1 Monday, 3 December 2001
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.30 a.m.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Call the case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. This is the case number
8 IT-98-32-T, the Prosecutor versus Mitar Vasiljevic.
9 JUDGE HUNT: Sir, would you please make the statutory declaration
10 in the document which the usher is showing you.
11 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
12 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
13 WITNESS: ALEKSANDAR MOLJEVIC
14 [Witness answered through interpreter]
15 JUDGE HUNT: Sit down, please, sir.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
17 JUDGE HUNT: Have we got a new list of witnesses for this week,
18 Mr. Domazet?
19 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, unfortunately, this is
20 the last witness who has come to The Hague. The remaining two witnesses,
21 that is to say, Dr. Djordje Stojkovic and the witness from Visegrad for
22 whom we requested protective measures - so I don't want to mention his
23 name although you know who he is - unfortunately, they have not arrived,
24 despite all our attempts over the weekend to have them come. Dr.
25 Stojkovic has said that, unfortunately, he is unable to come before
1 mid-December because of prior engagements, and that was also the reason
2 given by the other witness, so that we are faced with the situation in
3 which these two remaining witnesses have not arrived.
4 On the list, there was also Witness Pecikoza, and we gave up on
5 him quite a while ago because he said that he did not wish to come so that
6 we didn't, in fact, call him. But the other two witnesses whose passports
7 are with the offices in Sarajevo are unfortunately unable to make it at
8 this point in time.
9 JUDGE HUNT: Well, we'll worry about what we can do about those
10 two in a moment. Obviously, we don't need a list if this is the only one
11 you have at the moment. Let's get on with this witness's evidence.
12 MR. DOMAZET: Can I start? Thank you.
13 Examined by Mr. Domazet:
14 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Dr. Moljevic.
15 A. Good morning.
16 Q. Dr. Moljevic, I will be examining you on behalf of the Defence
17 team but let me caution you that, as we speak the same language, you and
18 I, please make pauses between my questions and your answers. And the
19 monitor in front of will you help you see when the translation has been
20 completed and I shall do the same to facilitate the work of the
22 I should like to ask you first and foremost to introduce yourself
23 to the Court, tell us your name and surname, your place and date of birth,
24 and other particulars.
25 A. I have a question. Do I have to get up or can I answer sitting
2 Q. No, you may remain seated.
3 A. Thank you.
4 Your Honours, distinguished Judges, the Prosecution, the lawyers
5 and everybody else in the courtroom, my name is Dr. Aleksandar Moljevic.
6 I was born in 1956, on the 23rd of September, in Cacak, the Republic of
7 Serbia. By profession, I am a doctor. I am a specialist in orthopaedic
8 surgery and traumatology and my working title is primarius. My work post
9 is head of department for traumatology of the orthopaedic department at
10 the general hospital at Uzice.
11 Q. Thank you. Dr. Moljevic, will you tell us since when you have
12 been working at the general hospital in Uzice in the department you
14 A. I have been working at the department for orthopaedic surgery and
15 traumatology at the Uzice general hospital since the 1st of February,
16 1987, when I started my specialist training, and completed my specialist
17 training on the 8th of March, 1991.
18 Q. Where did you work before that, Dr. Moljevic?
19 A. I worked in the health clinic of Visegrad or health centre. I
20 think it was from February 1983.
21 Q. When you began working in Visegrad, until your arrival in Uzice,
22 did you work in Visegrad continuously throughout that time?
23 A. Yes, except for a period of less than one year when I did my
24 military service, and that was in 1984, between 1984 and 1985.
25 Q. Since you have been in Uzice onwards, did you spend part of your
1 time working in Visegrad?
2 A. I'm not sure I understood you. You mean before I completed my
3 specialist training or while I was doing my specialist training?
4 Q. Generally speaking, since you have been working in Uzice, did you
5 have occasion from time to time to go to Visegrad, rather, do you have
6 days when you see patients in Visegrad or days when you are on duty in
8 A. Yes, I have a private practice in Visegrad and I examine patients
9 once a week. I'm on duty there and perform minor surgical interventions.
10 Before that, I would go to -- I would visit health centres in the region
11 and this was a contract that the Uzice general hospital had with these
12 health centres, and for a time that contract included cooperation with the
13 Visegrad health centre.
14 Q. In view of the time you spent working in Visegrad while you were
15 in Uzice and later on, means that you know Visegrad very well and the
16 people of the town; would that be correct?
17 A. Yes, absolutely correct.
18 Q. Thank you. Dr. Moljevic, let me go back to -- let me focus on
19 what we're interested in here and that is the year 1982, and as you said,
20 you were in the hospital in Uzice. Would you recall that period of May,
21 1992 - 1992 - what you did at that time and how your department functioned
22 within the general hospital when tensions already existed and the
23 conflicts began?
24 A. Up until the middle of March 1992, I was involved as a reserve
25 sanitary officer, we used to call it, a surgeon in the military medical
1 corps. From mid-March, I was in my hospital of Titovo Uzice. It was
2 called Titovo Uzice at the time, and I remember the period when the first
3 wounded and injured came in from the newly-opened front in Bosnia.
4 The Uzice general hospital and the town of Uzice itself is about
5 70 kilometres away from Visegrad and about 40 kilometres away from
6 Skelani, which are two of the nearest towns in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the
7 patients and inhabitants from those towns gravitate towards Uzice for
8 treatment, that is to say, they come to Uzice for treatment because our
9 hospital is the largest regional hospital in Serbia and we have about
10 1.000 beds.
11 At the beginning of the war, we admitted all persons who were
12 wounded and injured, that is to say, soldiers and civilians alike
13 regardless of their ethnic affiliation or the army they belonged to or
14 their military unit.
15 As a surgeon myself, I was one of the more experienced people in
16 the area of surgery. I was already an experienced surgeon, and as I have
17 told you from before, I had been engaged as a reserve officer, a surgeon
18 in the medical corps of the then Yugoslav Peoples' Army.
19 If you were to ask me in greater detail or some specific
20 questions, I would be able to answer you like this. I don't know what you
21 want me to tell you.
22 Q. Thank you, Doctor. Dr. Moljevic, as you remember the period well,
23 I am interested to know whether, within the frameworks of your hospital,
24 you changed your method of work with respect to the admission of patients
25 and triage of patients because you had this great influx of injured and
1 wounded compared to the procedure you applied before that. So what was
2 your procedure from April onwards in 1992?
3 A. I apologise. I was watching the screen. In April 1992, when the
4 conflict had broken out in Bosnia-Herzegovina and with a greater influx of
5 wounded and injured persons, people coming to our hospital, the
6 administration in the hospital introduced extraordinary measures, a state
7 of alert for work in the hospital, and that state of alert implied a
8 maximum reduction of -- that is to say, cutting down patients' admissions
9 to all hospital departments except the pediatric department and
11 All the other departments, in view of their capacities, were
12 placed at the disposal and at the service of surgical disorders and
13 surgery. Generally speaking, the accent was placed on surgery, so that
14 our department, too, was subordinated to the surgical department.
15 At the admissions department, what we called a triage team was set
16 up and the head of that team was an experienced surgeon, one of the
17 experienced surgeons of what we call the surgical group of the department,
18 and that was made up of general surgery with its subsections: chest
19 surgery, abdominal surgery, neurosurgery. Next, there was children's
20 surgery as a separate department, as a separate section. Then we had the
21 orthopaedics department with its subsections for orthopaedics and
22 traumatology, and the department for maxilofacial and otorhinolaryngology
23 and the eye department.
24 In the admissions triage team, as I have said, the head of the
25 team was always one of our experienced surgeons, whether an orthopaedic
1 surgeon, surgeon, and one colleague at that time who was head of child
2 surgery and he was also a general surgeon with vast experience in the
3 field of surgery.
4 I was one of the surgeons who, if I was not actually operating in
5 the operating theatre, I was, in the ensuing period or as my regular work,
6 engaged as head of the triage team. So that roughly was the hospital
7 organisation at the start of the war and conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
8 Later on, we adjusted and restructured this as the need arose and
9 based on the experience we had gained.
10 Q. During this -- the existence of the admissions triage team, could
11 you tell us what the procedure was like when a patient came from the war
12 zone and he was injured? Where would the patient come, what did the
13 triage team do, where would the patient be forwarded to, et cetera? Tell
14 us a little about that, please, Doctor.
15 A. Upon arrival to the hospital at the entrance to the emergency --
16 at the emergency entrance, once the patient was transported on a stretcher
17 into the hospital, he would be sent to room number 8 - I think it was room
18 number 8 -- at the admissions department. It is a large room with all the
19 necessary equipment for resuscitation, reanimation for stopping bleeding
20 and for administering first aid and emergency medical assistance,
21 including an internist part with a cardiac arrest.
22 Usually, the doctor at the admissions department, who is a general
23 practitioner, calls in a surgeon or the head or chief of the triage team
24 if the patient is seriously wounded and is also bleeding. If the doctor
25 thinks that the injury is not life threatening, then he, himself, issues
1 orders as to how the patient should be treated further in the sense of
2 issuing orders for radiography, x-rays, x-rays of the injured
3 extremities. It might be the head, the chest, or the abdomen. He takes a
4 basic laboratory test, performs basic laboratory tests, which means the
5 blood picture, haematocrits, glucemia, urine, urea, and creatine.
6 Next, he would do an EKG, that is to say an electrocardiogram, and
7 once all these required results are obtained from the tests conducted, he
8 would call in either the chief of the triage team or a doctor of the
9 required specialty from the triage team because in the triage team, except
10 for the surgeon who was always chief of the team, there was always a
11 surgeon. We would also have an internal medicine specialist as well as an
12 infectologist or, upon requirement, another specialist depending on who
13 made up the team on that particular day.
14 If the patient has injured his extremities, then we would call for
15 an orthopaedist who is on duty 24 hours round the clock at the orthopaedic
16 department and comes down to the admissions department when he is called.
17 Similarly, we would call in other doctors who are on duty, who are
18 doing duty in their own departments, according to the same principle. The
19 principle would always be the same.
20 Q. Thank you, Dr. Moljevic.
21 A. You're welcome.
22 Q. You mentioned the doctor on duty. Does that mean that
23 independently of the triage team that you described, each separate
24 department also had a doctor on duty who would be on duty in the afternoon
25 and during the night when the first shift was off duty? Was that how the
1 hospital was organised?
2 A. Yes. All our hospital departments have doctors on duty 24 hours
3 round the clock. A specialist would be on duty round the clock.
4 Q. Could you tell me, please, Dr. Moljevic, for the period we are
5 discussing, who worked in your own department, that is to say the
6 orthopaedic department, and were they orthopaedic surgeons or what
8 A. You mean that day or generally speaking?
9 Q. Generally speaking.
10 A. At the orthopaedic department of the general hospital at that
11 time, the head of the department was primarius Dr. Dragoslav
12 Milosavijevic, who is now retired. Then there was primarius Dr. Primisav
13 Spanusavuvic [phoen], emeritus professor and my late chief. Then we had
14 primarius Dr. Dusko Pribicevic. At the time he was the director of the
15 general hospital. Then there was Dr. Djordje Stojkovic, the head of the
16 department at the moment. He is my department head at present. Then
17 there was Dr. Vojkan Krnic, who works in the Cacak hospital, and then
18 there was myself. Dr. Zoran Stojanovic, as well, who is now working in
19 Plandiste in Vojvodina. Then there was Dr. Ivan Jovanovic. He was a
20 doctor doing specialised training at the time in the sphere of
21 orthopaedics and traumatology, and there is Dr. Vladimir Gordic who at
22 that time is what we call the secondary doctor, that is to say a general
23 practitioner preparing to do his specialist training at the orthopaedics
24 department and traumatology department. I think I have enumerated them
1 Q. Thank you. To go back to the hospital at this particular period
2 of time, my next question is the following: Did you know Mitar Vasiljevic
3 from Visegrad?
4 A. Yes, I did.
5 Q. Could you tell us, please, since when have you known him and how
6 did you come to know him?
7 A. Mitar Vasiljevic was a waiter in the hotel catering company called
8 Panos of Visegrad. Usually, he worked on the terrace of the Visegrad
9 hotel and I think a section, a bar, there that was called Panos. I knew
10 him since the time I received permission from my father to be able to
11 frequent restaurants and bars. I think I happened to notice him at that
12 time, but we didn't actually know each other until I had graduated from
13 university and started working in Visegrad.
14 At that time, I went to restaurants and bars more often because I
15 had more money to spend on things like that. So that my friends and the
16 people I socialised with, usually after work, especially on Fridays and
17 Saturdays, would go out to dinner and to listen to music to a lovely
18 terrace of the Visegrad hotel.
19 Mitar Vasiljevic was very often on duty there and served our
20 table. He was a very good waiter and I can also tell you that the other
21 waiters, usually older waiters who would serve us, I assume would serve
22 our table more frequently because we would give generous tips generally in
23 bars and restaurants.
24 Q. Thank you, Dr. Moljevic. Let me just ask you something. From
25 your answer, it appears to me that you were in Visegrad before you
1 graduated, but in your answer, you said that you began working there and
2 you were born, as I see, in Cacak. Could you tell us since when have you
3 been in Visegrad?
4 A. My mother had what we call a high-risk pregnancy so that she gave
5 birth to me in the Cacak hospital because Visegrad at the time did not
6 have a gynecologist. So I was only born in Cacak actually, but I spent my
7 entire life until I left for Uzice living in Visegrad. That is to say my
8 childhood, I did primary school there, secondary school, college and until
9 I left for university. So I lived in Visegrad until I left to go to
10 university, and to this very day, I'm there very frequently because my
11 parents live in Visegrad, as does practically the whole of my family.
12 Q. Thank you, Dr. Moljevic.
13 I think we have managed to cover something that we actually left
14 out before. Let us go back to Mitar Vasiljevic and I should like to hear
15 you, how it was that you knew him. What you said about him, does that
16 concern the period of time that you spent living in Visegrad?
17 A. Yes, it does.
18 Q. Except for the fact that you saw him from time to time as a waiter
19 in the restaurants where he served, did you personally have any contacts
20 with his family? Did you visit that family? Did the members of that
21 family come to your house?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Thank you. Dr. Moljevic, let us go back to the period of time
24 that you described in the Uzice hospital that is following the month of
25 April 1992. Do you remember Mitar Vasiljevic from that period of time as
1 a patient of that hospital?
2 A. Yes, I remember him quite well.
3 Q. Would you please tell us what it is that you remember, including
4 the time that you first saw him and everything else that you remember from
5 that period?
6 A. Mitar Vasiljevic was admitted to our hospital pursuant to some
7 medical documents on the 14th of June, in the evening hours of the 14th of
8 June. He had a fracture of the left lower leg. On that day, I happened
9 to be the chief of the admissions triage team and before he came to
10 hospital, someone had called me from Visegrad, I don't remember who it
11 was, but it was for the second or the third time that day because we had
12 had several admissions from that particular area, telling me that the
13 injured -- that an injured person by the name of Vasiljevic is arriving.
14 I was informed by the admissions department doctors that he had
15 arrived because the call was addressed to me, and at that time, I was at
16 the orthopaedics department where I saw an injured a wounded person and
17 dressed his wounds, who happened to be a neighbour and who was also the
18 brother of a man with whom I went to school and a son of a very good
19 friend of my father.
20 At the admissions department in room number eight which was
21 established for such cases, there was Vasiljevic. He was on a stretcher.
