up of
8 the day's news?
9 A. Yes. That is relayed, I think, at 0.30 in the morning and at
10 2 o'clock or so in the morning again.
11 Q. If we can now turn to the second most prominent German
12 television station in terms of news features, and that is ZDF,
13 is that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Did you speak to someone at ZDF in relation to the matter for
16 which you had been instructed by the Defence?
17 A. Yes, I did.
18 Q. Did they, in fact, not provide any computer information?
19 A. No. They were not able to provide this kind of information on
20 computer printout.
21 Q. But did they, in fact, check their computer system and give you
22 the information that they had within it?
23 A. Yes. They did a check on the computer in the archive and they
24 found 18 reports where Tadic at least was mentioned, but they
25 could not give me any information how many photos were used. It
26 was not possible.
27 Q. This was between February 1994 and October 1996?
28 A. Yes.
1 Q. The 18 reports were within the two main news programmes Heute
2 and Heute Journal?
3 A. Yes, that is the equivalent to Tagesschau and Tagesthemen in the
4 first programme ARD. Heute is at 8 p.m. watched by 5.34 million
5 people or households and also repeated during day time a couple
6 of times.
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. And the other one is Heute Journal watched by 3.55 million
9 people or households broadcasted once a day only at 9.45 p.m.
10 Then there was also like in our day during night time Heute
11 Nacht, another news programme, which very often repeated what
12 has been broadcasted already during day time.
13 Q. These periods where we are looking at the use of the name of
14 Dusko Tadic and his photographic image for the television
15 stations, were they at periods when it was a major story within
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. We are not dealing here with an obscure piece of news given a
19 low ranking; this was news given the highest ranking?
20 A. Yes, especially in the periods I just outlined after his arrest
21 in Munich ----
22 Q. Yes.
23 A. --- I would say that was the most important period. Then after
24 the first hearing in November '94 at the Tribunal, then when he
25 was deferred in April/May 1995, again big media coverage, and
26 then in the beginning of this year, spring this year. Those
27 were the most important periods but it was quite high profile.
28 Q. If we turn now to RTL, the third major news programme, did you
1 get provided information from their computer system?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. That was provided to you in the form of a computer printout from
4 their archives?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. That has been labelled as appendix 2, is that right, in relation
7 to your report?
8 A. Yes, that is right.
9 MR. KAY: Again, your Honour, this has been provided to the
10 Prosecution and I submit it for the Court as 101C.
11 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Any objection?
12 MR. KEEGAN: No objection, your Honour.
13 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: 101C will be admitted.
14 MR. KAY: Thank you very much. [To the witness]: As with other
15 documents, if we just flick through appendix 2, it frequently
16 contains the name of Dusko Tadic and within each programme a
17 summary of what the content of the programme was about?
18 A. And also what kind of pictures were used.
19 Q. Yes. References to Omarska, Munich where the arrest took place,
20 the Tribunal?
21 A. Interviews by Mr. Goldstone and other people from the Tribunal
22 and so on.
23 Q. Chief Prosecutor of the Tribunal as well as mention of Radovan
24 Karadzic, General Mladic. All within that context you will also
25 find the reference to Dusko Tadic often in programmes of a wide
26 concern as well as a specific concern ----
27 A. That is right.
28 Q. --- in relation to him?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Perhaps then if you can tell us what your findings were in
3 relation to RTL?
4 A. All right. So, altogether looking at their news programmes,
5 Punkt Zwolf which is broadcasted at 12.00 a.m., then RTL Aktuell
6 and Nachtjournal, they altogether had 20 reports mentioning at
7 least the Tadic case, and 19 of them had one but most of them
8 had different, even different, and more than one picture of
10 Q. Just on that matter, were in fact pictures of this defendant
11 emerging other than those taken at the time of his arrest by a
12 television station, but pictures from his past emerging within
14 A. Well, I did not check exactly now on this RTL, but there were
15 some pictures from Tadic as a younger man ----
16 Q. Yes?
17 A. --- from Bosnia doing some karate. That was very prominent as
18 well, karate exercises, and with old friends. So they were not
19 only from his arrest, and later in the day also from the
20 Tribunal quite a lot of pictures ----
21 Q. Yes.
22 A. --- when he was arrested in Germany.
23 Q. Can you tell us then how many people watched RTL Aktuell in
24 1995, what their average viewing figure was?
25 A. 3.5 -- 3.49 million people in the average, 1995.
26 Q. Yes. Can you tell us about the number of programmes that were
27 played on RTL Aktuell?
28 A. They had seven programmes, or reports, about Tadic in RTL
1 Aktuell, and in all of them they used photos of Tadic, different
2 photos, and these were broadcasted again the same periods
3 actually, in February 1994, on 14th and 15th, so two in February
4 1994, in November 1994, in April 1995, another one in April
5 1995, the first on 21st, the second on 24th, and even a third
6 one on 26th April 1995 and May 1996. Again, RTL, the main show
7 is at 6.45 p.m., and there are other RTL Aktuell shows during
8 day time which use sometimes the same material.
9 Q. So they recycle the material that may have been used on the main
10 news slot?
11 A. Yes, very often.
12 Q. Again do we see often a consistency within the dates by which
13 this information is being put on the television stations?
14 A. Yes, I think it is quite open. Again after his arrest in
15 February 1994, even two shows reports, then the first hearing of
16 the Tribunal, November 1994, and then even three when in the
17 period of his deferral to the Tribunal in April 1995 and the
18 last one again in summer this year.
19 Q. Could you tell us about Nachtjournal?
20 A. Nachtjournal had nine reports about Tadic. Also, in all of them
21 they used photos of Tadic and in the average, 1996, in October
22 1996, it is quite a new information, they had 1.16 million
23 people watching Nachtjournal, and these reports were broadcasted
24 again the same periods, in February 1994, in November 1994 twice
25 or on two different days, on 7th and 8th, April 1995 on 21st, on
26 24th, on 26th, August 1995, March 1996 and May 1996, and the
27 programme normally, on a normal day, is broadcasted twice at
28 night at 0 a.m. and 3 a.m. in the morning.
1 Q. Lastly, the other main news programme for RTL is Punkt Zwolf?
2 A. Yes, which had four reports about the Tadic case and in three of
3 them they used photos of Tadic and they were broadcasted again
4 the same period, November 1994, April 1995, May 1996, these
5 other three with photos of Tadic only.
6 Q. Yes.
7 A. Again information about average people watching, Punkt Zwolf on
8 a day in October, it is 1.38 million people. It is only
9 broadcasted once a day.
10 MR. KAY: Your Honour, that would be a convenient moment.
11 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: We will stand in recess for 20 minutes.
12 (11.30 p.m.)
13 (The Court adjourned for a short time)
14 (11.50 a.m.)
15 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Kay, you may continue.
16 MR. KAY: Thank you, your Honour.
17 Q. The next television station that you were able to have access
18 to, was that n-tv?
19 A. Yes, n-tv, Der Nachrichtensender.
20 Q. If you could say that a little bit slower because they have to
21 put this on to the transcript?
22 A. N-tv, Der Nachrichtensender.
23 Q. Thank you. This is a German speaking all day news channel, is
24 that right?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. Having again access to their computer system, have you been able
27 to compile that information on to an appendix 3?
28 A. Yes.
1 MR. KAY: Your Honour, again this has been served on the Prosecution
2 and I tender it as 101E, one for the Registry and three for your
3 Honours. Your Honour, we have lost the transcript again this
4 morning. It comes and goes.
5 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: It is particularly embarrassing for this to
6 happen when Mr. Deichmann is here, considering the field you are
7 in. It has never happened, Mr. Deichmann, with this frequency,
8 I promise you!
9 MR. KAY: Thank you.
10 THE WITNESS: Now I have it on my screen.
11 MR. KAY: If you could tell us then about n-tv, what the product of
12 your research was?
13 A. Yes, they did -- what they told me as a start, that it is an
14 incomplete list which they could do. They were not able to do a
15 complete list because it is a news all the day and they could
16 not say how often it has been reported, different reports about
17 the Tadic case.
18 They found in a quick research in the period between
19 October 1994 and May 1996 10 reports about the Tadic case.
20 According to their own information, some of these reports have
21 been shown 20 times, but they in the average calculate or they
22 told me that one should calculate in the average that every
23 report has at least been broadcasted eight times, and n-tv also
24 was here in the spring this year live covering the Tribunal,
25 I think, one or two days.
26 Q. Their news channel has a major news slot at about every 30
27 minutes of the day, is that right?
28 A. Yes.
1 Q. In between that period are other features and other news
3 A. Yes, on economy or some surveys.
4 Q. Within your report you tell us that the reports were broadcasted
5 in October 1994, November 1994, April 1995, three times in May
6 1996, although I can see five times in May 1996, judging by the
7 dates. Is that a typographical error?
8 A. No, it is three times on 7th May 1996, once on 8th May 1996, and
9 then on 10th May 1996 another one, and on 12th and 13th May,
10 so .....
11 Q. The viewing figures of that particular news channel, on average,
12 each day?
13 A. It is 2.6 million people per day, which they calculate watch
14 n-tv, an average time of 12 to 14 minutes. But, according to
15 their own information, peaks reached the figure of even more
16 than 3.5 million people watching it.
17 Q. As this is a rather slimmer document to the others that we have
18 submitted, if we just look at the information which is very
19 similar to the other archived material produced within appendix
20 2 and appendix 1, is it not ----
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. --- we can see here the date, would that be the date that this
23 information was produced? 14.10 -- sorry, I am looking at the
24 wrong part. Would that be the date that the information was on
25 television, 14.10.1994?
26 A. I am lost.
27 Q. I was as well for a while. I am looking at the first section on
28 appendix 3.
1 A. I am sorry, I have to get the appendix out.
2 Q. The date that we see for that first passage on appendix 3,
3 14.10.1994, that would be the date of screening, would it not?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Below that at 10.7.24, that would be the time?
6 A. I think that is -- no, that is -- I actually do not know.
7 I think it is some technical expression. The next one is about
8 how long this report was. It is one minute 41 minutes -- so one
9 minute 41 seconds, I am sorry.
10 Q. Yes. It gives a summary there of what would have been the
11 subject matter ----
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. --- of the screening?
14 A. Yes, it is saying "Den Haag", The Hague,
15 "Kriegsverbrechertribunal will Tadic", the War Crimes Tribunal
16 wants Tadic, and the abstract is "Der in Munchen einsitzende
17 Dusko Tadic soll vor UN-Kriegsverbrechertribunal in Den Haag".
18 Q. If you could translate that for us?
19 A. Something like that, "In Munich, imprisoned Dusko Tadic is meant
20 to be brought in front of the UN War Crimes Tribunal in The
22 Q. It gives the sequences below, is that right?
23 A. Yes. So that at the different sequences. So it is the first
24 one is in Munich, a refugee home.
25 Q. Yes.
26 A. I assume it is on interviews with refugees. Then it is a
27 statement of a friend of Tadic.
28 Q. Yes.
1 A. Then there are some pictures of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
2 Q. Yes.
3 A. Some pictures about torture, some dead bodies.
4 Q. Yes.
5 A. Then Netherlands, The Hague.
6 Q. Yes.
7 A. I assume the Court here, the Tribunal.
8 Q. Yes.
9 A. Then it is Chief Prosecutor Richard Goldstone reading the
10 indictment against Tadic.
11 Q. Right. Again, this information is easily absorbed. If one goes
12 through these passages, you can pick up the use of the
13 information within each sequence and what the programme is
14 about, is that right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. It shows the name of Tadic in virtually every programme. If we
17 can now turn to the next matter which is SWF?
18 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Excuse me, Mr. Kay, is there any objection to
20 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
21 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: OK. That will be admitted.
22 MR. KAY: Thank you. The next station with appendix 4 on your report
23 is SWF, Suedwestfunk?
24 A. Yes, SWF, Suedwestfunk.
25 Q. If you could tell us about this particular television station?
26 A. Yes, that is one of the regional stations that were in all the
27 Landers of Germany. They have regional stations, and that is in
28 the south west of Germany, and it is broadcasted in co-operation
1 with the first programme which I mentioned in the beginning,
2 ARD. So it is actually the third channel, as we call it, ARD
3 third channel.
4 You can either reach it in the land you are living
5 which is Baden-Wuerttemberg. You can also reach it via Astra
6 satellite and you can reach it with Cable TV in three Laender in
7 Germany, completely in Baden-Wuerttemberg, in Saarland and in
8 Rheinland Pfalz.
9 Q. By "Laender", you mean districts of Germany?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Areas of Germany?
12 A. Yes. Then in the neighbouring parts of Baden Wurttemberg where
13 this channel is based, in parts of the neighbouring Laender, you
14 can reach it as well via Cable.
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. So in Bavaria, in Hessen, in Nordrhein-Westfalen and in Sachsen
18 Q. Again their computer was able to be accessed and material
19 produced upon the number of programmes as well as their subject
20 matter and the uses of the image of the defendant Tadic, is that
22 A. Yes.
23 MR. KAY: Your Honour, this is appendix 4, again served on the
24 Prosecution. If I could submit this to the Registry as D101E?
25 There are copies for your Honours.
26 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is there any objection to 101E?
27 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
28 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: It will be admitted.
1 MR. KAY: SWF as a television channel is particularly important, is
2 it not, in relation to Dusko Tadic, because a lady called Monika
3 Gras did a number of documentaries about the issues concerning
4 the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the former
5 Yugoslavia ----
6 A. Yes, that is correct.
7 Q. --- as well as concerning the defendant Dusko Tadic?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Her reports and documentaries were broadcasted on SW3 and also
10 ARD, the first station we looked at?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Can you tell us, first of all, about the screening then of
13 various documentaries, what they were called and the length of
14 the films as well as the dates?
15 A. All right. One additional information, the third programmes,
16 they have the Tagesschau, the news programme, which we talked
17 about with ARD, they use the same material, but these are
18 documentaries. So the first three documentaries that were
19 produced, are actually a series, they are called Opfer des
21 Q. If you could just translate these as you go through?
22 A. All right. Victims of the war, No. 1, Kozarac ethnically
23 cleansed, 84.09 minutes, was broadcasted on the 11th October
24 1993, by regional channel SW3, we just talked about. According
25 to SWF information, Suedwestfunk information, 160,000 people
26 watched this film altogether via satellite, via channel or via
27 the normal procedures.
28 Q. The series that you spoke of was relayed the next night on
1 12th October ----
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. --- 1993?
4 A. There was a second part also entitled "Victims of the war, part
5 2", and the subtitle "Death camp Omarska"; the length 88.47
6 minutes, broadcasted one day after the first on 12th October
7 1993, again by SW3, and here Tadic is presented in a slow motion
8 in Kozarac. So he was filmed by the crew already in spring 1993
9 when he was walking through the village wearing a leather jacket
10 and a red shirt. This was even prior to his arrest, so October
11 1993. According to Suedwestfunk information, 250,000 people
12 watched this film altogether -- "households", is a better
13 expression, watched it.
14 Q. Then there was a third programme in this series, is that right?
15 A. Yes, that was, as far as I remember, it was straight after this
16 second ----
17 Q. Yes.
18 A. --- death camp Omarska report. That was actually an expert
19 discussion where some journalists, some witnesses and other
20 experts were discussing the matter of the Tribunal and war
21 crimes in Bosnia. It was called "Victims of the war, No. 3,
22 discussion", 63.15 minutes, the length, broadcasted on
23 12th October 1993 by SW3 and, according to SWF information, a
24 few less people watched it. 100,000 people watched the
25 discussion after the Omarska documentary.
26 Q. Yes. The next programme, as a documentary rather than news
27 programme, was shown on 14th February 1994, was it?
28 A. Yes, called "Blickpunkt Europa". That is a kind of a title for
1 a programme which is broadcasted regularly but has different
2 topics, though this was -- "blickpunkt" means something like
3 "looking or spot Europe".
4 Q. Spotlight?
5 A. "Spotlight Europe: the Tribunal", 44.05 minutes, the length,
6 broadcasted on 14th February 1994 again by SW3, and I do not
7 have any further information about how many people watched it.
8 I could not deliver this information.
9 Q. We just lost the transcript again, your Honour. The material in
10 this film was very much the same material as that shown on
11 another date in February 1994, is that right?
12 A. Yes. I have not seen this one, Blickpunkt Europa, personally
13 but the title is the same, like others, number F, for example,
14 and people who saw it told me that it was more or less the same
15 material being used, also the date is actually the same day.
16 Q. Yes.
17 A. Not exactly the same day, but the next one was shown only a
18 couple of days later.
19 Q. Yes. The programme then that used the same material was "War
20 Criminals in Germany"?
21 A. Yes. That is even, this and the next one, the more important
22 ones because they were produced by Suedwestfunk, but they were
23 broadcasted by ARD which means all over Germany and also other
24 in countries with a satellite or Cable TV could watch it.
25 "Kriegsverbrecher in Deutschland", "War criminals in Germany",
26 the tight, the subtitle, "The case Dule Tadic and of other
27 Tatern, actors" or ......
28 Q. Yes.
1 A. The length is 29.10 minutes broadcasted on 24th February 1994
2 which was very briefly after his arrest, broadcasted in ARD, and
3 this video or this programme is quite a good example because
4 there is actually Tadic shown in many different photos
5 actually. More or less what existed at this time, photos of
6 Tadic have been shown there and reproduced by other media. So
7 it is again this image of Tadic in the leather jacket.