22 Next to him there was a driver by the name of Zivorad Savic, whom I knew
23 from Visegrad because he was the driver in my shift of the emergency
24 department in Visegrad where I worked. And since the injury in question
25 was a fracture of a lower leg, I sent him to my colleague Ivicovic [phoen]
1 for further treatment because we were already busy with something else.
2 So up until the next morning, I no longer saw him because I didn't go back
3 to the orthopaedics department that night.
4 On the basis of the medical documentation and in view of my
5 capacity here as a witness before The Hague Tribunal, I checked the day
6 and was able to establish that it was a Sunday. The following day, that
7 is on Monday, after the usual briefing that I had with the director of the
8 hospital which starts at 7.00 a.m. and lasts for 20 minutes, I went to
9 inspect the patients. It is the main round of inspection which is carried
10 out with the head doctor, usually on Monday at 7.30.
11 I cannot remember the particular room that Vasiljevic was in on
12 that day. What I am certain about, on the other hand, is that the
13 remainder period of time while he was in hospital, he was in room number
14 411, 4-1-1. That is the first room located in the right wing of our
15 department, and my colleague, Dr. Primarius Ivicovic is in charge of that
16 particular room.
17 After a while, we observed the unusual behaviour of Vasiljevic and
18 the doctors who were on duty were told that this unusual behaviour
19 consisted of singing, sticking some drawings and photographs all over the
20 wall - which is forbidden at the department and he was consequently warned
21 to take that off - and this behaviour was also characterised by an
22 incident involving another patient by the name of Selim Lepenica, a Muslim
23 who was a civilian victim of the war and was from Gorazde.
24 He displayed aggressive behaviour towards that patient, and
25 according to our knowledge, he tried to hit him with a stick while
1 lying -- with his crutch, while lying in his bed. He verbally abused him
2 and because of that, he was told and warned that in case of other
3 violations of the house rules and regulations, appropriate measures would
4 be applied, that is, that he would be discharged prematurely or taken to
5 the psychiatry ward.
6 His transfer to the psychiatry department is a subject matter that
7 I'm not able to tell you about because I was not there. However, judging
8 from the dates, I know that it happened between the weekend of the 5th of
9 July and the national holiday which was celebrated in our country in those
10 days on the 7th of July. That is what I can tell you about his transfer
11 to the psychiatric department and his admission there.
12 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Domazet, --
13 THE INTERPRETER: That is what I can tell you, excuse me, about
14 his stay at the orthopaedics department.
15 JUDGE HUNT: I think this doctor is about the closest we've got to
16 the first doctor who saw your client when he was admitted, Dr. Jovanovic,
17 I think is his name. Now all we've heard from this witness is that your
18 client was admitted during the evening hours, I think was the expression.
19 I think, if I may say so, we are somewhat concerned to know when he saw
20 him and where he fits in with the doctor who actually signed the papers as
21 having admitted your client. This is an issue which the Prosecution has
22 raised and it would be best, if I may suggest, that you take the witness
23 to that particular issue so that we get some assistance from it. He's
24 clearly someone who can assist us on that issue.
25 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I do intend
1 to ask that, but I believe that Dr. Moljevic described on his own
2 initiative the stay of Vasiljevic in that particular department, which was
3 supposed to be the subject of my questions.
4 Q. But I should like to focus on the admission and go back to the
5 evening when you said you were a member of the admissions triage team on
7 Let us try to clarify that and then perhaps we will go back to
8 Vasiljevic's stay at the orthopaedics department, if necessary. What is
9 important for us is to know when exactly it was that Mitar Vasiljevic was
10 admitted to your hospital. I should like to know whether such records are
11 usually kept, whether there was a ledger, a book which would have included
12 cases like these, that is, the cases of people who were brought from the
13 territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
14 A. There is a big book at the admissions department which contains
15 records on all cases admitted to the hospital regardless of the department
16 in question. However, it seems to me that in those days, we also had an
17 additional book where we kept records of the wounded and the injured from
18 the area of the former Yugoslavia because in 1991, we admitted other cases
19 as well. In that book, there would be the name and the surname of the
20 patient, the diagnosis on arrival, the name of the driver of the ambulance
21 which brought the patient to the hospital, and the department to which the
22 patient was eventually admitted.
23 Once the patient is admitted at the admissions department, that is
24 when the doctor decides on the department where he would be admitted, the
25 procedure is carried out by the administrative and technical staff who
1 enter the relevant data on the first page of the case history, whereupon
2 the patient is transported or transferred to the department to which he or
3 she is to be admitted.
4 Once at the department of admission, the identifying data of the
5 patient are entered in the department book of admissions. As for the case
6 history document, in the upper right corner, the name of the room where
7 the patient was admitted is usually -- the number of the room, I'm sorry,
8 where the patient was admitted is usually entered and the name of the
9 doctor, the specialist who is to be in charge of further treatment of the
11 So once the patient has left the admissions department, any
12 interest of the members in that department in that patient ceases because
13 he is taken over by another part in the hospital, the department that is
14 to be in charge of his treatment, and that is the situation until the end
15 of his stay, the patient's stay at the hospital.
16 Q. Dr. Moljevic, let us go back to the admissions department and the
17 book that you described which contained the data of those who had been
18 injured or wounded in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. You stated
19 that the data entered in that book include also the name of the driver who
20 had brought the patient, the diagnosis as well, and I should like to know
21 whether the time of admission, in addition to the date, is also entered in
22 that book, the time, that is the hour and the minute of admission?
23 A. Yes, on a regular basis.
24 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Domazet, I don't like to interrupt, but we don't
25 have any such book, do we? I can remember there was a --
1 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] We do, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE HUNT: A book with the date. Does it have a time?
3 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, that book was
4 seized and is in the possession of the Prosecutor since the 1st of
5 November last year, together with all other remaining documents. That
6 book is one of such documents that were seized during the search and I ask
7 the Prosecutor to prepare that book for us so that the witness could have
8 a look at it and testify as to whether that is the book in question. I
9 think the book is blue or dark red. There was one blue book and another
10 one which was dark red, burgundy in colour. I inspected it several days
12 I think that we should show it to the witness; however, I should
13 like to ask a question before that, a question relating to the book.
14 JUDGE HUNT: It is, so far as I know, not in evidence, although in
15 a document somewhere, there was a -- just a strip and it just had your
16 client's name and the date of his admission, not the time, and we had
17 nothing above it or below it. I don't think even the -- I do not think
18 that even that document is in evidence. So there was no way of judging
19 even approximately the time he came in.
20 Now, there's one that we have a photostat of. I don't know quite
21 what its provenance is, it's not yet in evidence, which does show a time,
22 but I think we're going to have some help. It just can't be overlooked.
23 We've got to have some assistance on this particular issue. So we
24 need every book that has any relevance to time of admission and we need
25 more than that just little strip that we were shown before. So if you
1 just see what you can do to get them into evidence.
2 It's your case, remember. I know you bear no onus but you are the
3 one seeking to demonstrate the reasonableness of the possibility that your
4 client was in hospital at the time that this crime was alleged to have
5 been committed.
6 I'm sorry, it is in -- now in evidence as part of 137.
7 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I provided a photocopy
8 of what you say that contained nothing above or below because that was the
9 kind of copy that I received at the hospital. It was a certified copy;
10 however, at that time, they did not want to photocopy the portions of the
11 text including other names, names of other patients. They gave me only
12 the data concerning Vasiljevic and that is what I provided.
13 The time is also stated there in addition to the date. However,
14 the original of the book was brought by Dr. Moljevic to the Prosecutor,
15 which material was seized pursuant to an order of the Tribunal and is now
16 in possession of the Prosecutor, and it is very important for us that that
17 book be examined and for the witness to be given an opportunity to comment
18 on the book. By comparison, you will be able to see that that indeed was
19 the copy that I provided but the copy concerned only Mitar Vasiljevic.
20 I kindly ask the Prosecutor to have the book in the courtroom. I
21 think that Mr. Ossogo or -- is it there?
22 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, well you proceed with that but don't forget that
23 we'd like to know if this witness can tell us when it was that he first
24 saw him and whether it was before or after the other doctor signed him in
25 as a patient.
1 MR. DOMAZET: Yes.
2 Q. [Interpretation] Not yet, Dr. Moljevic.
3 Before we have a look at any of these books, Dr. Moljevic, I have
4 a question for you concerning a patient that you said you had seen on that
5 day and who had been admitted to hospital and you said that he was a
6 neighbour of yours. Is that the individual who was admitted to hospital
7 before Mitar Vasiljevic?
8 A. Yes, yes, and he's from Visegrad.
9 Q. Could you tell us his name and surname, please?
10 A. The name of that patient was Dragan Filipovic. He's deceased,
12 Q. Was he also brought from the town of Visegrad as an injured or
13 wounded person?
14 A. He'd been wounded as a soldier in his right shoulder, and in view
15 of the wound and the graft that I applied during his treatment, I was
16 able to recognise him during an identification of dead bodies including
17 his body -- in a later period of time during the war.
18 Q. Dr. Moljevic, you have told us about what you remember. You said
19 that Mitar Vasiljevic was admitted in the evening hours of that day.
20 Would you please try and remember the exact time of his admission? And
21 you also mentioned another doctor who was the first person who saw Mitar
22 Vasiljevic when he arrived in the hospital.
23 A. Well, I spoke in general terms. I said that he was admitted in
24 the evening hours, that is how we usually say. It was already night. I
25 believe that it was around 9.30 p.m. because I also based my statement on
1 some documents that I inspected. So I think that he was admitted around
2 2130. The physician who was there at the admissions department, the
3 general practitioner, I cannot remember who it was because those teams
4 were sent -- were established on the previous day, either through an oral
5 order or a written order issued by the chief surgeon of the hospital who
6 was in charge of selecting members of the team for a particular day.
7 Q. Dr. Moljevic, you are referring to the doctor who was at the
8 admissions department?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. However, I should like to know which of the orthopaedists was the
11 first one who had contact with Vasiljevic.
12 A. Well, since I am an orthopaedist, I was the first one who saw him
13 but it was my colleague, Dr. Ivicovic, who was in charge of his further
14 treatment because he was on duty in the orthopaedics department on that
15 day. I believe you understand me. If a surgeon had been in my place,
16 then that surgeon would have seen him.
17 Q. Yes, that was my question. So you saw him and then
18 Dr. Jovicovic saw him. I see that in the transcript it says "Ivicovic"
19 but the name is Jovicovic. You said, Dr. Moljevic, that Dr. Jovicovic was
20 on duty at the orthopaedics department. Was he the doctor who was in fact
21 on duty during the second and third shift, that is to say the afternoon
22 and during the night up until the morning; is that right?
23 A. Yes, that's right, but an orthopaedist starts to go on duty -- for
24 example, my duty shift starts at 7.00 in the morning and finishes 7.00
25 a.m. the next morning. All admissions are taken down in my name, my name
1 is put down whether I see the patient or not or whether I see him just
2 when he gets to the department. If, in the meantime, I'm off operating
3 in the operating theatre or if I am an assistant to a surgeon in the
4 operating theatre, that is what our practice has been.
5 Q. Is that the reason why Mr. Mitar Vasiljevic was written down as
6 being Dr. Jovicovic's patient both in the card and in the room he was
7 assigned to later on?
8 A. Absolutely correct, yes.
9 Q. Dr. Moljevic, when you were explaining what the procedure is for
10 urgent cases, in general terms, you talked about the tests and analyses
11 that are taken straight away. Do you happen to remember for this
12 particular case, the case of Mitar Vasiljevic, was he sent to any other
13 control examination, laboratory tests, any screening or anything like that
14 when -- since the time he was admitted at the -- in the admissions
15 department until he was transferred to the ward? If you happen to
16 remember that, between his admission and the time he was sent to the
18 A. I don't remember. I really don't remember because a lot of time
19 has gone by since then.
20 Q. Do you happen to remember, Dr. Moljevic, whether on that occasion,
21 Mitar Vasiljevic had with him an x-ray of his injury? Do you happen to
22 remember having seen that?
23 A. No, I do not remember because the x-rays are brought to me by the
24 technician or the doctor at the admissions department. Whether the
25 patient brought them with him or whether the x-rays were done in my
1 hospital, I can't really say.
2 Q. You said, Dr. Moljevic, that the technician at the admissions
3 department fills in part of the case history. He puts in the date and
4 takes down the general particulars and that goes with the patient to the
5 ward. My question now is whether, at the admissions department, the
6 patient is assigned an individual patient's number?
7 A. Yes. All that is done at the admissions department. In our
8 department, we have nothing to do with that kind of administration so the
9 patient is assigned a personal identification number.
10 Q. Is that number recorded in the case history which follows the
11 patient, and is it recorded in any other book or ledger of the hospital?
12 A. Yes, and we call it the personal identification number, which is
13 in the upper right-hand corner. I'd have to have a look at the case
14 history form to be sure whether it is under one, two or three. Whereas
15 all the other investigations and tests that we require in our department,
16 it is compulsory to have the name, the surname, what is being requested,
17 what types of tests, and all those sheets and lists contain the personal
18 identification number of the patient to avoid any errors in the writing of
19 names and surnames because that happens even today. Sometimes mistakes
20 are made in writing the names, but if we have the personal identification
21 number, we will know exactly which patient it is. This is particularly
22 important for blood tests as preparation for operations.
23 So let me repeat, we always have the personal identification
24 number which can be compared in all the various documents.
25 Q. Dr. Moljevic, I think that this is an opportune moment for you to
1 take a look at the books in front of you and tell us if you see the book
2 which was used in the admissions department for recording the patients
3 that were admitted. If that is the notebook, Doctor, would you look at
4 the hard cover and tell us what it says as the title on the hard cover?
5 A. This thick book here is the book of admissions, all patients
6 admitted, not only those who were injured or wounded but all patients
7 coming into the hospital. It is in alphabetical order and it says "1992"
8 on it.
9 This other thinner book is the book of admissions for patients
10 from the war zone, from the -- and it is dated the 6th of April, 1992
12 Q. And was that the book you were reading from?
13 A. Your Honours, I handed it over in a proper and correct state.
14 Q. Would you read out, doctor, please, what it says on the hard cover
15 of that thin book? The book you are holding in your right hand.
16 A. Book of patients from the war zone or battlefield, the date is
17 the 6th of April, 1992. In the upper right hand corner, it says
18 admissions or in the neuter gender, "priljem," admissions.
19 Q. Would you open that book, please, and you can put the other one
20 aside for the time being.
21 JUDGE HUNT: Do we know which one would be likely to be filled in
22 first? I don't think the doctor has told us that.
23 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Let us ask the doctor. Of the two books, Doctor -- Dr. Moljevic,
25 you have two books in front of you. Which book is filled in first; do you
2 A. I don't know and I don't think it is significant whether it is one
3 or the other. Both are at the reception department. Now, whether the
4 technician takes hold of one book first or this other one, I don't think
5 it is important, At least, not for our purposes. I apologise, it's not
6 of importance for our purposes in the hospital.
7 Q. The two books differ as to the information that is recorded in
8 them; is that right? Looking at the one in front of you now, and looking
9 at the columns, it doesn't matter what patient, just select a random
10 patient and tell us what information is recorded in the book and then
11 we'll see what information is written down in the other book.
12 JUDGE HUNT: He's dealing with the one now with the patients from
13 the war zone? I can't see because of the screen in front of him.
14 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, Your Honour. Yes.
15 Q. Would you look at the 14th of June, 1992? Perhaps that would be
16 best if we take a look at that date.
17 A. I have found it.
18 Q. At the top, it says the title of each column, what each column
19 contains. So would you read slowly, please, read through the columns and
20 tell us what information should be recorded there and then we'll see what
21 is actually recorded.