8 Q. You, in fact, list there six different types of photos that were
9 used within the programme?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. The Bench can see the list there. We have no need to repeat
12 them. What was the information, according to SWF, concerning
13 the number of people watching this film?
14 A. 1.96 million people, so nearly 2 million people or households
15 were watching this documentary.
16 Q. Yes. When you talk about satellite and these figures that we
17 are given, it is common knowledge that you can pick up in other
18 countries through other means, either by Cable or by satellite,
19 the programmes in Germany, you can pick them up here in Holland,
20 for instance?
21 A. ARD, yes.
22 Q. ZDF?
23 A. ZDF as well, the main channels, yes, RTL as well. So there are
24 two satellite systems. One is Astra Satellite and another one
25 is Yutel satellite which is European wide. I could look it up
26 in what countries they are broadcasted, but ARD and ZDF is
27 nearly everywhere in Europe.
28 JUDGE STEPHEN: Can I ask, the numbers that are given, are they
1 confined to Germany?
2 MR. KAY: That was the next question, your Honour. I am grateful.
3 I was going to ask that. The figures that we are given here,
4 are they the whole of Europe or are they merely Germany?
5 A. That is only Germany, but it includes, as I said, people who
6 watch this documentary just via ARD with the normal procedure or
7 via satellite or via Cable; but, altogether households watching
8 in Germany, this particular documentary.
9 Q. Households in Holland, households in Switzerland?
10 A. No idea. That is not included in these figures.
11 Q. Yes, and even in parts, Croatia, Austria?
12 A. In Austria, for definite, but these are also not included in
13 these figures, but I am not sure if you can see it in Croatia,
14 ARD, no idea. But these figures, as I said, are only for
15 Germany, only for Germany.
16 Q. Yes.
17 JUDGE STEPHEN: If I can ask another question? Repeatedly it
18 says "People"; is it people or households or television sets, in
20 MR. KAY: Can you help us?
21 A. Yes, sorry, that is my bad English, but it is households
22 actually is the right word to mention here.
23 Q. So it is number of television sets on?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. As opposed to numbers watching the television set?
26 A. Yes. That is information which is produced by companies who do
27 some service for TV programmes because they want to know how
28 many people watch it, and then they can sell their ads to other
1 companies. So it is quite important for the prices you then,
2 you know, make for advertisements and your programmes. So that
3 is quite reliable sources.
4 Q. Yes, from your research, you are aware that these figures are
5 figures that are important and figures that have to be produced
6 carefully because ----
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. --- other commercial interests rely upon them?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. The programme at F, "The Tribunal"?
11 A. Yes, that was broadcasted as well in ARD, so the first main
12 programme in Germany on 16th February 1995.
13 Q. Yes.
14 A. The title is "The Tribunal: Victims, Prosecutors" -- no,
15 "Taeter" means "actors" -- "Victims, actors prosecutors" ----
16 Q. Participants?
17 A. "Participants Judges. The War Crimes Tribunal", 61.01 minutes
18 on 16th February 1995. This time much of the material was used
19 from the Tribunal here. That was after the hearings had started
21 Q. Yes.
22 A. And four times in this report Tadic photos were used twice. He
23 is sitting in a car after his arrest in Munich wearing this
24 sports training clothes and, according to Suedwestfunk, again
25 660,000 households in Germany watched this film. It was,
26 I think, at 11 o'clock in the night, so it was quite late.
27 Q. Yes. Have you put together a short video film of some 10
28 minutes relating to the material and images used within these
2 A. Yes. It is actually only from one documentary No. E,
3 "Kriegsverbrecher in Deutschland", "War criminals in Germany",
4 which we just talked about, broadcasted on 24th February 1994
5 with 1.96 million households watching it.
6 Q. The images of Tadic used within this programme, were they
7 photographs that were picked up on and recycled throughout the
8 news system? Were they the predominant source ----
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. --- of the image?
11 A. Yes. They are pictures from his arrest or even before his
12 arrest when this camera team and photographer were looking where
13 he was living, where Tadic is living, in Munich. Some of these
14 photos, then films of his arrest in Munich, the photos of
15 Kozarac, which I mentioned already, from spring 1993. Then also
16 some pictures, older pictures, of Tadic doing karate exercises,
17 being with friend in Bosnia. So I think that is quite a good
18 summary of what has been reproduced as well by other papers or
20 Q. This has been put together into the form of a tape which we will
21 now screen and has been handed to the technical booth, is that
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. So if we could put our video monitors on? Is it right that the
25 sound will be switched off so we are not hearing the spoken
26 word; we are going to be just looking at the film image?
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. Thank you.
1 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is this going to be an Exhibit?
2 MR. KAY: Yes, it is, your Honour, No. 102.
3 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Any objection?
4 MR. KEEGAN: We have never seen the video tape, your Honour. We just
5 got a copy this morning as with the rest of this material, so I
6 actually have no idea.
7 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I have on my list of things to do to remind the
8 Prosecutor to have translated the video that they offered when
9 Mr. Ljubomir Tadic testified.
10 MR. KAY: Yes.
11 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: The problem being that they were just excerpts
12 and they were in German. I gather this witness has put together
13 highlights, as he sees them, from various films?
14 MR. KAY: Yes. He has used the image of Tadic which is the point of
15 this evidence.
16 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: That is true, the image, but it is the
17 frequency. It is excerpts from a number of films.
18 MR. KAY: Yes -- from one film which was the predominant film.
19 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I am sorry, OK. That makes the problem smaller
20 then. Maybe we can then get the entire film and see it in
21 context. I suppose that is the situation. It relates to the
22 same offer that the Prosecution made regarding Ljubomir Tadic.
23 We wanted to see it in context, see the entire film as well as
24 see it in English or, at least, not in English, but at least the
25 translation. So if you will do the same for this at least ----
26 MR. KEEGAN: The Ljubomir tape Miss Hollis will be addressing after.
27 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: OK.
28 MR. KAY: If I can just stress here, your Honour, the point of this
1 selection is the image rather than the programme itself or what
2 was spoken.
3 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: We will take a look at it and see how it fits
4 in in perhaps the total film. Anyway, OK, you have not seen it,
5 so we will take a look at it and then hear objections later, if
6 there are any.
7 MR. KAY: I think Mr. Deichmann wishes to assist us?
8 THE WITNESS: If I could make a brief comment about this? The
9 question has just been raised; so this film was 29 minutes and
10 it is in different periods where Tadic is being shown quite
11 frequently. So it is after two minutes, the first time, and
12 then after five minutes and half a minute and the second time.
13 That is the first sequence we look at. Then it is actually 10
14 minutes where Tadic is not shown, but then from about a minute
15 No. 15 to minute No. 22, we look at only one sequence which is
16 complete without any cuts; whereas loads of material used,
17 photos of Tadic. Then it is only one more which we will not see
18 at minute 22, and then it is another seven minutes when the film
19 was finished.
20 MR. KAY: Have we had cut out the 10 minutes bit without him?
21 A. Yes, that is cut out.
22 Q. Thank you. That is as I understood it.
23 A. Also the first five minutes is cut out and the last seven
24 minutes is cut out.
25 Q. You have a record there of what has been taken out?
26 A. Yes.
27 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: That is helpful. Fine.
28 MR. KAY: Perhaps now if the technical booth can put on our screens
1 the film and lower the lights so we have a better image?
2 (The video was played).
3 Thank you, that is the film you put together,
4 Mr. Deichmann. Amongst the photographs that we saw, there was
5 the image of Mr. Tadic coming out of a house and dressed in a,
6 I believe it is called, shell suit. We also saw another image
7 of men in a bar or a room somewhere with copies of the same
8 photograph and it being passed around?
9 A. Yes.
10 MR. KEEGAN: I am going to object to that question, your Honour. It
11 calls for speculation. I certainly could not tell what that
12 photograph was. I would like some voir dire from the witness
13 whether he even knows before we have a conclusionary statement
14 like that.
15 MR. KAY: If I can assist the Court, because copies of the
16 photographs from the film have been produced.
17 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: You are referring to when the men were looking
18 at a piece of paper and there was a photograph on it ----
19 MR. KAY: Yes.
20 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: --- and that is what you have?
21 MR. KAY: Yes. You can identify the image of Mr. Tadic in one of
22 these photographs on the photograph being looked at by the men.
23 If I refer my learned friend to the same scene and he looks at
24 the photograph of the men with an ashtray in the foreground and
25 looks at the photograph in the centre.
26 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: You two may be talking about something I do not
27 understand. I thought the objection was to the portion of the
28 film where people are looking at something, and it appears that
1 included in what they are looking at is a photograph.
2 MR. KAY: Yes.
3 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: The question becomes, a photograph of whom?
4 That is now what you are addressing.
5 MR. KEEGAN: Yes. Actually, your Honour, my objection was to the
6 leading question which called for a speculative answer. Defence
7 counsel is now referring to something they are apparently going
8 to put into evidence which I would be happy for the Court to
9 have because my objection still stands, as I do not believe you
10 can tell. I simply wanted to know if this witness had any idea
11 of what picture these people were looking and, if so, how does
12 he know that.
13 MR. KAY: Shall I ask that as a question then?
14 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Yes, since we have not been utilizing voir dire
15 for the last six months, you might ask those questions so that
16 we can determine whether there is this indicia of reliability.
17 MR. KAY: As my learned friend has no objection to the photographs
18 going in, perhaps I can produce them so they can be in front of
19 your Honours as Exhibit 102B. If we call the video tape A.
20 That is for the Registry which is the original photographs.
21 These are photocopies for their Honours.
22 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: The photo that Mr. Keegan was looking at was
23 one of multiple people or is that not the one you were referring
25 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, your Honour, there are actually two that are very
27 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: What we have is a picture of one.
28 MR. KEEGAN: There are a whole sequence of photographs apparently
1 here, your Honour.
2 MR. KAY: May I apologise for the numbering because they were
3 originally numbered for an entirely different purpose.
4 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: That is OK. This is all 102B?
5 MR. KAY: Yes, your Honour.
6 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: No objection? 102B then will be admitted.
7 MR. KAY: The photograph we are concerned with would have "Tape 2,
8 21/27" on the left-hand side.
9 Mr. Deichmann, have you got a copy of that
10 photograph? You have only a photocopy ----
11 A. Yes, a very bad photocopy.
12 Q. --- I suspect. Let me give you mine or the Registry can provide
13 you with it as they have finished noting it up. I believe there
14 the bundle you have, which is the one filed with the Registry
15 is, of original photographic images?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Actual photographs rather than what I have got which is a
19 A. I think these are photographs done from the video tapes.
20 Q. Yes. I think Judge Stephen may have a similar set in his hand
22 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: His are shiny!
23 MR. KAY: Yes. The photograph that has got in the top left-hand
24 corner "tape 2, 21/27", do you have any comments to make about
25 that photograph in relation to what it represents?
26 A. Yes, that is a photo reproduced from the film we have just seen,
27 which is the "War Criminals" broadcasted in ARD on 24th February
28 1994. It is about, after 18 minutes 25 seconds, Bosnian
1 refugees in a pub with, I think it is quite clearly to see,
2 blown up photos of Tadic. Actually in the middle of this photo
3 you can see which here is No. 2.
4 Q. Yes.
5 A. You can see it from -- actually if you look from behind through
6 it you can see that this one has written "troedel" marked on it.
7 Q. You are holding up to the Court now what has No. 2 on, although
8 not No. 2 in the bundle, and it is a notice with "troedel"
9 marked on it. The photograph that you are referring to, perhaps
10 it could be put on the overhead monitor so you can point to the
11 particular photograph and why you say these two are linked?
12 I am afraid I wanted the one with "tape 2, 21/27" on the
13 monitor. Which photograph do you say is linked to the
14 photographs of Mr. Tadic, so that it is being looked at from the
15 back? If you could just keep your thing on it.
16 A. [The witness indicated] This one. I think that is the clearest
17 expression of it, but I analysed the video quite carefully and
18 also it is not as clear as here. It looks as though all the
19 other pictures as well are blown up from this video ----
20 Q. Right.
21 A. --- and distributed to Bosnian refugees. What you can see here,
22 which is quite interesting as well, that is a sign which is in
23 German pubs, this one here. It is on a different section of the
24 video, much clearer, which is a sign which is in every pub for
25 the protection of youth, saying that, you know, you should not
26 give drinks to kids and so on. But it is in another aspect
27 quite clear that is a German pub. I assume it is a pub in
28 Munich. There is also a sign which says "Privat" private.
1 Q. Perhaps if we make no bones about it, what was the purpose of
2 showing this bit of film within that documentary?
3 A. Sorry?
4 Q. What was the purpose, why was this being shown in the film about
5 the war criminals?
6 A. Actually, the point which has been made not only in this
7 documentary, is that many refugees recognised Tadic, so there
8 are other bits in documentaries where witnesses who do not want
9 to tell their names and so on confessed that they saw him, for
10 example, in a shop in Munich and recognised him there. That was
11 why just the sequences where they showed Bosnian refugees in
12 Germany looking at it after his arrest.
13 Q. Yes. That is all I ask about those particular photographs which
14 we have produced as 102B. Thank you. One of the reasons for
15 the interest within these German television programmes you have
16 told us about is the European perspective, Germany being in the
17 centre of Europe and the former Yugoslavia being a European
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Did Germany receive many people from the former Yugoslavia at
21 the time of the conflicts in that country?
22 A. I do not have the exact figures here, but I would say now I am
23 sure that it received the most refugees from all European
24 countries. There are also loads in Austria, but in Germany
25 there are, I do not know the figures, as I said, but the most of
26 the refugees went to Germany. There is even now a big
27 discussion about how they can be brought back securely.
28 Q. Your research has been principally upon those television
1 stations that we have covered in evidence this morning, is that
3 A. Yes, also I did some more precise, I did some check-ups with
4 them on the more precise journals for TV.
5 Q. Yes. I just want to make it clear that you have not sought to
6 produce before this Court all the television stations ----
7 A. No.
8 Q. --- within Germany or in Europe?
9 A. No.
10 Q. But this has been an exercise focused upon that country?
11 A. Only on German, focused only on German, but on the most
12 important news programmes and Suedwestfunk as an example because
13 they produce these important documentaries which have been
15 Q. Thank you very much. Did you also consider special magazines
16 for TV with political content?
17 A. Yes, that is what I did as well. I looked, I tried to get
18 information of special magazines or journals which are
19 broadcasted, some of them weekly others monthly or fortnightly,
20 and broadcasted either on private channels or on the main
21 programmes in Germany. So I checked on Spiegel Teufel which is
22 a TV programme but linked to a very prominent magazine, printed
23 magazine, Der Spiegel. The same with Stern Teufel, a TV
24 programme which belongs to ----
25 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Kay, the transcript has gone.
26 MR. KAY: I am sorry. We are nearly making it to the end of the
28 So Spiegel TV was a particular television journal with
1 political content that you looked at, is that right?
2 A. Yes. That was actually the only one who told me that they had
3 done a report about the Tadic case. All the others which
4 I checked, the most important ones, the others did not do
5 anything, but Spiegel TV is the third biggest political journal
6 on TV. They have on average in 1994, that was when their
7 report, one report was broadcasted, they had 3.93 million people
8 watching to it, and this one report 10 minutes long was
9 broadcasted on 3rd March 1994. Again, Tadic is shown there with
10 an old karate friend, even some more details, information here.
11 Once he is shown again in training clothes entering this house
12 in Munich where he then was captured by the police. Then later
13 in the film after three minutes he is shown doing karate
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. Then after eight, nearly nine, minutes he is again showed with
17 an old friend, Tadic wearing a beard. Actually, we have also
18 some of these photos in this collection here.
19 Q. Right.
20 A. Some of them also have been shown by the other film we just saw.
21 Q. Again, on Judge Stephen's point, by 3.93 million people, do you
22 mean households or individuals?
23 A. On Spiegel Teufel I would have to look up my figures if it is
24 people or households.
25 Q. Right.
26 A. I cannot say now, because some may differ. Some may even give
27 you the breakdowns of the age of people. So I would have to
28 check this. I am not sure now.
1 Q. Did you also review the German print media?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Did you consider the biggest and most important German weekly
4 magazine, I say that with deference to the others, but Der
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Did they tell you the number of articles and photos that were
8 used of the defendant Tadic?
9 A. Yes, we even produced an appendix for this as well, but they
10 had ----
11 Q. Perhaps if that could be produced now then as Appendix 5. This
12 has been served on the Prosecution, your Honour. I produce this
13 as 101F with a copy for the Registry and three for your
15 MR. KEEGAN: No objection, your Honour.
16 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: 101F will be admitted.
17 MR. KEEGAN: Just for the record, there was apparently no ruling on
18 my prior objection to the questions and answers.
19 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Well, I do not think Mr. Kay went back to the
20 question, that I recall. I thought it had to do with who was in
21 that photo that we saw. Was that your objection?
22 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, your Honour.
23 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: We never got an answer from the witness that
24 I heard. He did say that he looked at some blown up photos when
25 he was looking at the video, but he never told us what was in
26 it. I would like to blow up ours because it is difficult.
27 Anyway, this 101F. If that is your objection -- if you want a
28 ruling I will rule. I just maybe have lost the objection.