22 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it is Exhibit 137,
23 which I think you have. It is a Prosecution Exhibit and I think that we
24 have that particular page, the page that the witness is looking at now.
25 A. May I begin?
1 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please, Doctor. [In
2 English] Have you? Yes.
3 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, I've got 137 and that's the thin book, and
4 that's all I need to know, and then we'll go to the thick book.
5 MR. DOMAZET: Yes, Your Honour.
6 Q. [Interpretation] Doctor, would you please take a look at the
7 columns, the top of the columns, and read out what columns exist in the
8 book first.
9 A. In the book that is in front of me, the columns are as follows,
10 and I'm moving from left to right: The first column says ordinal number;
11 the second, date and time; the third, name and surname, first and last
12 name; the fourth, the date and place of birth for the patient; next is the
13 diagnosis; and then it says who brought the patient in. The next column
14 is where he was admitted and what is referred to here is the hospital
15 department. The next column, it says who the patient is, a soldier of the
16 Yugoslav Peoples' Army belonging to his own Territorial Defence or
17 civilian. And the last column it says "report," and it says -- the column
18 says who has been informed about the patient's admission into our
20 Q. Would you now look and see which patients are written in that day,
21 in the date and time column? Does it always state the time?
22 A. Yes, the first patient the name and surname is Simo Vuleta, and
23 the number is 186. The date is the 14th of June 1992 at 1430 hours. The
24 third column, it says born 1935 in Vogosca. The fourth column diagnosis:
25 ulcus bulbi duodeni sanguinems [phoen], which means a bleeding ulcer of
1 the duodenum. Who brought the patient in, in that column, it says, "came
2 on his own." Where he was admitted, it says, "admitted to the internal
3 medicine department two," which is where the gastroenterology department
5 Then we come to the next column, what he was at the time, civilian
6 TO or JNA, it has a question mark. Probably, there were no particulars
7 about that. And in the report, it says that they were compulsory -- that
8 compulsorily informed whether regional department of the SUP Uzice,
9 Republic of Serbia. It says military police and the responsible corps on
10 the territory of Western Serbia, and also we find the number 985. I can't
11 remember, but I seem to -- actually, I think it was the service for
12 information and alert, whether for the town or for the department in the
13 ministry of internal affairs, but I think that's what the 985 figure
14 referred to. That was the first patient.
15 The second was Filipovic Dragan, the same day he was admitted at
16 1540, and the third was Vasiljevic Mitar and here we see the time, which
17 is 2135 hours.
18 Q. Would you read out what it says for Mitar Vasiljevic from start to
19 finish, please, what you are able to read, if you can read the
21 A. In the column for Vasiljevic Mitar, it says quite literally as
22 follows: Ordinal number 188. The date and time of admission, the 14.6.92
23 at 2135. The name and surname, Vasiljevic Mitar. The date
24 and place of birth, 1954 Visegrad. The diagnosis, fractura tibia at
25 fibula l. sin. That means a fracture of the tibia and fibula of the left
1 leg. Who brought the patient to the hospital: Brought by the ambulance
2 from Visegrad, the ambulance driver Savic Milorad. That's what it says
3 here but I think the first man's name was "Zivorad," so this is a mistake
4 in the first name of the driver, the mistake made by the administrator at
5 the reception department. Where was he admitted, he was admitted to the
6 orthopaedics department. Who he is, and where -- who is he and where was
7 he assigned to at the time, it says TO Visegrad, Territorial Defence.
8 And report, informed the secretariat of internal affairs, military
9 police, 985.
10 Q. Dr. Moljevic, is that the book that you recognise as being the
11 book in which the persons wounded or injured in the war zone or on the
12 battlefield were recorded?
13 A. Yes, absolutely correct, that is the book.
14 Q. The patient who is in front of Mitar Vasiljevic who comes before,
15 is that the one that you described as being your neighbour from Visegrad
16 whom you knew and whom you visited and whom you described?
17 A. Yes. He is the late Dragan Filipovic.
18 Q. Before we take a look at the other book, and in order to check
19 that information and the way in which facts have been recorded, I would
20 like to ask you to look at the 24th of June now of that same year, so that
21 is several pages later on, and see if there is a patient by the name of
22 Goran Loncarevic and if -- would you read out his particulars, please?
23 What day was he admitted and when?
24 A. I apologise for smiling, for laughing. It is a colleague of mine,
25 a doctor, so my -- I don't want it to appear as if we're sidetracking.
1 228 is the number. The person -- he was admitted at 7.30 hours on the
2 24th of June. The name is Goran Loncarevic, born 1962 in Visegrad. The
3 diagnosis is vulnus scapuloterium verasis l. dex [phoen], which in
4 translation means bullet wound to the right side of the chest. He was
5 brought from Visegrad by ambulance.
6 The driver's name is Zivorad, I assume the same man, Savic, and he
7 was admitted. It says shock, surgical shock. He belonged to the
8 Territorial Defence of Visegrad, and informed were the military police,
9 the secretariat for internal affairs, and number 985.
10 Q. You said a moment ago that you recognise the name and the person
11 to be your colleague. Do you happen to know how he was wounded?
12 JUDGE HUNT: There was never any issue about this, Mr. Domazet. I
13 don't think we need to have this gone into again. The doctor -- that
14 doctor was not cross-examined to suggest he was not telling the truth
15 about his injuries.
16 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] I asked the question, Your Honour,
17 because of the method in which it was recorded in the book. So let me
18 rephrase my question.
19 Q. Dr. Moljevic, you, yourself, read out the hard cover of the book
20 where it said that it was patients admitted from the war zone, the
21 ratiste. What did the concept of war zone or battlefield imply as
22 relevant to the book?
23 A. It was the customary term or slang, perhaps somebody from the
24 hospital administration thought it up, and that was what we wrote. Now,
25 why it said "ratiste," I never gave it much thought. Probably because
1 all the people admitted were from the war zone of Bosnia-Herzegovina and
2 other war zones before that, before the conflict actually broke out in
4 Q. Does that mean, Dr. Moljevic, that this book recorded all patients
5 coming in from the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina at that time who were
6 wounded or injured and came to your hospital regardless of how they had
7 been injured; is that right?
8 A. Well, mostly yes, and for the most part, they were military
9 conscripts, that is to say, men under the age of 65, according to routine
10 procedure, and also persons injured and with gunshot wounds, whether by
11 bullets or shrapnel or any similar thing. I think that patients who were
12 sick were also sometimes, or all the time, taken in. I could tell you
13 that if I were to look through the whole book, whether sick soldiers were
14 admitted as well.
15 Q. You read out, when you read out the person first admitted on the
16 14th of June, number 186, Simo Vuleta, and I think his diagnosis was not a
17 diagnosis of a wound, but it was a disease; am I correct in saying that?
18 So would you read that out again, perhaps, his diagnosis?
19 A. Yes. As I said a moment ago, it says a bleeding ulcer of the
20 duodenum. Yes, that's right, and he was admitted. He was born in 1935
21 and Vogosca is a suburb of Sarajevo, in fact, and that's why by -- he was
22 automatically inscribed here. I see that another person was injured by a
23 football post, a goal post, and he was sent on to the military medical
24 academy. And then there's another one that I can see, a soldier from
25 Rogatica, in Eastern Bosnia, Territorial Defence, and it says
1 "dermatitis," which means that he has an inflammation of some part of his
2 skin, not to go through the whole book.
3 Q. On that same page, would you have a look at number 184, Slavko
4 Tomic from Visegrad? Do you happen to know him personally and is the
5 diagnosis a wound injury or disease, or is it an illness?
6 A. I know Slavko Tomic. He is a high medical technician in the
7 health centre of Visegrad and he -- the diagnosis was
8 hypertensioarteralis, which in translation means high blood pressure. He
9 was brought in by an ambulance from Visegrad. The driver was Tesovic
10 Slobodan. And he was admitted into the internal medicine department, but
11 in the column where it says what it is by virtue of his employment
12 assignment or whatever, it says Territorial Defence Visegrad, and he was
13 written into this book automatically.
14 Q. Doctor, would you look at the 17th of June, whether Nebojsa Kovac
15 and Mitar Vasiljevic, whether they are recorded?
16 A. On the screen I see, it says Mitar Vasiljevic, and I heard you say
17 Mitar Knezevic.
18 Q. Yes, that's right, doctor. Would you look at the date, the 17th
19 of June.
20 A. Yes. The number is 203. Admitted was Nebojsa Kovac on the 17th
21 of June, 1992, at 2130 hours. And Knezevic Mitar, the number of that man
22 is 204, also at 2130 hours. In the column, there is a name Markovic
23 Marjan, which was the ambulance driver, whom I know personally and he was
24 killed during the war. So that both were members of the Territorial
25 Defence of Visegrad. Nebojsa Kovac, his diagnosis was vulnus
1 scapuloterium abdomini [phoen], which means a gunshot wound to the
2 abdomen, whereas Mitar Knezevic's diagnosis is vilnus sclepatereo regio
3 ante brace dex [phoen] or, in translation, gunshot wound of the right
4 lower arm.
5 JUDGE HUNT: I think we'll adjourn now, Mr. Domazet, but I would
6 like to get to the other book if we could when we return. We will resume
7 at 11.30.
8 --- Recess taken at 11.03 a.m.
9 --- On resuming at 11.32 a.m.
10 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Domazet.
11 MR. DOMAZET: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Moljevic, before we move on to the second
13 book, let us finish with the first one. Would you please turn the smaller
14 book to the 17th of June, where you found Nebojsa Kovac and Mitar
15 Knezevic, who were admitted one after the other. Since we have some
16 additional information of their treatment, would you please have a look at
17 the book and see whether both were entered within the column "admitted,"
18 or not?
19 A. In the column where the patient was admitted, Nebojsa Kovac, I
20 have already told you the diagnosis, he was admitted to the shock
21 section. As for Mitar Knezevic, it says that he was returned, which means
22 that he was not eventually admitted to the Uzice hospital. He probably
23 had some light injury.
24 Q. Thank you, Doctor. You can now move on to the second book. You
25 said that the book includes all the patients admitted during the year
1 1992. What kind of information -- what kind of data is usually entered
2 into this book?
3 A. May I now open the book, please?
4 Q. Yes, yes, please.
5 A. Let me see, under "A" --
6 JUDGE HUNT: [Previous translation continues]...
7 MR. DOMAZET: I don't know exhibit number if the Prosecution has.
8 JUDGE HUNT: Can you help us?
9 MS. BAUER: No, it doesn't have a prosecution number assigned. I
10 think Mr. Groome has suggested that the Defence is tendering it as an
11 exhibit, so if they want it as an exhibit.
12 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Then we would like to tender it,
13 Your Honours.
14 JUDGE HUNT: Is there a copy?
15 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] As exhibit --
16 JUDGE HUNT: It will be Exhibit 33, I should think, but is there a
17 copy of it for us?
18 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] That book was never at any point in
19 time in my possession and I suggest that we keep the original as exhibit
20 and perhaps make copies of relevant pages. As far as I know, the book was
21 subject to some expert analysis, as was the other one, but again, it was
22 never actually in my possession. And I could see that it was on the list
23 of exhibits of the Prosecutor together with other documents, hence I
24 believe that it would be tendered into evidence.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Do you have copy, Ms. Bauer?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 MS. BAUER: I'm sorry, I don't, but we can do one any minute if --
2 of the relevant pages. I'm not quite sure which are the relevant pages at
3 the moment.
4 JUDGE HUNT: Well, you proceed, Mr. Domazet, and we'll just have
5 to try and follow it.
6 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE HUNT: Is there any objection to it being an exhibit?
8 MS. BAUER: No, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE HUNT: Then D33 is your next number. Yes, it will be
10 Exhibit D33.
11 MR. DOMAZET: Yes. Yes, Your Honour.
12 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Moljevic, would you be so kind and have a
13 look at the book. Let's see, letter V, since that is the letter we are
14 interested in. Is the book in the alphabetical order listed according to
16 A. Yes, the information is entered according -- in the alphabetical
17 order; however, one must bear in mind that we are talking about the
18 Cyrillic script so the letter "V" would be third in order, unlike in the
19 Latin script where it would be somewhere towards the end. Just a moment,
20 please. You wanted me to have a look at the numbers.
21 Q. Yes.
22 A. Okay. So under the letter V, we have, just as the case with all
23 other letters, the number, then the date of admission, name and surname,
24 and then the fourth column is the department. The first name that we have
25 under letter V is Vinka Vasiljevic, whose personal identification number
1 is 503/92. The date of admission was the 1st of January and the
2 department concerned was ORL, ortholaryngology section.
3 Q. Dr. Moljevic --
4 A. Just a second, please. Here towards the end, we have the date
5 24th of December, 1992 -- 1991. Those patients were admitted at the end
6 of 1991, but whose information is now entered into 1992.
7 Q. Dr. Moljevic, do we have the name of Mitar Vasiljevic under letter
9 JUDGE HUNT: I'm sorry, Ms. Bauer, I can't see both sides of
10 the courtroom at once.
11 MS. BAUER: I just have to apologise, I just discovered and
12 checked the records. It has already been tendered as Prosecution exhibit
13 number 136, so it slipped my attention and everybody else's. So I'm
15 JUDGE HUNT: Well, then we can cross it out as Exhibit D33. Thank
16 you very much for drawing our attention to that. It's only numbered that,
17 it hasn't become an exhibit, has it?
18 MS. BAUER: It has been, according to my records, tendered through
19 the investigator Ib Jul Hansen.
20 JUDGE HUNT: I'm quite happy to be proved to be wrong but I
21 haven't crossed it off my list as being admitted as an exhibit. We'll get
22 to checked anyway, but at the moment, we can use document 136 whether it's
23 an exhibit or not.
24 The oracle has spoken. The court deputy says it is an exhibit as
25 P136. You may proceed, Mr. Domazet.
1 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, maybe it would be good
2 to see if number 137 has also been tendered as a Prosecution Exhibit so as
3 not to tender it once again.
4 JUDGE HUNT: 137, certainly has been.
5 MR. DOMAZET: Yes, 137 is the other book.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Now, can you give us the ordinal number?
7 MR. DOMAZET: I don't understand, Your Honour, what ordinal
9 JUDGE HUNT: Well, we've got a page of names which I assume is the
10 relevant page. They have a number down the left-hand side which I have
11 assumed, not being able to read Cyrillic, is the ordinal number.
12 MR. DOMAZET: You are talking about the number 136.
13 JUDGE HUNT: And that is the document that the doctor has opened
14 before him now, I'm told. I'm just trying to get to where the relevant
15 issue is rather than read them all out like we did for the last one.
16 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Dr. Moljevic, do you have in front of you under letter V the
18 number of the page, the page where Mitar Vasiljevic's data were recorded?
19 A. No, the pages are not marked. What we have is A, B, V, G, D, and
20 so on and so forth, in the alphabetical order but the pages itself are not
22 MR. DOMAZET: [Previous translation continues]... copies of this
23 document but I am interested for page V.
24 Thank you. I have a copy now.
25 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Moljevic, have you found the page?
1 A. Yes, yes, I have.
2 Q. What kind of information do we have there?
3 A. On the right side of the book that I have opened under the date
4 14th of June, in the column which says personal number, we have 10.014,
5 name and surname, Mitar Vasiljevic, department, orthopaedics department.
6 Q. The other information on the same page, does it concern the
7 persons under the surnames beginning with "V" but the information is of a
8 later date, including the relevant case histories and other data?
9 A. I will read out --
10 JUDGE HUNT: Just before you do, Doctor, I wish we could just have
11 a little assistance on this. Is it the first entry on the page?
12 MR. DOMAZET: Yes, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Because that's the only one I can see for the 14th of
14 June and it looks like 10.014. So the -- what is the left-hand column on
15 that page, what's the heading on it?
16 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Dr. Moljevic, would you please read for us the heading of the
18 column? I assume that we are talking about the column including the
20 A. The personal number, that is the number under which the patient is
21 admitted to the hospital and we refer to it as the personal admission
23 Q. Is that the number which is included -- which is recorded on the
24 case history of the patient?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. The following column is the date of admission; is that correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Then we have name and surname?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Would you please have a look at the previous page and read for us
6 the name of the last patient before Mitar Vasiljevic, his date of
7 admission and his case history.
8 A. The personal admission number is 10.002, the date of admission
9 14th of June, name and surname, Simo Vuleta, department, internal medicine
10 department number two.
11 Q. So that was the previous patient under the same letter, that is
12 the first letter of the surname whose data was recorded on the previous
14 A. Yes, that is correct.
15 Q. Dr. Moljevic, so that we are sure about the data and the
16 information here, we have patients whose information was entered in the
17 admissions book and I should like to hear from you the information entered
18 in this book in respect of those patients about whom you have already
19 testified. Let's start with Dragan Filipovic.
20 A. Dragan Filipovic.
21 Q. Yes, under "F," can you find Dragan Filipovic, and if so, would
22 you please read his date of admission, personal admission number, and the
23 case history.
24 A. Sorry, I forgot what letter precedes letter "F." I forgot the
25 Cyrillic alphabet.
1 Q. In the Cyrillic alphabet, it is towards the end.
2 JUDGE HUNT: I'm glad to see it's as much of a test for the native
3 speakers as it is for us.
4 MR. DOMAZET: Yes.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honours. Here it
6 is, I've found it.
7 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Would you please read for us his personal admission number?
9 A. 10.004, the date of admission June 14th. Name, Dragan
10 Filipovic. Department, orthopaedics.
11 Q. Thank you. Would you please turn to letter "L."
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Would you please try to find the name of Goran Loncarevic and
14 Selim Lepenica.
15 A. I assume it would be in April. I think Lepenica should be
16 somewhere in May. Here it is. Personal admissions number 7.869, date of
17 admission May 6th. Name and surname, Selim Lepenica. Department, the
18 shock block, intensive care.
19 Q. Would you please look at the Loncarevic information.
20 A. Here he is. His personal admissions number is 10.607, June 24th,
21 name surname, Goran Loncarevic, department shock block-surgery.
22 Q. And one more, please, letter "K," Nebojsa Kovac in the month of
24 A. Here he is. Personal admissions number 10.247, date of admission
25 17th of June, name and surname, Nebojsa Kovac, department, surgery.
1 Underneath, we see the shock block or the intensive care, which has been
2 crossed out, and instead, the word "surgery" was written.
3 Q. You found Nebojsa Kovac in the other book under the 17th of June
4 and Mitar Knezevic was admitted and returned on the same date. Do you see
5 Mitar Knezevic underneath -- under the name of Nebojsa Kovac in this
6 particular book, because according to the previous book, he was returned.
7 He should be under letter "K," Nebojsa Kovac. If he is to be found there,
8 he should be immediately after Nebojsa Kovac. Who is the following
9 patient, the one that comes after Nebojsa Kovac?
10 A. The next patient, the one after Nebojsa Kovac, is the patient by
11 the name of Sladana Kovacenvic, who was admitted on the 18th of June to
12 the surgical department under the personal admissions number 10251. In
13 this book, I don't see the name of Knezevic, nor could you find him there
14 because he was returned. That was the purpose of checking this
15 information in this book.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Domazet, your witness is behaving absolutely
17 impeccably. He watches the screen and he doesn't answer until the
18 translation is finished, but you have for the last few questions come in a
19 long time before it has finished. Please pause. Just follow your
20 witness's example. He's doing very well.
21 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes, you're quite right, Your
22 Honour. This time it was my fault.
23 Your Honour, I think that the witness was somewhat confused when
24 he didn't find what he could not have found, but that concludes my
25 questions as regards this book. I should like to check whether Exhibit
1 537 has been tendered, the smaller book, because I do not seem to recall
2 that the book was tendered into evidence during the Prosecution case. If
3 indeed was the case, I should like to tender it as Defence Exhibit.
4 JUDGE HUNT: Let me check to see whether it's -- 137 has been
6 Both of them have an admitted. I did have 137 checked so it's
7 already in evidence.
8 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Thank you.
9 Could the witness be shown D32, please? That is the protocol book
10 of the persons who underwent surgery at the orthopaedics.
11 Q. My first question for you, doctor, have a look at the book and
12 tell us if you recognise it as being the book from your department and
13 tell us what it contains, please?
14 A. Yes, it is the protocol book for operated patients which contains
15 data about operated patients from January 1991 until mid-August and July,
16 I see here, 1992.
17 Q. Thank you. Would you look at the year 1992, the month of June,
18 the 14th, 15th and 16th of June, 1992. I think it's all on one page.
19 A. I've found it, yes.
20 Q. Would you look carefully, Dr. Moljevic, look at the page
21 carefully. I think there are five columns. And would you read out the
22 first column on the page, the date of the operation, who the surgeon was,
23 who was operated and all the rest. What can you tell us by looking at
24 that book and the page?
25 A. This is the protocol book of patients operated at our department.
1 The first column is the ordinal number, that is the ordinal number of this
2 particular patient book. Then you have the personal patient number,
3 admissions number. That number is written down and assigned at the
4 admissions department, and the date the patient was operated. It says
5 here, the next column, it says surname and name of the patient, plus the
6 name of one parent. We very rarely include the name of a parent but I see
7 that is the full title of that column. I never knew we had to write in
8 the name of the parent.
9 The following column is clinical diagnosis. Then we have
10 operation, surgery, and then a brief description of the operative finding
11 and procedure of the surgeon. Then we have operation lasted from to,
12 column 8 is anesthesia, column 9, the surgeon, column 10, the assistants,
13 11, the anesthesiologist, anesthetics, column 12, and the remarks. You
14 asked about the first column.
15 Q. And tell us whether it is the patients you talked about today.
16 A. In column number 1, we have the patient who is Filipovic, Dragan
17 from Visegrad, born in 1962. His ordinal number is 283. The personal
18 identification number on the case history is 10004. The date of operation
19 is the 14th of June 1992. The clinical diagnosis is as follows: Vulnus
20 sclapatareum ragio omnus sin cum alvusio acrumioni et column scapulo sin
21 [phoen]. I made a mistake, I said it was the right shoulder a moment ago,
22 but it is a gunshot wound to the left shoulder, in fact, with throw back
23 to the roof and neck of the left shoulder-blade.
24 Operation exploratio vulneris immobilis asio [phoen], which means,
25 in translation, that the wound was examined surgically by means of
1 surgical instruments to ascertain its width, length, and depth. The wound
2 was cleaned from foreign particles -- of foreign particles and bone
3 fractions and other impaired tissue. And that the extremity, in this case
4 it was the arm, was immobilised. And then there is a brief description
5 under operating procedure, what I have just said, actually.
6 Then the following columns state that a local infiltrational
7 anaesthetic was used. The surgeon was Dr. Jovicevic, and under remarks we
8 have the assisting nurse. Her name was Milesa, and the other name was
9 Slobo, who is the plaster cast technician from our department. And
10 together with the doctor, he immobilised the extremity.
11 Q. Thank you, Doctor. Would you look at the next three columns, not
12 to have to read them all. Was it the same day and the same surgeon, the
13 next three columns, and would you read out what it says under number 285,
15 A. Can we take it in order? 284, Mirjana Popovic, the 15th of June.
16 Her personal admissions number as it says in the book. She was suffering
17 from a fracture of the right lower leg. An extension was performed
18 through the heel bone. Local anesthesia was applied, Dr. Gordic.
19 The next patient, the same day, the 15th of June, Mitar
20 Vasiljevic, a fracture of the left lower leg, the same operation, the same
21 operative procedure and the same surgeon.
22 The same date, same operation date. The patient this time was
23 Rajko Bugarin, and it was the right leg in his case, an extension or -- an
24 extension was performed. The operative procedure wasn't described. This
25 is the surgeon considered it was the same as the previous one. The
1 anaesthetic was the same and the surgeon was the same.
2 Under remarks, the names are different. The plaster cast
3 technician was our department technician and the instruments nurse was a
4 different one this time who was on duty on that particular day, a lady.
5 Q. Could you read out the name of the instruments nurse who worked on
6 the 15th of June, the lady?
7 A. The name is Dragana. I can tell you the surname, Sopalic. She
8 was the only instruments nurse called Dragana at the time.
9 Q. And now just have a look at the last column on the page, when that
10 operation was performed and who performed it.
11 A. Moljevic Andrea was operated from Visegrad on the 16th of June
12 1992. It was a gunshot wound to the left lower leg where the skin was
13 impaired and the subcutaneous tissue as well as the gastropnemius [phoen]
14 Muscle. The surgeon was myself and it is a patient who is a close
15 relative of mine.
16 Q. Take a look at that page carefully, please, just one more
17 question. The name of all these five patients, the names are written in
18 different scripts. Tell me, please, which the scripts are for what name.
19 Some of them have been written in the Cyrillic, others in the Latin
20 script. Do you recognise this and is that customary?
21 A. The first column is the Cyrillic script, Filipovic Dragan is one
22 handwriting. Then we come to Popovic, Vasiljevic and Bugarin, that is to
23 say the 15th of June is another handwriting in the Latin script. And the
24 16th of June is another handwriting, and that is standard procedure,
25 depending on the technician, man or woman, working
1 at our department. When she receives a case history where the surgeon has
2 written his operative findings, it is her duty to record this in the
3 operations protocol book. Sometimes this is done by the head nurse
4 of the department, sometimes it is done by the department nurses which she
6 Q. Thank you, doctor. We have finished with that book now.
7 Now I'd like to ask you to take a look at a copy of the case
9 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown document
10 Exhibit P138.
11 A. I have a copy in front of me.
12 Q. Take a look at the upper half and tell us whether that is the
13 standard type of printed form that is used and with the information
14 recorded that you spoke about, the date of admission, the personal
15 admissions number for the patient and the doctor whose patient it is.
16 A. Yes, this is the standard type or, rather, the copy of the
17 standard type of case history printed form, the first page, actually. Let
18 me tell you straight away that until -- up until column 11, columns 1 to
19 10 inclusive, this is filled in at the admissions department. From column
20 11 onwards, which states basic cause of hospitalisation or in brackets
21 final diagnosis, that is written in by the doctor at the orthopaedic
22 department who is discharging the patient.
23 To make things clearer as to who writes this in, if you are
24 interested, can I go on? It can be written in either by myself as the
25 senior specialist physician who received the patient or, more often, a
1 doctor doing his specialised training or a doctor waiting to undergo his
2 specialist training, which is the most frequent person. That is what most
3 frequently happens because writing down administrative data and seeing to
4 administration under the conditions, our own conditions of work, takes up
5 quite a bit of time. So we senior specialists don't usually waste time on
6 things like that and so it is our -- the younger doctors who see to the
7 administrative side of this.
8 Q. Thank you. Looking at the top left-hand corner above the columns,
9 some information has been written in, not the printed form. Could you
10 explain to us, based on the practice and circumstances of the time, what
11 this is and what it says and why it says what it says?
12 A. Let me take this in order, if I may. May I show it on the ELMO so
13 that you can all see? Can I indicate and describe what I'm talking about
14 using the ELMO, please.
15 Q. I think that we all have a copy. You can read it out.
16 A. It's like this, this number up here was 413 and then it was
17 corrected to 411. That is the room the patient was admitted in. I see
18 that the patient was admitted to 413 first and that was a room under
19 Dr. Krnic first but then it was corrected to read 411, which means that
20 the patient was transferred, whether the day or the following day, to 411
21 and that's a male dormitory belonging to Dr. Jovicevic. 412 is a
22 women's room. We have women's and men's rooms.
23 Underneath, VP is military post, police, so it means who was
24 informed. And I see here 985, the secretariat of the interior was
25 informed, which means in the admissions department they wrote in who was
1 informed, the military police 985 SUP.
2 Now, 386 was probably the number of the room on the psychiatric
3 ward, and next we have the initials of the doctor whose patient it was
4 and we say CDJ, which means Dusko Jovicevic, and then it says case
5 history. And then in capital letters it says injury in the war zone or
6 battlefield in Visegrad, the word is "Ratiste." Now why this was written,
7 I don't know, probably someone in the administration decided to -- that it
8 should be written in this way.
9 I don't know what the next number is, 603/92, I really don't know
10 what that is. Somebody from the administration must have written that
11 in. And I don't know what 05 means. The "O" is general hospital Uzice
12 orthopaedics, that is to say that the patient was admitted to our
13 department, the orthopaedics department. The hospital and department,
14 there ought to be some codes there but I've been working in the hospital
15 for 15 years and never have I seen any of that filled in.
16 Then we have the next column, the personal admissions number for
17 the patient, and 3 is the date of admission, 14/06/92 and the personal
18 admissions number I see here is 10.014, 15. I think that the 4 is a
19 stronger digit, typed out more strongly than the 5 digit. The name and
20 the surname, Vasiljevic, Mitar. Ljubisa, in brackets, is the name of the
21 father. I don't know what should be written in there. And then the
22 insurance holder. This is for Yugoslavia. I don't know what happened in
24 Now, if somebody was employed, they would have the name of the
25 company working for. If the person was a farmer, then the holder of the
1 insurance would be the breadwinner, the father of the family. If he was
2 retired, it would say retired.
3 Next, the name and surname of the spouse or parents and address.
4 That column is necessary, should a patient happen to die so that we know
5 who to inform, to come and collect the body or his belongings, or whom we
6 can contact should the need arise, if the patient needs something and the
7 hospital needs to contact his next of kin.
8 Then we have sex, male/female, and then under one, I see one which
9 means male. Two is female. So one is male. Sometimes they circle it in
10 but this says one.
11 Next we have the date of birth, in this case the 25/08/1954. The
12 address or residing in, we usually have the full address written out but
13 here I can see that the address is written next to the spouse so that here
14 it just says Visegrad.
15 700 UR which used to be the abbreviation for basic organisation of
16 associated labour. That is what it was called in our country. And the
17 technician wrote in "TO," Territorial Defence Visegrad or member of the
18 JNA or whatever.
19 8, category of health insurance, and we see underlined here Voja
20 Posne [phoen], military post, which means that he was from a military unit
21 of some kind. The employ. For me it would say doctor, for you to would
22 say lawyer, for him, it says reservist. And column number 10, referral
23 diagnosis. That is the diagnosis that appears on the referral letter from
24 the health centre sending it to our hospital. Here it says fractura tibia
25 and fibula one sin [phoen]. This is written by a technician. Technicians
1 don't know Latin as a rule so mistakes are made here. We don't actually
2 take that much notice of that because the main information for us is from
3 column 11 onwards. We write that in, basic cause of hospitalisation or
4 final diagnosis, which is usually the operative diagnosis, so that is the
5 first diagnosis that is written down. It says here fractura cruris L sin,
6 which means fracture of the lower left leg, and the code is 823.2. These
7 are the codes that were used and up until last year. They are old codes.
8 We now use the international code system when Yugoslavia was taken back
9 into the international community of nations and I think that code would
10 now be S 42. something, but that's not essential. That's what it was, a
12 This brings us to column 12, other ailments or diseases. In this
13 case, it was psychosis. And this is their code, their old code,
14 probably. And 13 is the date of discharge, day, month and year and the
15 number of days spent in bed at the hospital.