1 MR. KEEGAN: I was just noting for the record that an objection had
2 been made and there had been no answer to it. So it was just
3 for the record.
4 MR. KAY: I am quite happy with the way things have gone. I do not
5 know whether Mr. Keegan is or not.
6 MR. KEEGAN: To save confusion, your Honour, I will withdraw the
7 objection. I will just handle it in cross.
8 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: We will see. 101F then is admitted.
9 MR. KAY: I am much obliged. [To the witness]: If you tell us
10 about -- not all of them are of war criminals either, the
11 pictures here -- if we consider then your research from Der
13 A. Yes, as I said it is the most prominent or biggest weekly
14 magazine or the biggest in circulation, but it is very
15 well-known with a print run, I have a figure of the last quarter
16 of 1995 with over a million, 1,033,344, quite an exact figure.
17 Q. In relation to a print run, that does not necessarily mean that
18 that number of people look at a magazine. Could more people
19 look at the same magazine if it arrives on a household doorstep?
20 A. Actually, that is what some papers complain always about, that
21 other people very often read these papers as well and they would
22 prefer to sell it. I do not have the exact figures, but
23 normally more people read these magazines than there were sold.
24 Q. Thank you. If you could tell us then about its reproduction of
25 information concerning Mr. Tadic?
26 A. OK. They had four articles from the beginning of 1994 to the
27 middle of 1996, and in these four articles all four of them
28 included photos, altogether five photos. One article had even
1 two photos of Tadic.
2 Q. Yes.
3 A. On the periods I only have the number of the week, number 8,
4 1994, for example, you if you look at No. 8 it means it is the
5 eighth week of the year which will be around February 1994,
6 which means after his arrest in Munich. Two photos of Tadic,
7 one with a glass of wine and another one doing karate
8 exercises. The next article from Spiegel No. 45, 1994, again a
9 photo of Tadic, actually the same photo of Tadic like the other
10 one with a glass of wine. This is around week 45 in this year,
11 which is around November.
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. I assume at the time when the Tribunal hearings started. The
14 third one, No. C, is No. 18, 1995, Spiegel issue, one photo of
15 Tadic, him doing karate exercises. This would be around
16 April/May, so the time of his deferral to the Tribunal from
18 Q. Yes.
19 A. The last one, No. D, issue of Spiegel No. 29, 1996, a photo of
20 Tadic here in front of the Tribunal, in front of the Court.
21 Q. Did you also do the same exercise in relation to Fokus?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. The magazine that you classify as being the second most
24 important after Der Spiegel?
25 A. As a news magazine, yes, Spiegel is the most important news
26 magazine. Fokus is quite a new one. It does not exist for such
27 a long time as Spiegel, but it has become quite important as
1 Q. In relation to this, did you also access their records and did
2 they produce a summary of the information that you have in your
4 A. Yes, it is Appendix 6.
5 Q. Appendix 6. I put this in for completeness because you actually
6 set it out within the report. Your Honour, if this could be
7 submitted by the Defence as 101G. A copy has already been
8 served on my learned friend.
9 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is there any objection to 101G?
10 MR. KEEGAN: Does that relate to Appendix 6?
11 MR. KAY: That is Appendix 6, your Honour.
12 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
13 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: That will be admitted.
14 MR. KAY: In fact, your report in English sets out this information
15 in the form of a summary, does it not?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Perhaps if you could tell us then about the articles run by
18 Fokus during that same period, from February 1994 until October
20 A. So it was actually between February 1994 and the last one was in
21 April 1996.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 A. The first one -- altogether, the summary of this research, they
24 had eight articles concerning the Tadic case in this period, and
25 in four of them they had three photos and one caricature. So
26 three photos I think that is the most important.
27 Q. By "caricature" you mean cartoon?
28 A. A cartoon, yes. So the first one on 21st February 1994, one
1 article where there is a photo of Tadic which was reproduced
2 quite often in a car after his arrest in Munich wearing his
3 training clothes.
4 Q. The second one?
5 A. The second one an article on 2nd May 1994 about the work of the
6 Tribunal but no photo of Tadic, just been mentioned. The third
7 one is what I referred to already, the cartoon which was printed
8 in the issue of 14th November 1995.
9 Q. Yes.
10 A. Then now No. 40D in my report, this is an article printed on
11 29th April 1995, again no photo. Then E an article printed on
12 12th June 1995, again no photo. F an article on 23rd October
13 1995 where you see a photo of Tadic at the Tribunal. Then again
14 an article without a photo printed on 17th February 1996. The
15 last one on 29th April 1996, again with a photo of Tadic at the
17 Q. The print run of Fokus in the last quarter of 1995, did that
18 average to being slightly over 750,000?
19 A. That is correct, 751,714.
20 Q. Again, with the same proviso that more people often read
21 magazines than ----
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. --- are actually sold to individuals?
24 A. Also I cannot give a figure on this.
25 Q. Yes. To round up this now with Stern magazine, another popular
26 weekly magazine, is that right?
27 A. Yes, that is a very popular weekly magazine. Also a kind of
28 news magazine but more popular. It even has a higher print run
1 than Spiegel has. So the print run in the last quarter of 1995,
2 the same period as the other papers I just talked about, was
3 1,251,038. So they had in the period also between beginning of
4 1994 and mid-1996, altogether they had seven articles concerning
5 the Tadic case and five of these seven articles included
6 altogether six photos of Tadic.
7 So, to go through in more detail, the first appeared
8 in Stern No. 9, 1994 which is again the week No. 9, February
9 1994 I would assume or the beginning of March after his arrest,
10 with two photos of Tadic in a car, again after his arrest in
11 Munich, and the other one Tadic doing karate exercises.
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. B Stern No. 26, 1994 which would be around April/May, one
14 article with one photo of Tadic again in a car after his arrest
15 in Munich. No. C, Stern No. 45, 1994, again a photo of Tadic in
16 a car after his arrest in Munich.
17 Q. Yes.
18 A. No. D Stern No. 24, 1995, a photo of Tadic at the Tribunal.
19 Q. Yes.
20 A. So, the one before No. 45, 1995, is around the time of November
21 when the hearings started here. The one I just talked about
22 No. D24, 1995, that would be the middle of 1995, the time around
23 when he was deferred. Then No. E, an article in Stern No. 6,
24 1996, which is in February 1996, no photo of Tadic. Another
25 article just three weeks later which is March 1996 Stern No. 9,
26 1996, without a photo. The last one No. 20, 1996 and the time
27 of April 1996, I assume, a photo of Tadic at the Tribunal going
28 with this article. That is it, seven articles, five of them,
1 six photos.
2 MR. KAY: Thank you. Your Honour that is a convenient moment.
3 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: We will stand in recess until 2.30.
4 (1.00 p.m.)
5 (Luncheon Adjournment)
1 (2.30 p.m.)
2 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Kay, you may continue.
3 MR. KAY: Thank you, your Honour.
4 Q. Mr. Deichmann, over the lunch adjournment did you make some
5 enquiries over the matter of people and households which was a
6 concern of the Judges? Can you tell us what the result of those
7 enquiries were?
8 A. Yes, I did some brief enquiries and when we discussed this with
9 Suedwestfunk, which is No. 5 in my report, I got confused
10 looking at the numbers of households, being satellite and so
11 on. Actually, the question your Honour asked about if it is
12 people or households when we talked about this important report,
13 "War Criminals in Germany", which was broadcasted in February
14 1994, on 24th, we saw bits of it, I mentioned the figure 1.96
15 million people and actually what is in the report is correct.
16 It is not households, it is people. I checked this up.
17 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Deichmann. If we could next turn to
18 the Sueddeutsche Zeitung which is the German daily paper with
19 the highest circulation? As a result of enquiries from their
20 computer system, did you have provided for you a computer
21 printout which is appendix 7 concerning the number of articles
22 they have printed?
23 A. Yes, that is correct.
24 Q. Again, your Honour, this has been served on the Prosecution and
25 I produce it now as Exhibit 101I. There are three copies for
26 your Honours.
27 JUDGE STEPHEN: I wonder if I can just clarify one aspect of it?
28 Apart from that one instance, other references to "people" are
1 to television sets, are they, or throughout your report where
2 you mention "people", does it mean people?
3 THE WITNESS: It means people, yes.
4 Q. Not households?
5 A. No. Just to explain it, I got confused as well because
6 they changed the system how they count a couple of months ago
7 which has just been explained to me as well by these people.
8 MR. KAY: Thank you very much. This printout here is a summary of
9 the articles on the Tadic case that were printed between
10 February 1994 and October 1996, is that right?
11 A. Yes, that is correct.
12 Q. The information about how many of these articles had photos of
13 Tadic was not something that you were able to have provided to
14 you during the period of time that your research was undertaken,
15 is that right?