16 Then we have 15, the date and type of operation, it says extensio
17 trans calcanearus [phoen] here, which means an extension via the calcaris,
18 which is the heel bone, and the date when this was done and the year at
19 the end.
20 The outcome of treatment, very often we don't write that in. We
21 don't consider it to be a special obligation. Nobody made us do so.
22 Except if the patient happens to die, then we circle in whether he has had
23 a post mortem examination done or not.
24 Then column 17, the physician treating the patient, in this case
25 Dr. Tesovic, Dr. Slobodan Tesovic. He is a doctor at the psychiatric
1 department who continued the treatment. And for our patients from
2 Yugoslavia, that is, especially those who were injured in a factory, for
3 example, under column 16, "injuries," we would have to say whether the
4 injury was at work or not for insurance purposes, remuneration,
5 compensation, and so on and so forth.
6 So according to the international classification of disease, we
7 would have to write down the code for the external cause of injury, which
8 is column 19, and then we come to column 20, the day and hour of the
9 injury, and 21, rehabilitation. We very often leave that out because they
10 do that in rehabilitation. And if the patient has died, then we are
11 duty-bound to write the cause of death, basic cause of death under column
12 22. We do this in letters and in code, letters here and code there. It
13 can be a medical diagnosis or it can just be in the Serbian language, a
14 descriptive diagnosis.
15 Q. Thank you. I have just one question for you, doctor, looking at
16 column 20, but before that, let me ask you the following: Do you happen
17 to recall -- I don't think we mentioned that today. Do you happen to
18 recall whether, when you admitted Mitar Vasiljevic or talked to him for
19 the first time, do you remember how he was injured? How did he receive
20 the injuries for which he had come to hospital for?
21 A. I learnt about it because the driver, Zivorad Savic, told me that
22 he had fallen off a horse and it would be like this: Everybody else was
23 wounded whereas he happened to fall off a horse, so I remembered that.
24 Q. Could you have a look to see, doctor, whether that -- it's not
25 written in on the first page and my question is why column 20 was not
1 filled out at all, row 20 and column 20, whether it was filled in at that
3 A. It depended. With injuries of this kind where you are dealing
4 with fighters or people from another state, which was Bosnia and
5 Herzegovina already then, we didn't regularly write this in. Some people
6 would, but very rarely. As far as I remember, I, myself, didn't fill that
7 column in and as I was a specialist training where doctors who were in
8 training wrote this, we didn't control it. We didn't think it was
9 essential because it says up at the top, injured in the -- on the
10 battlefield. We didn't mind about that very much, so that was the basic
11 heading and we didn't fill the rest in.
12 Q. Thank you, Doctor. Would you now take a look at the second page,
13 please, and look at the information recorded there. According to you, who
14 wrote that in and was the manner in which the patient was injured recorded
15 there or not?
16 A. This is a typical way, style of Dr. Jovicevic. I write in a
17 similar fashion. Dr. Jovicevic was one of my teachers. I think I can say
18 that, and in the anamnesis and findings, it says admitted to the
19 department as an urgent case which means he wasn't admitted in the morning
20 shift, because of a closed fracture of the lower left leg, which he
21 received falling on a flat plain on the battlefield. He did not lose
22 consciousness. Upon admission, the lower leg was deformed, it had a
23 pathological aspect, active movements are impossible, passive pain, and so
24 on and so forth. Now why he wrote this in, I don't know. I wasn't there
25 when he wrote this.
1 Q. Thank you. The next column where it says the 15th of June, are
2 those the same data that you found in the operations protocol book and is
3 it the same number? Would you take a look at that, please.
4 A. Yes. This data is fully compatible with the data in the
5 operations protocol book.
6 Q. Thank you, doctor. Would you turn to page 3. The rest of the
7 information isn't important for us here. The other witnesses have
8 discussed that. And look at the date, the 17th of July. It is page 4, I
9 think, in your copy.
10 Look at the date, please, the 7th of July, 1992. 17th, 17th of
11 July, 1992.
12 A. The 17th of July, 1992, it says literally, plaster cast adjusted
13 16th of July from the orthopaedics standpoint; the patient can be released
14 home. Walking with crutches without reliance on the injured foot.
15 Control examination in one month's time. Tuesday morning, Dr. Moljevic.
16 Q. That was your examination of the patient?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. When you say, "From orthopaedic standpoint, the patient can be
19 released home," what does it actually mean, because in view of the dates,
20 he was not released on the 17th of July?
21 A. It means that from the orthopaedic standpoint, there is no further
22 need for the patient to be kept at hospital for treatment. Further
23 treatment should be performed by his physician, by the physician who is in
24 charge of him, which was a psychiatrist. I wrote check-up within one
25 month, which means that it is the time when the plaster cast should be
1 readjusted or taken off, depending on the quality of healing, the progress
2 of the healing. Tuesday mornings, in those days, I worked in the
3 outpatient clinic on Tuesdays.
4 The check-up -- and this examination was a consultative
5 examination upon the invitation of the physician who was in charge of the
6 relevant ward where the patient was.
7 Q. Dr. Moljevic, can you remember whether you performed check-ups of
8 Mr. Vasiljevic in this period of his treatment at the hospital?
9 A. I believe I did. I think I did. Whether it was after the first
10 injury or the second one, I don't know, but I believe that he came
11 occasionally. I don't know whether I was the one who took off the plaster
12 cast. I think that could be seen from the discharge list, the second page
13 of the discharge list.
14 Q. Thank you. Dr. Moljevic.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Dr. Moljevic, in connection with this particular case, would you
17 customarily -- oh, I'm sorry, did you ever give a written statement to the
18 Defence counsel of Mr. Vasiljevic?
19 A. Yes, I gave one statement to you and Mr. Tanaskovic. It was a
20 written statement but I cannot recall the date. I believe that you should
21 have it somewhere. I didn't keep it. I didn't write it for myself and I
22 didn't think it was necessary to keep it.
23 Q. Dr. Moljevic, after that, did you have contacts with the
24 investigators of this Tribunal and did you have any documents with you on
25 such occasions?
1 A. Yes. I think that it was on the 1st of November last year that I
2 received a telephone call of Mr. Yves Roy - I believe that was his name,
3 that was how you pronounce it - following which call I had an interview.
4 I was interviewed in the premises of the IPTF in Visegrad. We spent two
5 and a half, three hours talking. During that interview, I gave a
6 statement in response to their questions.
7 I did have some documents with me, the documents which had been
8 requested by Mr. Roy, since he wanted to have a look at it and to
9 compare it with the copies which were officially issued and certified by
10 the department of my hospital, which you had also requested. I didn't
11 know what you needed at the time.
12 As for the documents that he requested, I was able to see the
13 copies here but also the originals. I went to the archives, and pursuant
14 to an oral approval of the then head of the hospital to collect those
15 documents because I believe that they would be returned, according to what
16 Mr. Roy told me. However, after a very friendly interview, at the very
17 end of that discussion, Mr. Roy informed me that those documents,
18 pursuant to a decision issued by a Judge, I don't remember the exact
19 wording of the decision, I didn't take it and I'm sorry that I didn't take
20 the decision, that such -- that those documents would be confiscated. I
21 can tell you now and I can tell Your Honours here that I was rather
22 worried and concerned about my future status in the hospital. I was very
23 concerned about my future in the hospital because the book here contains
24 10.000 names approximately, and the small book contains the information
25 about those injured in the war area, and even to this date, many of those
1 who are on this list of names are requesting some -- are seeking
2 compensation either on a private, individual basis or officially or
3 formally because they have lost documentation on their injuries or wounds,
4 and I am telling you this also as a sworn-in court expert, because I am
5 very often required to testify as part of the litigations conducted by the
6 aggrieved against the state.
7 I felt very uncomfortable and I thought it was the same for
8 Mr. Roy as well because we both raised our voices, which was not becoming
9 of the situation and our professions. However, we managed to resolve the
10 differences to a certain extent because I understood that I found myself
11 in the territory of a country which followed certain rules and that I was
12 to abide with these rules.
13 You have these documents now. Judge Hunt, Your Honour, I do
14 believe that this documentation, I hope that this documentation would soon
15 be returned to the country because the situation has changed in the
16 meantime. Laws are much more strict now and I think that it would be
17 high time for this documentation to be returned to the place where it
18 belongs for myself, because of myself and because of the people whose
19 information is contained in this book.
20 I parted with Mr. Roy on friendly terms and we both expressed a
21 wish to meet again, regardless of the circumstances that we found
22 ourselves in on that particular occasion. That's all that I wanted to
24 Q. Dr. Moljevic, do you remember what else, apart from these books
25 that you saw today, what else you brought there on that occasion, what
1 other documents?
2 A. The entire documentation was in a bag that I had with me, and
3 during the interview, this gentleman didn't want me to explain every
4 single detail contained in that documentation. He just wanted to have the
5 documentation at the end of the interview. I remember bringing these
6 books. The protocol book, I'm not quite sure as for the case histories,
7 some information was there. I don't know what exactly was included in the
8 case history documentation, and x-ray findings, and there was also a blank
9 form, case history form dated from the previous year. I don't know why
10 Mr. Roy needed it, but he expressed interest in that so I gave him
11 this particular -- the blank form.
12 Q. Thank you. You mentioned an x-ray finding as being part of that
13 documentation. I should like you to have a look at it, see whether you
14 recognise it and tell us what it pertains to.
15 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Could I please have the assistance
16 of the usher, but I do not remember the number.
17 MS. BAUER: 151.1, the original, I assume.
18 JUDGE HUNT: Sorry.
19 MS. BAUER: It's P151.1, the original
20 JUDGE HUNT: Is that the x-ray? The doctor has referred to the
21 "x-ray findings."
22 MS. BAUER: I think he meant the x-ray.
23 JUDGE HUNT: That's may be so, but that's what he said. Doctor,
24 you are recorded as referring to x-ray findings. Do you mean some report
25 or the x-ray itself, because the x-ray itself is certainly here.
1 A. I don't remember using the word "findings." We do not use the
2 same techniques as in the west, where I also work. I don't remember using
3 the word "findings." X-rays are viewed and examined by us, not by a
4 radiologist. It's not a custom here and those are not the rules. I don't
5 remember using the word "findings." If I did say, I apologise, I must
6 have misspoken or I must have been misinterpreted.
7 JUDGE HUNT: That's all right, we're just anxious to get the
8 document you want. 151.1, has it been found? That's it. Show it to the
9 doctor, please.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's how we examine x-rays in
12 Mr. Domazet, may I?
13 MR. DOMAZET: Yes, please.
14 A. This is an x-ray of a lower leg fracture. A tibia fracture can be
15 observed on the x-ray. Mitar Vasiljevic, 14/06/1992. In the lower left
16 corner, we have a letter L encircled. This was probably written with
17 felt-tip pen. We see the device which was used to immobilise, premer
18 [phoen] wire. Not everything can be seen, only the two-thirds of it. It
19 is an elongated spiral fracture, and since the dislocation is not a big
20 one, it was just split. It is a very bad x-ray, actually, it's been
21 damaged and soiled.
22 Q. Dr. Moljevic, you recognised a fracture of the tibia, that is the
23 larger bone on this x-ray. You said it was a spiral fracture. On the
24 other hand, you say that you do not see any signs of the fibula fracture,
25 but you are speaking about an upper part that might have sustained this
1 type of fracture. Can you see it on the x-ray? Could you explain that
2 for us?
3 A. [In English] It's no good. [Interpretation] On this x-ray, I
4 don't know whether you can see it. There is an elongated spiral fracture
5 of the tibia. That is the larger bone of the lower leg. And since this
6 is a very long spiral and goes like this, moves upwards, it is logical to
7 assume that there would have been a smaller fracture or a split on the
8 fibula, on the smaller bone. We use the term subcapital. That is below
9 the head or the main part of the shin bone.
10 With these type of fractures, we do not have dislocations in all
11 directions. The fibula is usually cracked, just cracked, so it can heal.
12 Or it may have sustained an insignificant dislocation several millimetres
13 wide, which is not important. The reason why my colleague went for an
14 extension was because that he believed the fibula was also fractured to
15 a certain extent because this type of fracture can be fixed without
16 immobilisation if the fibula was not harmed.
17 Q. In this case, according to your opinion, was this x-ray done
18 properly? Could it have been done in a better way? Could it have been
19 taken so as to include what you think is left out?
20 A. Mr. Domazet, Your Honours, ladies and gentlemen, there are many
21 things that are not done in a proper way. In my country, these things
22 happen to this date. Very often, we have to go and see the physician at
23 the x-ray department in person and require for a specific type of x-ray
24 that we need because the staff is not always behaving in the most
25 responsible way; not only in this department, but in any other
1 department. Many doctors do not see any problem with it. However, there
2 is a number of us physicians who have had experience abroad. I spent
3 quite some time at the University of Uppsala in Sweden, working with top
4 specialists in orthopaedic surgery, and I do have a problem with this.
5 However, we have to live with it, such is the situation. I'm not
6 a health minister. I do not hold any position in the hospital where I
7 could undertake disciplinary measures for this type of behaviour, so we're
8 still faced with this type of problem. In view of the relevant rules and
9 regulations in your countries, things that you take for granted, one would
10 have to take an x-ray of the lower leg and the ankle, including the ankle,
11 so one would have a large x-ray or four smaller x-rays so that the doctor
12 would get the entire image, the entire picture.
13 In other countries, there are appropriate procedures, there are
14 possibilities for compensation claims and so on and so forth. However, in
15 our country, things are not done in a proper way. So that is what I
16 wanted to tell you. That is the explanation that I wanted to include in
17 my testimony.
18 JUDGE HUNT: Did we lose some translation there or was there a
19 deliberate pause?
20 THE INTERPRETER: We lost an adage, something to the effect, "It's
21 a long way to Tipperary."
22 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you.
23 Mr. Domazet, are you satisfied with what has been recorded?
24 MR. DOMAZET: Yes, Your Honour.
25 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Moljevic, you said that in the left corner,
1 you saw a letter L. If indeed that's what it says, could you tell us what
2 it means, does it indicate something and if so, what?
3 A. In the Anglo-Saxon terminology, it refers to -- it means left and
4 in Serbian, it means "levo," which means left.
5 Q. Does it mean that the x-ray was of the left lower leg?
6 A. Yes. Yes, of course.
7 Q. Dr. Moljevic, you've described for us the fracture of the larger
8 bone, that is the tibia. You said it was an elongated spiral fracture,
9 that is how you described it. Is that type of fracture compatible with
10 the explanation which you have as to the cause and the origin of the
11 injury, that is, the fall off the horse and the relevant side? Is it
12 possible in view of that information for this type of injury to have
14 A. Yes, because the patient when on top of a horse as he lags a
15 stride, so probably one metre above the ground, approximately. In cases
16 of a fall off a horse, the difference is not significant. If he falls off
17 a horse -- as he falls off a horse, his foot touches the ground, the leg
18 turns because of the fall and because of the weight of the body and the
19 fracture that results from that fall is a spiral one in view of the
20 torsion so if the patient falls off a horse, it is possible for the horse
21 to press the leg which is on a flat surface and further fracture would
22 thereby be prevented.
23 However, if the surface is uneven or if you have an uneven body
24 such as a piece of rock or a hard piece of land or soil, then the type of
25 fracture would be different because the pressure of this other body would
1 lead to a new fracture due to the pressure of the horse's body. In this
2 case, it was obvious that it was not the horse, that is, the pressure of
3 its body that caused any additional fracture of the lower leg.
4 Q. One other thing, Dr. Moljevic. Do you remember whether Mitar
5 Vasiljevic was a patient at your department in your hospital after this on
6 any occasion after 1992, if you remember?
7 A. Mitar Vasiljevic was our patient for a brief period of time in
8 1993 less than a year after he sustained this fracture. As to the month,
9 I don't recall but I believe that he was treated by Dr. Krnjic and that no
10 extension was applied, only plaster cast, and he was released from --
11 discharged from hospital soon after that.
12 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Thank you, Dr. Moljevic. This
13 concludes my examination of the witness, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE HUNT: Well, I think we might start the cross-examination
15 after lunch. We'll adjourn now until 2.30.
16 --- Luncheon recess taken at 12.57 p.m.
1 --- On resuming at 2.30 p.m.
2 JUDGE HUNT: Are you part of the team again, Ms. Korner?
3 MS. KORNER: I'm just here for this afternoon, Your Honour. It
4 always gives me a last opportunity to see Your Honour.
5 JUDGE HUNT: I'm not sure how I should take that.
6 Yes, Ms. Bauer.
7 Cross-examined by Ms. Bauer:
8 Q. Good afternoon, Dr. Moljevic. My name is Sabine Bauer and I'm
9 going to ask you a few questions on behalf of the Prosecution this
10 afternoon. Dr. Moljevic, am I correct in saying that nowhere in the
11 medical record there is any sign of your involvement in the treatment of
12 the accused Mitar Vasiljevic up to the 17th of July, what you have seen so
13 far; correct?
14 A. First of all, let me say good afternoon, to react to your
15 greetings. And in response to your question, you asked me is it not
16 normal or that it is normal or is not normal, what do you mean?
17 Q. [Previous translation continues]... It is a fact that your name as
18 a treating doctor is not mentioned anywhere on the medical histories or
19 anywhere in the record books as far as we saw them now up to the 17th of
21 A. Yes, thank you. That is customary with us, the patient who -- the
22 doctor whose patient he is, who received him on the ward in the
23 department, his name is written down, but what happens sometimes is that
24 that doctor is absent for any reason, perhaps he is on holiday, and
25 the -- he left before the patient was discharged, say five days before, so
1 it says the doctor whose patient he was, and on the right-hand side, the
2 head of department's name is mentioned.
3 The discharge papers can be written by another doctor. It is
4 usually the doctors doing their specialist training or awaiting to do
5 their specialist training and these doctors are called secondary doctors
6 in our department, as I explained. So as you mentioned my name, I was a
7 doctor on the triage team. I need not be mentioned on the sheet at all
8 because the sheet is written up in the department except for column -- up
9 to column 10.
10 Q. So your answer is basically, and I mean what I wanted to get at,
11 as a treating doctor that one could say he was your patient. He wasn't
12 your patient up to the 17th of July for any major treatment orthopaedic
13 treatment, of course, we are talking about only.
14 A. The second part of the question that you asked explains matters
15 for any more important form or major form of treatment. Now let me
16 explain what major treatment means. Us orthopaedists on duty round the
17 clock 24 hours, what is compulsory is the daily round of the
18 orthopaedist. On Mondays, we have the main round, the main doctor's visit
19 with the head of department and all the staff, but after that, it is only
20 the doctor whose patients and the doctor under whom the patients are being
21 treated has his rounds. If he is unable to attend -- to organise the
22 rounds and do the rounds, then somebody else will take his place, but the
23 evening round which is usually between 2000 and 2100 hours is conducted by
24 the doctor on duty that day for all the patients in the department and
25 ward. And also the morning round and evening round is conducted by the
1 doctor on duty if it is a weekend or a national holiday.
2 My name is not mentioned up until the date when I was a
3 consultant, that is to say, when the doctor from the psychiatric
4 department called me. I was probably on duty that day or was called in as
5 a consultant. So I take part in the treatment because at that time, for
6 example, if we look at the number of doctors, I was on duty every five or
7 six days. So by virtue of the job I was doing, I knew all the patients
8 and their problems, why they were lying in the ward.
9 Q. So you made control visits but you didn't treat him as your proper
10 patient. Would that be, in summary, correct?
11 A. Absolutely correct, yes.
12 Q. Thank you. Now, you told us that you knew Mitar Vasiljevic from
13 beforehand as a waiter, but you didn't have any closer family or otherwise
14 connection with him, did you?
15 A. Absolutely correct, yes.
16 Q. Now, was this customary at that time, Dr. Moljevic, that if a
17 patient from the Visegrad area would come, that they would call you up and
18 say -- because you were from Visegrad, to say there was somebody coming
19 from Visegrad? Was that a customary procedure?
20 A. Yes. Well, very often, what happened was that apart from the
21 injured person, all the other people, for example, children or expectant
22 mothers, would ask for me because Visegrad is a small town and my family
23 is well-known in town and people say that they are among one of the better
24 doctors. I apologise for having to say so myself. So they ask for me
25 very often because we like to say that if you haven't got anybody you know
1 in a large hospital, you are going to have to wait longer and wait and
2 wait, whereas if you have someone you know, you'll get through your
3 business much quicker. So that this care and attention on my part, when
4 -- and even in other departments when I come in and say I am interested
5 in this patient's treatment, it carries some weight. The patient or the
6 staff would accord a little more attention and pay a little bit more
7 attention to that particular patient.
8 Q. So actually, that date in June before Mitar Vasiljevic arrived,
9 you had already been called beforehand, right, because another patient
10 from that area arrived whom you treated, I think it's Dragan Filipovic was
11 his name?
12 A. I was chief of the triage team that day and I went to Filipovic
13 and they told me that they had already called me for the Vasiljevic
14 case, that a person from Visegrad had been injured and I should wait for
15 him there, but I was already in the admissions and triage team in the
16 hospital so it was easier for me on that occasion. But there were many
17 other occasions where I had to come from home but that's another matter.
18 I don't want to be sidetracked.
19 Q. [Previous translation continues]... Called you to announce Mitar
20 Vasiljevic's arrival; do you remember that? Who called you, because you
21 said, I think, as far as I see, "Somebody had called me from Visegrad," so
22 I would like to know who called you. If you remember, of course.
23 A. I can't remember. A lot of time has gone by since then. They
24 would call me up very often, both friends and relatives, the relatives of
25 the wounded and injured, starting off with their parents, spouses,
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 brothers, sisters. So as I say, a lot of time has gone by since then and
2 I really can't remember.
3 Q. Now, you also told us, Dr. Moljevic, that you actually didn't
4 really remember the time any more when Vasiljevic arrived. You said it
5 was sometime in the evening, and in order to refresh your memory, you
6 would have to rely on the records; correct?
7 A. Absolutely correct, yes.
8 Q. And also, you didn't remember whether he brought an x-ray or
9 whether x-ray tests were ordered or whether any lab tests were done? You
10 can't remember that quite vividly either; correct?
11 A. As far as that is concerned, I, as a doctor in charge of doing the
12 triage for the injured, everything is brought to me and that is something
13 that the GPs who are on duty do. For us in the triage team would just
14 assess whether it was life threatening, whether he was bleeding and
15 whether what he was suffering from was life threatening. Now, we would be
16 told that they were bringing in an urgent patient who was bleeding and so
17 on, which was not this case, but as to what you asked me about the blood
18 tests and the rest, I saw from the documents that this was done in routine
19 form, that they were requested in the morning as a matter of routine.
20 With conditions of this kind where we don't expect to be any major blood
21 loss because it was a fracture of the lower leg, we don't ask for these
22 tests to be done as an emergency measure, but the department doctor is the
23 one who makes the decisions. He decides on what tests, what surgical
24 procedure and so on, depending on the injury. So I, myself, as a triage
25 doctor, in the triage team, I send the patient off where he has to go,
1 whether it is orthopaedics, chest surgery, maxilofacial department or
2 whatever, and then he is taken over there by the doctor on duty in the
3 department and determines the further course of treatment which includes
4 whether additional tests are required, x-rays and so on and so forth.
5 Have I made myself clear?
6 Q. Yes, you did, doctor. So -- you also, I think you told us that
7 you personally did not fill out any of the admission books but it is the
8 GP, that is, the general practitioner who fills out these admission books;
10 A. I don't think you understood me. It is not the doctor who does
11 that. The particulars are written by a medical technician or one of the
12 nurses working at the administration admissions department. It is not
13 written by the doctor. So in columns where it says "Referral diagnosis,"
14 there are very often mistakes in Latin terminology because the medical
15 staff with medium training levels have a poor knowledge of Latin and
16 diagnostics, and that is a valid fact in court. I am a forensic expert
17 myself, a court expert. And so those diagnosis are very often not written
18 correctly because of those reasons.
19 Q. And you actually didn't see when these entries have been made, you
20 didn't -- you never see that because it is kept in a separate area, I
21 assume; correct?
22 A. I didn't see. It's just up to me to decide where the patient is
23 going to be forwarded to and then the technicians wheel him off into a
24 cloakroom where he changes, puts on a pajamas or whatever they have
25 available at that particular moment, and then they take him off to the
1 ward and department that I have sent him to, and those documents are
2 stored somewhere in the admissions department, I don't know, but like what
3 we have behind us here, there are typewriters, there are technicians, they
4 take down the particulars, the relevant information that is typed out on
5 the first page of the case history, and then we have the books like this
6 one here, this big book here and the others ones where these data are
7 recorded in hand. They are written out in hand in the these books.
8 Q. So at the first time that you looked for this particular case into
9 this book was, I assume, when you were asked for the records by
10 Mr. Domazet?
11 A. I don't know whether it was when Mr. Domazet asked or at the point
12 when -- at the request of Mr. Yves Roy from the Tribunal, took those
13 documents and happened to leaf through and see what it was about, but I
14 didn't study it in depth. I didn't think that was necessary because, in
15 principle, I am well acquainted with the organisation of the hospital
16 services because of the work I do now, that is, I am at the head of the
17 scientific research centre in the hospital, so I am acquainted with some
18 of that. I have to look at literature and case histories from the
19 archives and for the MA thesis that my colleagues do, of which I am the
20 head. I know how that is done. But in 1992, it didn't enter my head. I
21 had just begun to write my specialist thesis for congresses and so on and
22 I would get all those things prepared.
23 Q. Well, doctor, you told us this morning that you recollect the
24 statement was taken by Yves Roy, and would it recollect to you if you said
25 basically in this statement: It was early in this year, 2000, when I was
1 contacted by Mr. Domazet regarding Mitar Vasiljevic medical records and he
2 said I don't recall the date but he contacted me on my cell phone asking
3 for the documentation for the treatment. So you were first contacted by
4 Mr. Domazet, will you agree to that?
5 A. On my mobile phone, yes. Yes, he came into contact with me first
6 and then in the course of our conversation, he asked me whether I would
7 agree to make a statement before the Tribunal and before the investigator
8 of the Tribunal, and I said there was no problem there, just set the time
9 and place.
10 Q. So can I take it that since basically before 2000, you have never
11 tried to take a look at this medical history of Mitar Vasiljevic or at the
12 records? Would that be a correct assessment?
13 A. I would say that that is a correct assessment, and with a high
14 degree of certainty -- no, I certainly did not ask for it, I had no reason
16 Q. Now, where would those records -- where were they kept in 1992 in
17 the hospital?
18 A. We have a service for archiving the data, that is to say, the
19 case histories and all the other documentation and usually, in our
20 hospital, it is the last place, if I -- where it should be, if I can put
21 it as candidly as that, using the Serbian language. To the present day,
22 I'm afraid it was stored in the basement. The archives have now been
23 transferred to the basements of certain workshops within the hospital
24 compound. If you were to see where they are actually stored, things would
25 be quite clear to you, I think.
1 Q. Were those archives moved any time from 1992 to 2000 in these
2 intervening, in these nine years?
3 A. I think that a year or two ago, it was transferred from the
4 basement of the -- what we call the new hospital or the surgical block,
5 surgical unit, where there are now warehouses to store humanitarian aid
6 and things that the surgical unit needs, but I think that they're in a
7 basement now and I hear that the facilities are not good today either, but
8 I haven't checked them out.
9 Q. And if it would recollect your memory, did you say to Investigator
10 Roy that actually since 1992, these archives were moved three times, to
11 three different locations within the hospital? Is that correct?
12 A. Probably, it is. And when I came to the hospital, I seem to
13 remember that the archive was in an old section of the gynecology ward
14 where there was some storage space and then it was transferred to the new
15 hospital wing, and now this final transfer a year or two, or three ago,
16 whenever it was, the latest transfer. Because in -- sometime in 1987, I
17 began preparing documentation to help me write my professional papers and
18 thesis for congresses and that is the work of us younger doctors doing our
19 specialist training, so that the data is sorted according to instructions
20 given me by the senior physicians writing the actual paper. So my work
21 was the work of a research worker and a statistician and he wrote the
22 final text on the basis of the information that I collected, and I think
23 that the archive was in that particular locality but, after all, it was 15
24 years ago or so.
25 Q. And people like nurses or doctors, if they wanted to check a
1 record, they did have access to these records, correct, if they had to go
2 back for any kind of reason?
3 A. You mean personally, to go to the room personally?
4 Q. At archives, yes.
5 A. Well, there's no need for that because there are archivists, five
6 or six people, men and women working in the archives. We just send the
7 names and surnames and the time when they were hospitalised, and then they
8 can look through the archives and find what we need and then they would
9 bring it up to the orthopaedic ward to the doctors' room, the case history
10 we had requested. That's the usual procedure. There's no need for the
11 nurses to go and look for it and nor is that their job, if you understand
13 Q. And the -- you said if you wanted to take out the books, you know,
14 the whole books, the ledgers, you had to ask permission from the
15 director. Was this across the board? Is this sort of a rule for
16 everybody or was this just in this particular case that if you needed to
17 take out the book for whatever purposes?
18 A. Let me tell you, this is a case which is a little unusual and I
19 have no need to take a book out. If I want something, I need a case
20 history, so if you're asking me as a doctor, if I need something for a
21 congress or for a specialist paper. Now, as far as the other data
22 required from these books, we doctors don't need that. The patients come
23 to ask for that or the relatives of patients. If, for example, they have
24 died, for certain rights to be -- to get a certificate from our hospital
25 saying that they had been hospitalised from such and such a time, or if
1 they have lost their discharge papers, then that is photocopied, or
2 letters, and it is photocopied but it has an official stamp of the legal
3 department of the hospital, certifying that the copy is true to the
4 original. That's what can be done, but we didn't have to go. I don't
5 need the book. I don't see why I would need it. And in this particular
6 case, as I had to go to another country, to Bosnia-Herzegovina in this
7 instance, to show Mr. Yves Roy the original of what he already had
8 photocopied and in front of him.
9 He said he would look at it and give it back but the then director
10 of the hospital gave me oral permission to take it out with me and the
11 archives were instructed to hand me over those documents but
12 unfortunately, we saw what happened.
13 Q. Now, when you took out those books, were you asked actually to
14 bring the complete case file of Mitar Vasiljevic or did you make a
15 selection based on any kind of criteria?
16 A. Who do you mean asked me? You did, your investigators or any
17 lawyers? Who do you -- who are you thinking of, who do you have in mind?
18 Q. We agreed before that Mr. Domazet first asked you to get hold of
19 these documents. Now, I wanted to know when you got these documents, did
20 you simply go out and get the whole case file of Mitar Vasiljevic in 1992,
21 and 1993, whatever you could find in the archives, or did you make some
22 kind of a selection?