16 A. Yes, that is correct.
17 Q. That has not been something you have been able to update since
19 A. No, not yet.
20 Q. This particular newspaper, are you able to say whether
21 photographs of Tadic were ever printed at all during the period
22 of February 1994 and October 1996?
23 A. Well, altogether they had (which is also down here) 82 articles
24 which are listed on here covering the Tadic case, and for the
25 print run is 402,608 which makes Sueddeutsche Zeitung the
26 biggest paper in Germany. On the photos I cannot give any exact
27 figures but, from my experience, I would guess there were quite
28 a lot of pictures going with them, and actually maybe we can
1 show this later, all the stuff that has been already
2 distributed. If you take a look through this big file of
3 collections of articles, there are loads of photos in there.
4 Q. Yes, thank you very much. If we go to other sources and,
5 indeed, you have referred to a ----
6 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Excuse me.
7 MR. KEEGAN: Before we move on, are you just moving off this
9 MR. KAY: Yes.
10 MR. KEEGAN: OK, it is just that it has not been tendered yet that I
11 am aware of and, before we do, I am a bit confused as to -- that
12 is annex 7? That actually was not shown what was presented,
13 annex 7?
14 MR. KAY: Yes.
15 MR. KEEGAN: What paragraph in the report are we referring to now?
16 We seem to have jumped.
17 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: 4.
18 MR. KAY: Paragraph 4, after the "Stern" section.
19 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Any objection to 101? It will be H.
20 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
21 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: H, not I.
22 MR. KAY: We are almost getting there and I may have slipped up on
23 the procedures.
24 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: No problem.
25 MR. KAY: Thank you. You have referred to other sources which is on
26 the next page of your report and a ----
27 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I am sorry.
28 MR. KAY: --- that is quite all right --- and a bundle of newspaper
1 cuttings for that period from February 1994 to October 1996.
2 Can you tell us about this further bundle?
3 A. Yes. That is a bundle of articles collected from six important
4 daily or weekly papers or magazines, which is the Frankfurter
5 Allgemeine Zeitung, FAZ, with a print run of 390,586 ----
6 Q. Yes.
7 A. --- in the last quarter of 1995. It is Die Tageszeitung, TAZ,
8 with a print run of 59,182. It is the Frankfurter Rundschau,
9 FR, with a print run of 186,694. It is Die Zeit which is a
10 weekly paper with a print run of 478,961, all in the last
11 quarter of 1995. Then it is Der Spiegel we already talked about
12 and Die Woche where I do not have the print run figure now, but
13 these were looked quite consistently. It is not complete, but
14 it is based on actually my own archives which I collected in the
15 last couple of years and the archives of Mr. Heitmann.
16 Altogether he put together in his document 83 articles
17 from the period February 1994 to October 1996 concerning the
18 Tadic case, and he found in 12 of these articles, 13 photos and
19 two carricatures which are cartoons again. An important fact
20 maybe is that only the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, FAZ, was
21 the only daily or paper he looked at and I mentioned which did
22 not have a photo with Tadic.
23 Q. Right.
24 A. All the others at least had one photo in these articles of
26 Q. These research materials have been put together in a further
27 bundle, is that correct?
28 A. Yes.
1 Q. A copy of this has again been served on the Prosecution, your
2 Honour, and we tender it now before the Court as 101. I have
3 lost track now -- and three copies for your Honours?
4 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is there any objection to 101I?
5 MR. KEEGAN: No objection.
6 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: That will be admitted. The film that we saw
7 was ----
8 MR. KAY: 102.
9 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Was that 102?
10 MR. KAY: Yes, your Honour.
11 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Do you wish to offer that?
12 MR. KAY: Yes, your Honour.
13 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is there any objection to 102? That has not
14 been admitted, has it?
15 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
16 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: OK. 102 then will be admitted, and 101I.
17 MR. KAY: I think you have adequately described this material, as a
18 flick through of the contents shows the newspaper cuttings as
19 well as the various photographs that have been used. Did you
20 make enquiries of the GAFF photoagency in Berlin?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. Perhaps if you could tell us what that particular agency does as
23 a service?
24 A. When I did this research on the Suedwestfunkt and these films
25 produced there, the GAFF or GAFF photoagency was mentioned as
26 having the copyrights for actually all the photos that were
27 taken of Dusko Tadic before his arrest in Munich, and so I got
28 in contact with them -- they are based in Berlin -- and I talked
1 to the photographer who took the photos. According to his
2 information, he could not give me exact figures, but he was
3 saying that after Tadic's arrest in Munich in February 1994 that
4 all important newspapers immediately bought the pictures and
5 published them, which actually confirms the other research we
6 already talked about.
7 So he mentioned Die Zeit, Frankfurter Rundschau,
8 Stern, Spiegel, Fokus, and papers which have not been mentioned
9 as a weekly called Freitag and another daily, small daily paper,
10 with a print run of 20,000 called Junge Welt. So, these one,
11 two -- seven papers he mentioned having in mind that they bought
12 his photos with Tadic before the arrest.
13 He also told me that they have been printed very often
14 in Germany, and that there is another international photoagency
15 in Paris called SIPA Press which actually sold these photos a
16 lot of time worldwide.
17 Q. Yes. These agencies are used as distribution centres by
18 newspapers who call up the material and then buy the rights and
19 have them put in their own newspapers?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. In addition to that research within Germany, did you also
22 contact a Mr. Philip Hammond from Great Britain?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Is he a media specialist at the University of North London?
25 A. I have no idea if he is at the University of North London, but
26 I know him through the London International Research Exchange.
27 Q. Did he again provide information concerning a check on some of
28 the archives of various British newspapers?
1 A. Yes, he did.
2 Q. Did he also advise you from his research of the information that
3 was able to be obtained from the newspapers?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. What was that?
6 A. To bear in mind as well what he told me is that that is an
7 incomplete list. But what he did, he looked at altogether 13
8 different papers where, from my knowledge, 12 of them are
9 British and I think the only one, Newsweek, I think, is
10 published in America, an American weekly.
11 Q. Yes.
12 A. But they are read also in Europe and in Britain, in particular.
13 So, 13 different papers and he found 52 articles were concerning
14 the Tadic case. Then in terms of photos in these 52 articles,
15 in 22 articles photos of Tadic appeared. There was only one
16 paper which did not run a photo of Tadic which is, if you can
17 see in the list, The Observer, where he found one article but
18 not a single photo. Then should I go through this list as well?
19 Q. Yes. What did The Guardian produce?
20 A. He found 18 articles of The Guardian and four photos.
21 Q. A readership of a quarter of a million?
22 A. Yes, according to his information, yes.
23 Q. The Daily Telegraph?
24 A. He found eight articles and in five of them photos of Tadic, and
25 a readership of estimated a million.
26 Q. The Times?
27 A. The Times, six articles, one photo in these and a readership of
28 estimated 400,000.
1 Q. The Independent?
2 A. The Independent, five articles, four photos of Tadic and a
3 readership estimate of 250,000.
4 Q. The Financial Times?
5 A. The Financial Times, four articles, one photo of Tadic,
6 altogether a readership of 240,000 where he gave me additional
7 information that about 50 per cent, though 120,000 are sold in
8 Britain and the rest abroad. So that is international figure.
9 Q. The European?
10 A. Three articles, one photo in these, no idea about the
12 Q. The Daily Mail?
13 A. Two articles, one photo and a readership of more than a million.
14 Q. Newsweek?
15 A. Newsweek is, I think, an American magazine, weekly, with one
16 article and going along with a photo of Tadic.
17 Q. The Sunday Times?
18 A. The Sunday Times, he found one article going along with a photo
19 of Tadic.
20 Q. The Observer?
21 A. As I mentioned already, the only paper with no photo of Tadic,
22 one article, no photo.
23 Q. The Evening Standard?
24 A. The Evening Standard, one article with one photo of Tadic.
25 Q. The Economist?
26 A. The same, one article, one photo of Tadic.
27 Q. The Daily Express?
28 A. Again one article, one photo of Tadic and a readership estimated
1 more than a million.
2 MR. KAY: Again that is all I ask, your Honour.
3 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Cross-examination, Mr. Keegan?
4 MR. KEEGAN: Thank you, your Honour.
5 Cross-Examined by MR. KEEGAN
6 Q. Mr. Deichmann, can you explain to the Court, with reference to
7 the television markets that you discussed earlier, what is
8 "market share"? What does that mean?
9 A. That is -- I just have to get the figures out again -- what it
10 means, if you take all television consumers as 100 per cent,
11 then 16 of them or 16.8 per cent, which you could not calculate,
12 would look RTL regular ----
13 Q. No, I understand the figures. What I want to know is what does
14 the term "market share" mean?
15 A. In Germany, it means "markt anteiler" which means how important
16 this television programme is on a national area in terms of
17 being shown by people -- watched by people.
18 Q. Do you know how the television networks determine the figures
19 then that they have given you?
20 A. Actually, these information are, as I said, already not given,
21 but I could look it up very explicitly where I got these figures
22 from, but these figures are provided by, as I said, some
23 companies, independent companies, which are recognised actually
24 by all the media companies for these advertisement business
26 Q. What I want to know is, do you know how they get those figures,
27 what exactly do they do to come up with 16.8 per cent?
28 A. That is what I was alluding to when I talked about households
1 and people watching it. They do -- how do you call it in
2 English -- a kind of survey. They look at a certain number of
3 people and take this as an average, but it is -- actually these
4 figures are agreed on by all the major, actually by everybody.
5 Everybody is working after them. I could ----
6 Q. So, as far as you know, these are based on surveys of the
7 consumers; they call people or write them and ask them, "What
8 did you watch? What do you watch?" How do they do this?
9 A. I have no information how they get it together. It is done by
10 the Gesellschaft fur Konsumerforschung in Nuremberg, GFK, which,
11 I think, even got an official order by all these companies -- by
12 all the TV channels to provide this information.
13 Q. As far as you are aware, the purposes of this is for them to be
14 able to determine their market share so that they know how much
15 they can charge for the advertising time they sell?
16 A. I think that is one important aspect, but I am not sure if it is
17 actually -- I am sure it is also of purpose for other --
18 important for other purposes, but that is what I know, where it
19 is used.
20 Q. Do you know or are you aware of any studies with respect to how
21 people who do not speak the language German in Germany and who
22 are at the bottom of the ethnic scale, the most disadvantaged,
23 how they fit into this equation of market share? Are they
24 a disproportionately high percentage of the 20 per cent who are
25 not even represented within your figures?
26 A. Could you repeat.
27 Q. Are you aware of any studies with respect to this issue of
28 market share that specifically consider people who do not speak
1 the German language ----
2 A. No.
3 Q. --- or are the most economically disadvantaged within the German
4 society ----
5 A. No.
6 Q. --- and whether or not they make up a disproportionately high
7 share of the 20 per cent of market share who, apparently, do not
8 even fit into the numbers that you give us here?
9 A. No, I have no information. I could only guess that, or some
10 information here, that I think about more than 80 per cent of
11 all households in Germany have access to a television, or
12 I think it is even more. I think there were some on cable or
13 so, but I have no concrete or definite information about this.
14 Q. All the articles which you have produced here today are in the
15 German language, are they not?
16 A. Besides the last ones about the British which I just discussed
17 at the end.
18 Q. You actually have not produced any of those articles, have you?
19 I am talking about the Exhibits here in Court.
20 A. You mean about printed articles? I refer here in Der Spiegel,
21 no, I have never written for Der Spiegel, never for the Fokus,
22 Stern, Sueddeutsche Zeitung, no.
23 Q. I will move on, sir, thank you. Do you know any of the
24 witnesses in the Tadic case?
25 A. No, I do not know.
26 Q. You have never met any of them?
27 A. Well, I do not know who the witnesses are. I only know ----
28 Q. So you have no idea how many of them speak German?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Do you have any idea of how many of those witnesses may have
3 televisions? Do you know how many of those people have ever
4 read a German newspaper or a German magazine?
5 A. No, no concrete information.
6 Q. You would not have any information then on how many may have
7 satellite TV or Cable TV either?
8 A. No. But just, in general, most of the households in Germany
9 have televisions. It is very rare to find houses that do not.
10 Q. Really? Would it surprise you to find out that almost 5 million
11 households do not have television?
12 A. No.
13 Q. It would not surprise you? In your report you refer to several
14 factors that were of particular interest to German society ----
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. --- with respect to this whole issue. Is it not a fact that you
17 yourself have had a very keen interest in the media coverage of
18 this particular conflict for the last few years?
19 A. I had a particular interest, yes.
20 Q. In fact, I believe you testified earlier that you have collected
21 your own archives ----
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. --- including going to three to four daily newspapers as well as
24 the weeklies?
25 A. Yes, but that is to explain, as a freelancer, quite a normal
26 procedure you have to do, because I do not have access to AP or
28 Q. In fact, your focus, though, with respect to the coverage of
1 this conflict is that you are very critical of the way the media
2 has covered this conflict, are you not?
3 A. Well, I did not only collect articles in my archives about the
4 media, I actually collected nearly everything I could find, and
5 then for this report here I took out everything I could find
6 about the Tadic case. So it is actually only a selection of
7 what I have been collecting.
8 Q. Yes.
9 A. It is not only mine. It is, as I referred to, also from
10 Mr. Heitmann.
11 Q. Yes. My question to you was that your focus with respect to the
12 media coverage in your writings is to be very critical of the
13 way the media has covered this conflict and, in fact, you accuse
14 it of being anti-Serb, do you not?
15 A. I have been -- again could you repeat?
16 Q. I will break it down for you.
17 A. All right.
18 Q. Your focus has been to be critical of the way the media has
19 covered this conflict?
20 A. Yes, that is true.
21 Q. In fact, you have accused it of being anti-Serb and being an
22 instrument of western governments?
23 A. I have been quite critical and for criticising them for being
24 one-sided, yes.
25 Q. Sir, do you think that your extreme personal interest in the
26 media coverage of this conflict might affect the objectivity of
27 your conclusions in your report as to whether the average media
28 viewer might have seen the coverage of the Tadic case?
1 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Excuse me?
2 MR. KAY: Sorry, your Honour. I think my learned friend is making a
3 comment in the question there which, in the circumstances, is
4 not called for. There is no evidence that it is an extreme
5 personal interest that this expert has before the Court. He has
6 only come here to produce figures concerning viewing and article
7 circulation. To be frank, I do not see what the point is in
8 putting the question that way.
9 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: It is cross-examination. It is, you know, his
10 definition of "extreme"; if he feels it is not, he can say
12 MR. KAY: Yes, your Honour.
13 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I will overrule your objection. You need to
14 answer the question. Maybe it needs to be repeated.
15 THE WITNESS: Could you please repeat it? I am sorry.
16 MR. KEEGAN: Certainly. (To the witness): My question was whether
17 or not you would agree that your very strong personal interest
18 in the media coverage of this conflict might affect your
19 objectivity when you reached your conclusions with respect to
20 whether or not the average media consumer would have seen the
21 coverage of the Tadic case.
22 A. I think, no, I do not have a personal interest. I have an
23 interest as a journalist and that is what I was looking at and
24 why I was looking at. There is no personal interest involved in
25 this area. As I explained also I did some other areas I looked
26 at. So I criticised the media also for other things. We did
27 this project about D Day, for example, about images of Japan,
28 and I think that is what my figures show. There is no
1 subjectivity in it. I wanted to present objective facts. There
2 is no personal interest.
3 Q. If we could go to some of these factors then. It might be
4 easier to start from the last, perhaps that is most recent in
5 your mind. First of all, as I read your report, a colleague in
6 Britain actually did the review of these newspapers?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. You yourself, in fact, did not do this review and so you cannot
9 vouch for its accuracy, can you?
10 A. What he emailed me is not these figures, but he emailed me a
11 list of the titles which I have here as well, the authors, also
12 a short abstract of all the articles and also explaining what
13 photos were used. I did actually count them and I calculated
14 these figures together.
15 Q. Did you review each one of these articles completely yourself?
16 A. No, just as I described what I got from him there.
17 Q. So let us go to next series that you received from a colleague,
18 and that would be under paragraph 5 "Other Sources" which has
19 been produced to this Court. You indicated that those documents
20 were looked at quite consistently by you and your colleague, you
21 referred him to some of them, and that it is a compilation of 83
22 articles concerning the Tadic case?
23 A. Yes. That is actually what you have as a copy of this file
25 Q. Are you aware then that at least 10 of these articles do not
26 mention Tadic at all?
27 A. I am not aware of this, no.
28 Q. OK.
1 A. It would be a surprise for me actually, but this was done by
2 Mr. Heitmann this summary.
3 Q. In fact, you included some of your own articles and your
4 colleague's articles on the critical coverage of the media in
5 this conflict?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Of these 83 you indicate that 12 I believe ----
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. --- or as I look through them 12, yes, 12 carry photos?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Do you have any idea whether any of the witnesses in this case
12 saw any of those 12 photographs?
13 A. No.
14 Q. If we then go to the list from the ----
15 A. Sueddeutsche Zeitung.
16 Q. Yes, the research service. That was paragraph 4 which I missed
17 originally. You indicated again that this was 82 articles about
18 the Tadic case?
19 A. Not about it all in particular, but at least mentioning Tadic.
20 They have a research system where you give them a name and then
21 they find it on their system.