23 A. I see. Well, I looked downstairs in the room where the archive
24 staff are. I didn't say that. I didn't -- they wouldn't allow me without
25 having a written permit stating why I needed -- I just took a look at
1 what it was about. I looked in the case history. I'm not certain which
2 of these books was given to me and I didn't ask. I think that it was
3 probably the big admissions book and the admissions book for the wounded
4 because that's -- those are the books where you would find that kind of
5 data. I didn't ask for any other books until Mr. Roy told me what kind of
6 documentation he needed, and then once he did that, we started working on
7 the case as far as literature, administration, books and documents were
9 Q. We talked about the two admissions books. As far -- I think we
10 had in the beginning a difficulty but as far as I understand, the big book
11 was the general admission book for everybody in the hospital, and the
12 small book only about basically soldiers, war casualties or soldiers being
13 fallen sick; correct?
14 JUDGE HUNT: I'm not sure that that is --
15 A. Yes, you've understood that correctly. I'm sorry.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Let's get our books straight. This morning we had
17 two books there, the big book and the thin book, and the thin book was
18 those from the war zone. Some bright person thought of the title, the
19 doctor told us. Are those the two books you are talking about there?
20 MS. BAUER: Yes.
21 JUDGE HUNT: But it was a little bit broader than just people who
22 were soldiers, I thought he said.
23 MS. BAUER: Well, I think there was a reference to military
25 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, but not restricted to that.
1 MS. BAUER: Okay.
2 JUDGE HUNT: We'll go back and look it up if you are concerned
3 about it but he said, the doctor told us that somebody in the
4 administration thought up the title "war zone" for this thin book.
5 MS. BAUER: Well, then could the witness please be shown the
6 Exhibit 137.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I answer the question that you
8 asked me? What you said was right.
9 MS. BAUER:
10 Q. Well, exactly, that's the small book?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Now, do you have the copied pages of Prosecution Exhibit 135?
13 Yes, you have it. Now, if you would look at the last column. Apart from
14 one entry, will you agree with me that everybody seems to be from a TO,
15 from a military unit? I think the copied page is also in front of you.
16 It should be the same so ...
17 A. Yes. It's a little clearer to me here so I'll take it from that
18 there. You asked me whether it says Territorial Defence for most of them,
19 for the majority. Yes, or reservist. That would be the other term. And
20 for the last column, and that's what you were asking me about with the
21 patient Radoslav Jovicevic, born in 1963 in Ljubovija, the diagnosis is
22 [Latin phrase] which means both lower arms and the right side of the back
23 in the shoulder-blade region. The driver was Zavic Dragoljub from
24 Bratunac, a private vehicle being used as an ambulance. Admitted to
25 orthopaedics, it says here the Serb volunteers unit. Now what are you
1 interested in?
2 Q. No, actually, what I was interested in and basically you answered
3 my question, that most of these people written in this ledger were
4 somewhere militarily active, correct? So one could say they were
5 soldiers, whether they incurred an injury actively fighting or just being
6 sick is a different matter that's then in the diagnosis but they were
7 soldiers in the small ledgers, principally?
8 A. You have given the answer yourself. Let me add not just soldiers,
9 but military-age men, the conscripts. In the former Yugoslavia and in the
10 former Bosnia, military-aged men were all males up to the age of 65.
11 Q. And that would be also the reason why one of the persons that have
12 been informed when something happened to these people is the military
13 police would be informed; correct?
14 A. Yes, absolutely.
15 Q. Now, Doctor, do you recall you looked at the x-ray you were shown
16 this morning and you told us that you saw just one fracture because the
17 x-ray, according to you, didn't show more than that; correct?
18 A. Yes. Yes. Yes, you are correct.
19 Q. And you explained to us that such a spiral fracture could occur
20 from falling on to -- from a horse; right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. But it wasn't the horse's weight that, in reality, incurred the
23 fracture; correct?
24 A. [In English] No.
25 Q. Not correct?
1 A. No, it was not the horse's weight because first, he broke his leg
2 and then the horse leaned on him.
3 Q. So would you agree with me that if somebody would slip on a slope
4 and fall down on a hard surface, also such a fracture could occur?
5 A. Yes, absolutely. Your knowledge of medicine is quite good.
6 Q. Thank you. Now, doctor, you somehow admitted that basically many
7 of the records, including the x-rays, are not quite to the standard you
8 personally would expect, that there are mistakes and that x-rays are not
9 recorded correctly; is this right?
10 A. Yes. Unfortunately.
11 Q. And since the events or since these records have been moved
12 occasionally and nine years have been passing by since the events, would I
13 be correct that it could also be that they are not 100 per cent complete,
14 that simply things are missing?
15 A. Very often, some x-rays are missing, not only x-rays but also
16 findings of blood tests, findings following surgeries which are entered on
17 a separate form by anaethesiologists and not by us surgeons, that is the
18 beginning of the operation and the operation itself and the period
19 following the operation, the amount of blood given to the patient,
20 any other liquid solutions given to the patient during the surgery, the
21 amount of antibiotics given during the operation and all other medicines
22 that are administered to the patient during the operation. For example,
23 in cases of blood failure, special medicine is administered and so on and
24 so forth. So that kind of information is sometimes lacking and we have
25 the same problem in every aspect of the society, economy, and so on and so
2 Q. Thank you, doctor. I'd like to look at Defence Exhibit 32, the
3 operations log, please.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. If you could look, please, at the last column, "Remarks."
6 A. Yes, it's in front of me.
7 Q. Now if I ask you to look at the ordinal numbers 284, 285 and 286,
8 all got an operation which sort of led to an extension, or as we call
9 it here traction; correct?
10 A. Just a second, I am looking at this list but at random, I'm not
11 looking at any particular number. Do you want me to see the portion
12 concerning Vasiljevic's operation?
13 Q. Yes, and the one before, 284 ordinal number and the one 286, and
14 the question was whether you wouldn't agree that it was sort of the same
15 kind of operation was performed, namely, that these people were getting
16 traction or an extension applied to?
17 A. Just a second, let me find the page. Yes, I have the page in
18 front of me. 284, Mirjana Popovic from Ivanice [phoen], born in 1945,
19 female. It was not a surgery, properly speaking; it was an intervention.
20 However, that is also entered in the operations protocol. It is a rule
21 which we've had for I don't know how long. [Latin phrase] which means
22 that a bone traction is applied and it is from 2.58 millimetres -- up to 8
23 millimetres long and it is applied through the bone. The so-called bridle
24 is applied, which is usually 10 per cent of the patient's weight.
25 Q. I'm sorry to interrupt you. That is very interesting detail but
1 we don't need to be so detailed, I'm afraid. What I wanted to know is
2 that if you look at those, basically numbers 284, Popovic, Mirjana, 285
3 Mitar Vasiljevic, and 286, what I just want to know, if they had the same
4 kind of operation or measure applied to them. That was my question;
5 correct, extensio transulnaris [phoen]?
6 A. I do apologise for the digression, I'm not -- I won't do it
7 again. These three operations are the same except that in the third one,
8 we have extensio taloclorois [phoen], which is just an old term for the
9 same type of traction because the traction could not be performed through
10 the ankle because the damage would be even greater than the one caused by
11 the fracture. No traction is ever performed through the ankle bone, no.
12 Q. Well, and then you told us that basically the instrument nurse was
13 Dragana, correct, and I think that you've seen -- in column number 3,
14 right? And the plaster cast technician was a person called Milovan. Do
15 you remember having said this this morning?
16 A. Yes. Not Milan but Milovan, it's a man's name. And the name of
17 the lady here who was Dragana, Dragana Sopalovic. As for Milovan, I
18 cannot remember his surname. Dragana Sopalovic is a nurse and she is
19 currently working the protocol in our outpatient clinic, so I know who the
20 person is.
21 Q. But see, doctor, what I don't quite understand on this protocol,
22 and I'm going to be quite outright, you told me that all these three
23 operations were basically the same. Then it appears that in one, the
24 plaster cast technician, in two, plaster casts were applied and with Mitar
25 Vasiljevic's entry, the plaster cast technician wasn't there. So though
1 it was the same operation, how come although at one point the plaster cast
2 is there and only with Mitar Vasiljevic he wasn't there? Could you
3 explain that, please?
4 A. Of course I can. You misunderstood. When you apply traction, you
5 do not apply plaster cast. You apply plaster cast only sometime later on,
6 after two or three weeks' time, so you don't quite understand what we're
7 talking about. As for the plaster cast technician, it is a person, a
8 technician who is in charge of preparing the instruments needed for the
9 traction. One of such instruments is the Brownbeller's [phoen] machine,
10 where you put the leg on. He also prepares the stirrups and other
11 necessary instruments. The instrument nurse in this case was Dragana.
12 She's the one who would have brought the Kirschner pin and various types
13 of Kirschner pins and the surgeon is the one who selects the right type of
14 Kirschner pin to be applied, and all other medical material, bandages,
15 various other instruments all properly packed and sterilised. The
16 surgeon, meantime, gets ready. He has to clean up the area that is to be
17 operated, and then when the surgeon drills a hole, the technician is
18 holding the stirrups. It is a quite painful procedure. The location
19 itself is not very painful but it is the fracture that causes the pain.
20 The plaster cast technician is the technician in charge. He is
21 the one who does it, not the nurses.
22 Q. So how come then that if he is the technician to prepare the
23 traction and all three operations were the same, why is his name not
24 mentioned in column 13, if you look at it?
25 A. It's just an example of negligence. Milovan is not important.
1 Dragana is not even important as far as professional responsibility is
2 concerned. It is the surgeon who is the responsible one. The other staff
3 are replaceable.
4 Q. So you would agree that the record is again incomplete; right?
5 A. I wouldn't say that the record is incomplete. It's just that it
6 was not done with due diligence, if I can put it that way, in accordance
7 with customs prevalent in my country.
8 Q. Now, Doctor, let me ask you something else. Since you were from
9 Visegrad, I assume that during the war, you tried to keep updated with the
10 developments in Visegrad; correct?
11 A. Yes, that is quite right. That was my moral and professional
12 obligation. Moral as their fellow citizen, fellow resident, and a
13 professional one because I was one of the most senior surgeons at the
15 Q. Now, Doctor, did you hear in the summer of 1992 about the fire
16 which killed 65 Muslims? Did you hear about that through some means or
18 A. I heard about that after the arrest of Mitar Vasiljevic because up
19 until the end of July 1992, I was at the hospital and was subsequently
20 engaged in the military corps elsewhere for a while. And I also read
21 about it in the press, but after the arrest of Mitar Vasiljevic. But I
22 didn't much inquire about the incident neither with other citizens nor
23 with my family members.
24 Q. Now, to summarise, Doctor, is it correct that basically eight
25 years ago -- in 1992, you were first -- in 2000, I'm sorry, you were first
1 asked to recollect events from eight years ago, from 1992; correct?
2 A. Yes, yes, that was the first time by Mr. Domazet, that is the
3 Defence counsel, and then by Mr. Roy and his team.
4 Q. And in the meantime, in those eight years, I'm sure I'm correct
5 that you probably had thousands of patients that you treated and you saw
6 and you operated on, et cetera.
7 A. Yes, yes, that is absolutely correct. I had -- I operated on 712
8 wounded persons but as a surgeon, generally speaking, I have so far
9 performed over 2.100 operations, including the wounded.
10 Q. And at the time, wartimes, you also told us you were very, very
11 busy and you got a lot of patients from all over the country and the war
12 zone; correct?
13 A. Yes. Yes, because I was one of the surgeons who also performed
14 the so-called secondary operations, that is the reconstructions of
15 operations that had been performed earlier on in the war area. That is
16 the usual custom, anything that required a more complex surgical
17 intervention later on. I wrote three papers on that issue which have been
18 published in the mean time.
19 Q. And to summarise, I mean you don't have any independent
20 recollection of a single day eight, nine years ago, without relying on
21 records on the medical files?
22 A. You're right. Yes, you're quite right.
23 MS. BAUER: Thank you, Dr. Moljevic, I have no further questions
24 for you at this time.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Domazet.
1 MR. DOMAZET: Yes, Your Honour.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Madam Prosecutor.
3 Re-examined by Mr. Domazet: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Dr. Moljevic.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Just a few questions that have arisen from the cross-examination
7 by Ms. Bauer. In response to one of her questions as to whether this type
8 of wound can occur if a person slips on a slope and falls down on an even
9 surface, you stated that it was indeed possible. Now, I should like to
10 know whether that can cause a spiral type of fracture, and if so, how is
11 it that such a fracture is possible. Can this fracture be caused by any
12 fall or do other conditions have to be met for this type of injury to have
14 A. I see. Both Madam Prosecutor and yourself, you mentioned the case
15 of slipping. That immediately, in my mind, means a spiral type of
16 fracture, because I have many years of experience. A fall on even surface
17 without fracture, on flat surface, that causes simple fracture of an
18 ankle. However, with slipping, it is logical for the weight of the body
19 to be placed on the one side of the body, causing torsion, and between --
20 it is between the lower third and the mid-third of the lower leg that the
21 fracture would occur.
22 Slipping immediately brings into mind a spiral fracture; however,
23 you mentioned a fall on flat surface. If it is without slipping, that
24 type of fall would cause the fracture of an ankle. However, if there was
25 slipping as well, it would mean that the weight would be concentrated on
1 the mid-and lower third of the lower leg and that the pressure was applied
2 to that particular part of the lower leg, causing fracture.
3 Q. Would that be the case causing the so-called spiral fracture?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. One of the questions of Ms. Bauer was -- or rather concerned your
6 activities towards -- your treatment of Mr. Vasiljevic. Apart from the
7 17th of July, whether you did anything in particular with him. You
8 explained to us the system of rounds carried out every Monday where the
9 whole department is inspected and you also spoke about the system of
10 duties. My question in relation to that was whether you went to see him
11 outside these regular visits that you have spoken about that took place in
12 this period of time?
13 A. Yes, Mr. Domazet, I mentioned in response to a question by
14 Ms. Bauer that it was my moral obligation to pay more attention to my
15 fellow co-residents, so I went to visit other people from my area in
16 addition to Mr. Vasiljevic, to ask them whether they needed something,
17 cigarettes, cakes, and things like that. So that is what I did and I
18 believe that it was the right thing to do because it is much easier for a
19 patient when they -- when he or she saw me and not somebody else and they
20 were happy to see me outside my regular duties, perhaps happier than -- to
21 see other persons paying them visits.
22 Q. When you spoke about the system of duty shifts, you said that in
23 view of the number of the physicians, you were on duty every fifth or
24 every sixth day, every five or six days. The way I understand it is that
25 you were on duty the fifth or the sixth day and that you would be on duty
1 in the third shift, in the second and third shifts. Am I correct?
2 A. Yes. I can be even more precise. Just bear with me a little.
3 Dr. Milo Safljevic was never on duty because he was ill and then it was
4 Stojkovic and Vasiljevic and myself. We would be on duty every fifth day
5 and then sometimes on national holidays -- we had specialists for duties
6 on national holidays because that duty shift would be paid separately.
7 Q. The reason why I'm asking you was because the transcript read, "I
8 was on duty every five or six days" so I was afraid that there would be a
9 misunderstanding. However, you are telling us now that it was the special
10 type of duty, duty shift, but normally, you worked in the first shift as
11 all other physicians; am I correct?
12 A. Yes, yes, you're correct. We worked, of course, every day except
13 when it was my turn to be on duty, then I would be on duty 24 hours but
14 the next day would be a day off for me. However, in view of the general
15 situation and the great influx of the wounded in some periods of time,
16 most of us never used that day off because pursuant to an order of the
17 director of the hospital, the time off was regulated in a special way in
18 those days.