22 Q. Because we only have the titles here. So it is quite
23 conceivable then, for example, that the article which is
24 entitled Louise Arbour, the Chief Prosecutor Tribunal in The
25 Hague, may mention the word "Tadic"?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. And that suffices for your research?
28 A. Yes, and there is also no information about photos here.
1 Q. With respect to these broadcasts, for example, the RTL
2 broadcast, these extracts indicate of the 20 broadcasts which
3 mention Tadic 15 indicate that a picture of Tadic was actually
5 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Which one is this? I am sorry, Mr. Keegan.
6 MR. KEEGAN: That would be No. 2, your Honour, the RTL, the second.
7 THE WITNESS: It is No. 3 RTL.
8 MR. KEEGAN: You are correct, the annex.
9 A. Annex 2, Appendix 2.
10 Q. That is what I was thinking of, 2. In these stories then which
11 actually show a picture of Mr. Tadic, the complete stories
12 themselves range from 11 seconds to five minutes. You have no
13 indication in here of how long the picture of Mr. Tadic may have
14 actually been on the screen?
15 A. No. Well, that is a news programme, so I think it would be like
16 in an average news programme also here or in Britain, just a
17 couple of sentences I would guess.
18 Q. That would hold true for all of the broadcasts?
19 A. Pardon?
20 Q. That would hold true then for all of the broadcasts?
21 A. Of the news which I mentioned, yes, like Heute or ARD before,
22 yes, like normal news or sometimes they have it as a background
23 when the speaker is on.
24 Q. With ARD, for example, it would be anywhere from 31 seconds to
25 three minutes per story?
26 A. It is very rare that you have longer things in the main news.
27 Three minutes is actually very long in the main news.
28 Q. With respect to the video that you showed, it was my
1 understanding that those were segments of photographs of the
2 accused, and yet I saw several sequences of a man in a profile,
3 a darkened profile. Do you have any idea who that man was?
4 A. He was mentioned as a lawyer in Hamburg who was, I do not know
5 now, but I think he was presenting one of the witnesses.
6 Q. The man with a beard that was shown with the glasses, who was
8 A. Quite at the end was he? Yes, I think it is was a psychologist
9 or some person from Bosnia, but I do not remember his name.
10 Q. Your testimony with respect to the group of people that were
11 looking at a photograph, you indicated that you thought it might
12 be a bar in Munich?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And you thought that they were Bosnian refugees?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Was that information that you obtained from watching the video?
17 A. Well, it is mentioned in the video itself "Bosnian refugees",
18 but about Munich that was actually what I guessed because in an
19 earlier stage in this video there is somebody interviewed in
20 this pub, another person, and the way he talks in one second he
21 gave the impression because he mentions Munich at first. So
22 that is why I thought that it is in Munich, but it could have
23 been another German pub as well.
24 Q. You actually have no idea who those people in the photograph
25 are, in the video?
26 A. In the video we saw I do not have any idea, no. The person who
27 has been interviewed before is mentioned with a name but we did
28 not see this.
1 Q. OK. Once again, with respect to that particular video, the
2 figure of 1.96 million, do you know how they actually derived
3 that figure?
4 A. No, it is the same as I explained before.
5 MR. KEEGAN: Nothing further, your Honour.
6 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Kay?
7 MR. KAY: Thank you.
8 Re-examined by Mr. Kay.
9 Q. Just on one of the last matters that you were referred to about
10 the video and the clip in the video concerning the men looking
11 at pictures as you surmised being in a bar, did the video say
12 that they were looking at pictures of Dusko Tadic?
13 A. As far as I remember, no, it did not say it.
14 Q. The connection with Tadic comes from the photographs we looked
15 at and the image that we had earlier on in the sequence with
16 that notice?
17 A. Yes, and also the story of the whole report. It would make
18 sense in the story as well, quite a logical step.
19 Q. You are a freelance journalist, as you told us?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. As a freelance journalist in your own personal capacity you
22 provide articles from either the mainstream perspective or
23 contrary to the mainstream perspective?
24 A. What I am doing?
25 Q. Yes.
26 A. Mainly contrary to the mainstream perspective.
27 Q. Yes, but as far as your research for the Defence is concerned,
28 whatever you may have written, that was unimportant in relation
1 to the figures that you produced to us?
2 A. That is what I think is completely unimportant. That is very
3 objectively done.
4 Q. You were asked about television in Germany. Is Germany a
5 country where they have bars with televisions on the walls or on
6 the counters?
7 A. In some, but there are other countries I remember from holidays
8 where there are more televisions, but I could not guess. There
9 are some, yes, where people meet and watch news or watch
10 football or whatever.
11 MR. KAY: Thank you. That is all I ask.
12 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Keegan?
13 MR. KEEGAN: Nothing, your Honour.
14 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is there any objection to Mr. Deichmann being
15 permanently excused?
16 MR. KEEGAN: No, your Honour.
17 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Fine. Mr. Deichmann, you are permanently
18 excused. That means you are free to leave. Thank you for
20 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.
21 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: On Tuesday we will begin at 9 o'clock, if that
22 is acceptable with you lawyers, and we will adjourn at 3.30.
23 I wanted to tell you that basically just using the time while
24 Mr. Deichmann is gathering his material. Mr. Deichmann, the
25 next time you return, if you ever do, I promise that the
26 transcript is going to be working absolutely 100 per cent! So
27 9 o'clock on Tuesday I wanted to tell you that and we will
28 adjourn at 3.30. Mr. Kay, would you call your next witness or
1 Mr. Wladimiroff?
2 MR. WLADIMIROFF: We have concluded by the evidence we presented to
3 you our case. We rest our case, with the proviso, your Honour,
4 that we are investigating matters related to Witness L, and if
5 that might result in anything we think your Court should be
6 informed of, we will tell you about that and we may tell you how
7 we would find that the case would proceed. So far we rest our
8 case here.
9 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Very good. Thank you. Miss Hollis, I mentioned
10 the video involving Mr. Ljubomir Tadic. Do you rise to tell us
11 about that?
12 MISS HOLLIS: Yes, your Honour, I do. Your Honour, as you recall
13 that was marked as Prosecution Exhibit 360 for identification.
14 As you recall, that was two short film clips, one showing
15 Mr. Ljubomir Tadic in the cafe in Kozarac, the other showing him
16 at the monument. Following the issues of translation that arose
17 in the courtroom, we re-contacted Spiegel TV and they were this
18 time able to provide us with the original film footage before it
19 had been voice-overed in German. So what we have done to ensure
20 that those two clips are complete, is we have now a new video
21 segment. This video segment has, first, what you saw before,
22 the German voice-over version, followed by that same footage but
23 in the original Serbo-Croatian.
24 What we have done to assist you with the translation
25 of those segments is that we have had the German voice-over
26 translated in so far as the German commentary to put the context
27 in. Then we have had the original Serbo-Croatian translated so
28 that you have Mr. Tadic's own words in his own language to you.
1 To clarify the record, what I would like to do, I did
2 not offer Prosecution Exhibit 360, I would like to withdraw
3 that. I would like to offer this new composite film clip that
4 we have provided that I just told you about, that would be
5 Prosecution Exhibit 362A for identification, and this new
6 translation as Prosecution Exhibit 362B for identification. We
7 have previously provided the Defence with both a copy of this
8 new film clip and also with a copy of this new translation.
9 I think that should address the concerns about completeness.
10 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Mr. Wladimiroff, is there any objection to
11 Prosecution 362A and B?
12 MR. WLADIMIROFF: No, your Honour. We have come to an agreement on
13 this point.
14 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Very good. They will be admitted. 360 was not
16 MISS HOLLIS: No, your Honour.
17 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: In any case, it is withdrawn.
18 MISS HOLLIS: I have provided copies of the translation for the Court
19 and, as I indicated, I have previously provided that to the
21 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: The other matter I had a note to myself about
22 was the military book of Witness W. Have you been able to speak
23 with Mladen Tadic to find out where it is?
24 MR. WLADIMIROFF: I have no positive results to report to the Court.
25 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is that still a request, the military book, for
26 Witness W?
27 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, your Honour. We would like to continue that
1 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: You have been unable to locate Witness W,
2 Mr. Wladimiroff?
3 MR. WLADIMIROFF: We have no report of people who have spoken to him
4 who could tell me where he is and whether he is willing to hand
5 over that document.
6 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: So you have been unable to locate him?
7 MR. WLADIMIROFF: Yes.
8 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Is there anything else we need to consider at
9 this time? Otherwise the Prosecution will begin its rebuttal
10 Tuesday at 9 a.m.
11 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, your Honour.
12 THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Very good. The Court is adjourned until
13 Tuesday at 9 a.m.
14 (3.25 p.m.).
15 (The court adjourned)