19 Q. Dr. Moljevic, Ms. Bauer asked you about the way the records were
20 kept and to what extent they were kept in a proper and adequate way, and
21 you were quite critical when you spoke about the way that job was
22 performed. I should like to know whether you have had cases of mix-up of
23 x-rays? Did you have errors of that kind like erroneous names, mismatches
24 and things like that? Were such errors possible as well? I'm referring
25 to the relevant times but also as general practice.
1 A. Well, to be quite frank, the problem didn't only concern those
2 days. We have the same problem today. Very often, the sides of the hip
3 x-rays are switched, but it is easy to deal with in cases of a different
4 gender of the patient, the different sex of the patient, but we do have
5 such problems. Because I would receive an x-ray per purported to be an
6 x-ray of a male patient and I could tell it from the x-ray that the
7 patient was female. Such problems are common not only in our country but
8 elsewhere in the world. I'm interested in these problems and I've read he
9 had about it on the Internet. Such incidents are relatively common
11 Q. Dr. Moljevic, did the way in which these records, these entries,
12 were made contribute to that when the x-rays were developed or do you have
13 an explanation of your own as to how these mistakes were possible?
14 A. Mr. Domazet, let me say again in one sentence, a great deal of
15 negligence and irresponsibility that prevails everywhere in the parts we
16 come from today and the impossibility of sanctioning such behaviour or a
17 lack of will to exert sanctions for things of that kind.
18 Q. Thank you. And that brings me to what I think will be my last
19 question. Ms. Bauer asked you whether your recollection of these
20 events, especially the day on which Mitar Vasiljevic was admitted, whether
21 you relied on the documentation and you say that you remember the date and
22 even the day of the week on the basis of that. But you also gave us other
23 data such as the visit to Dragan Filipovic which probably stems from your
24 memory; am I right?
25 A. Absolutely right, yes.
1 Q. Are you sure, Dr. Moljevic, that Mitar Vasiljevic was admitted the
2 same day as Filipovic Dragan was admitted, whom you mentioned and said you
3 had visited?
4 A. 100 per cent.
5 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Thank you, I have no further
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, too.
8 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you, Doctor, for coming along to give evidence
9 and for the evidence which you have given. You are now free to leave.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Judge Hunt.
11 [The witness withdrew]
12 JUDGE HUNT: You better be careful, doctor, she might take some of
13 your documents.
14 MS. KORNER: I should tell Your Honour, I was present when the
15 doctor was interviewed.
16 JUDGE HUNT: I knew that. You should have been here when he gave
17 us the description of it this morning.
18 Now, Mr. Domazet, let's see where we stand. You are concerned
19 about Dr. Stojkovic. He, of course, is the doctor whose name appears most
20 often on the records but do you think his evidence is really going
21 to add to what we've already got and, if so, how?
22 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Well, Your Honour, I do not think
23 that it -- we could get something new through his testimony. It is true
24 that he is one of the witnesses who -- one of the names who appears on the
25 discharge certificate with his own remarks and signature, and as the
1 Prosecution questions were always frequently directed towards whether
2 witnesses had written down something in person, I really did consider that
3 the witness was necessary and would have liked to have seen him here.
4 However, if we come to the conclusion that after all the testimony
5 we have heard to date, that is not necessary, although I personally would
6 have liked to have heard him, I could agree to not calling him and not
7 listening to his testimony.
8 JUDGE HUNT: I want to make it very clear though, Mr. Domazet, I'm
9 not suggesting that at all. I'm just curious to know whether you think
10 that he will add to the fund of evidence we've got. The last time I asked
11 the Prosecution about its case, they were still maintaining that your
12 client was never in the hospital.
13 Oh, yes, you were. If that is no longer the Prosecution case,
14 then let us hear you say it, Ms. Bauer. If you remember, I asked
15 Mr. Groome whether the only issue which remained was what time and day did
16 he get there and he said that the Prosecution was still relying upon the
17 evidence of Dr. de Grave it could not have been the same person. Now,
18 if that's changed, I wish we'd have known several week ago because we've
19 heard an awful lot of evidence which goes to demonstrate that he was in
20 the hospital.
21 MS. BAUER: Your Honour, you're correct, we still challenge that
22 he was there at that date.
23 JUDGE HUNT: No, that's not the question I put to you. Is it
24 still the Prosecution case that he was never in the hospital in June and
25 July 1992? If you don't want to answer it, I can understand the problem
1 that Mr. Groome is not here but it becomes important as to whether it is
2 necessary to call yet another doctor to say that they saw him there.
3 MS. BAUER: I wouldn't like to really jeopardize or preempt
4 Mr. Groome's assessment of the situation after he has heard the last few
5 witnesses, or read it.
6 JUDGE HUNT: When will Mr. Groome be returning?
7 MS. BAUER: I just was told today that I will return only on
8 Wednesday. I mean if Your Honours so wish, I could ring him up and
9 say whether he -- whether I can put on the record whether we uphold the
10 position that he was never there in June or July of 1992 or whether the
11 position has changed.
12 JUDGE HUNT: I think it might be a very good idea. I am not
13 making any prejudgment at all, but the only evidence that you have got to
14 demonstrate that he was never there is the evidence of Dr. de Grave. Now,
15 that has been, on the basis of the x-ray, could not have been of the same
16 person. And we've got a report, a rather sketchy one which the
17 Prosecution properly handed on, and then a more detailed one from the
18 Defence which I assume we're going to hear from the doctor but
19 nevertheless, there is at least an explanation put forward as to why the
20 x-rays taken this year would be unlikely to show an injury such as was
21 caused or said to have been caused to Mr. Vasiljevic and demonstrated by
22 that x-ray that's been handed around today.
23 I don't want to suggest that I have made up my mind one way or the
24 other, but it is no longer the clear-cut case.
25 MS. BAUER: May I just intercede one second? We have another
1 expert, actually, who is the third or fourth expert one way or the other.
2 He is the fourth expert, actually who, as far as I can say now, supports
3 the results of Dr. de Grave.
4 JUDGE HUNT: All right. Well that will produce an issue and no
5 doubt then I can guess what Mr. Groome's reaction will be, he will say it
6 is still part of the Prosecution case that Mr. Vasiljevic was never in
7 that hospital during June and July, and if that's so, well, then I'm
8 afraid we will have to see what's going to happen about Dr. Stojkovic.
9 Well, Mr. Domazet, when will Dr. Stojkovic be available? Last
10 time I asked you, you said he couldn't be here this week. And we are
11 sitting on Monday and Tuesday next week.
12 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] I think, Your Honour, I don't think
13 we're working on Tuesday because of the Milosevic case, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE HUNT: I told you that we definitely would be sitting on
15 Tuesday, that the security had accepted that we were so hidden from public
16 view here.
17 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I talked over the phone
18 with Dr. Stojkovic last night. He is unable to come this week or next
19 week and that's where the problem lies. So that if he were to give
20 testimony, that could only be the first day when we continue sitting.
21 JUDGE HUNT: And is he your last witness of this type? We've got
22 a psychiatrist to come yet and your expert radiologist, but is he the last
23 of the witnesses about the hospital?
24 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes, with respect to the hospital.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Now, when are we going to see your expert on the
2 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] For the x-ray expert, I haven't
3 received the Prosecution's viewpoint, whether they wish him to be heard.
4 If so, we will try when we can, but the problem with that expert witness
5 is when he will be given a visa because it was requested and my
6 information says that it was sent off to the Ministry but that it has not
7 come back to Belgrade yet, that is to say, guarantees for the visa and
8 that's the problem attending that particular witness.
9 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Domazet, you will probably be very tired of me
10 repeating this but this has been an issue in the case since early this
11 year - I thought it was the end of last year, but let's say it was early
12 this year - as to whether or not this x-ray supports or destroys your
13 case. Now, the efforts you have made to get an expert appear to have
14 started sometime last week or the week before and I am wondering whether
15 this is just sheer inattention or whether there's some plan to it. I
16 don't understand why it has been left so late. When was his visa sought?
17 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] The same day when the request was
18 made for the registrar to allow the expertise and time -- that same day
19 the request was made, and I can also tell you that unfortunately, another
20 expert witness, who is an elderly man, a retired professional, was to do
21 this but then said he couldn't. So I had to change my expert witness,
22 which led to the delay and the problems that arose. It should have been a
23 Mr. Radulovic, who was to have been the expert witness but he had some
24 problems. He's an elderly man. So I had to change my expert witness
25 and find somebody else who I have never met personally, and that is what
1 set me back. We had to find him in Belgrade and then go ahead with the
3 JUDGE HUNT: I'm not quite sure why you had to find him in
4 Belgrade but nonetheless, I suspect I see a reason for it. But whose
5 report have we got, your first expert or your second expert?
6 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] You mean the other one, yes, the
7 second one. The other one didn't do that, but Dr. Cedomir Vucetic.
8 JUDGE HUNT: I'm sorry, I haven't got it in front of me so I don't
9 know. The only report you've filed is that of your most recent
10 expert; is that right?
11 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, the orthopaedic report was
12 handed over before this, last week.
13 JUDGE HUNT: That's the one that deals with the x-rays.
14 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes, the report by the orthopaedist
15 relates to the -- an examination of the x-rays which the expert did look
16 at. Mr. Groome gave me copies, which I sent to Belgrade, and he looked at
17 the copies and he makes his findings, that is that testimony expert.
18 JUDGE HUNT: And now you're saying there's going to be another
19 x-ray expert to give evidence, is there?
20 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, no. I'm not sure we understood
21 each other, Your Honour. It's one and the same. The one that made his
22 report and findings, not another one.
23 JUDGE HUNT: Well, have you any idea when we're going to get him
25 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] As far as he himself is concerned,
1 he can come as soon as he receives his visa and the other travel
2 authorisations, but we have had very poor experience with the duration for
3 the visa. I had the problem that Mr. Tanaskovic, prior to this trial,
4 received his visa just one day prior to departure although it had been
5 requested for a month beforehand, so that visas are always a problem.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Well, let's just see what the Prosecution says now
7 formally about this last report we've received.
8 MS. BAUER: Your Honour, you mean now the x-ray report?
9 JUDGE HUNT: Yes.
10 MS. BAUER: We would like to cross-examine the expert.
11 JUDGE HUNT: Right. Well, then you have to bring him,
12 Mr. Domazet. What about your psychiatrist?
13 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] I handed over today the psychiatric
14 report, according to our agreement. I left a copy on Saturday evening for
15 Ms. Bauer and today officially handed it over to the Tribunal and I'm
16 waiting to hear from the Prosecution whether the -- they will be cross
17 examining the psychiatrist too.
18 JUDGE HUNT: Well, I can understand that you wouldn't have an
19 answer just yet, but --
20 MS. BAUER: Well, I'm fairly positive we will want to
22 JUDGE HUNT: All right. Very well. Well, when can she come?
23 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] As far as she is concerned, and as
24 far as the -- she's already been to The Hague so I don't think the visa is
25 the problem. All we have to do is find a slot for her here. She
1 personally, although she has devoted more than a week to this case, she
2 came to The Hague and then wrote her report, when I asked her, she asked
3 me, if possible, that she be not asked to come just now in the next few
4 days because she is teaching at university. She has her student courses.
5 So -- but I will contact her if it is a problem and try to see if the -- I
6 should like to hear from the Prosecution when they would like to have her
7 for the cross-examination and then I could ensure that she be here.
8 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Domazet, I don't think you quite realise where
9 we're at. You have run out of evidence. Now, I'm trying to work out how
10 to get your witnesses here. You are meant to call a witness tomorrow.
11 You don't have one here. So we've got to work out how we get them here.
12 It's not a question of when the Prosecution wants them here for
13 cross-examination, it's when you can get them here to give their
14 evidence. The Prosecution, provided they've been given sufficient
15 warning, just has to fit in.
16 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. So that was my
17 question. I was asking the Prosecution when it will be ready, and I will
18 try and have the expert witness here for that day in view of the time
19 table that the Prosecution had at its disposal. I didn't dare take on the
20 responsibility of bringing this expert witness now, in these few days,
21 because we've only just handed over the report, so I didn't know whether
22 the Prosecution would be ready.
23 MS. BAUER: Your Honour, I mean, we are just in the process of
24 identifying an expert that could at least take a look at the report and
25 conduct maybe an examination of the accused himself so until we have
1 hopefully identified them by tonight or tomorrow at the latest, I don't
2 think we are sort of ready before this person has read the report at least
3 to cross-examine.
4 JUDGE HUNT: I understand that but then this has been something I
5 have been badgering Mr. Domazet about for the last week, and you mean you
6 haven't yet even retained a psychiatrist.
7 MS. BAUER: We have contacted several psychiatrists but, in fact,
8 of that it would probably be preferable to have a native speaker. It
9 seems to be not that easy to get hold of one.
10 JUDGE HUNT: Well, then, do you think that we will be able to know
11 where we're going tomorrow morning?
12 MS. BAUER: I hope so.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Well, so do I.
14 MS. BAUER: I'm going to make the necessary inquiries but I only
15 can say I tried last week 100 times to call a name in Croatia and I never
16 got through so...
17 JUDGE HUNT: If I had been you, I am afraid I might have tried
18 somebody else if I had sat there 100 times, but anyway, it seems that the
19 parties here are taking a very relaxed view about the problems we have in
20 finishing this case, which leads me to this: Mr. Domazet, the Prosecution
21 has been slowly building up a case in reply. I don't know how many
22 witnesses will be involved, but the number of loose ends in this case
23 because you were not able to cross-examine the Prosecution witnesses have
24 grown exponentially during the course of the case. Can you see any
25 particular problem if we reserve the rest of your case and allow the
1 Prosecution to start calling its witnesses in reply?
2 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, would that mean that I
3 cannot present my evidence because in that case, I really couldn't accept
5 JUDGE HUNT: I'm sorry, I think you've misunderstood me. I said
6 if we reserve the rest of your case so that you can call it, and if
7 something arises in it, the Prosecution will probably still have to call
8 evidence in reply, but there are a number of factual issues which have
9 been raised in your case which were not put to the Prosecution witnesses,
10 and the Prosecution, as I understand it, is proposing to call evidence in
11 reply on those issues.
12 It will mean the evidence being called out of order to some
13 extent, but bearing in mind, if I may put it as kindly as I can see how,
14 this all results from your failure to be ready, I'm asking you whether you
15 see any particular problem in allowing the Prosecution to call some of its
16 factual witnesses in reply and you can call the remainder of your case
17 when we can finally get your witnesses here.
18 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, that is possible,
19 but I think I should be informed as to what the Prosecution intends to
20 prepare in its reply so that I, too, in my turn, can prepare. Otherwise,
21 I have nothing against if we would gain time that way.
22 JUDGE HUNT: That's certainly fair enough. I'm surprised that
23 they haven't given you anything yet. What's happening about the
24 Prosecution's case in reply, Ms. Bauer? I was told by Mr. Groome that it
25 would last a week, which rather horrified me but, nevertheless, that
1 assumes that you have a number of witnesses and I assume you have
3 MS. BAUER: Unfortunately, Mr. Groome didn't really identify me
4 about his sort of plans who were the people he intends to call. I have a
5 rough idea, but I really couldn't answer this, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE HUNT: You mean that Mr. Groome can't produce any statements
8 MS. BAUER: I mean I haven't seen personally one that I could
9 produce now so far.
10 JUDGE HUNT: The doctor this afternoon was talking about something
11 called blood pressure, and I'm afraid mine is rising. I do not understand
12 how if this has been going on for so long, the Prosecution hasn't been
13 prepared for it. What has been going on? I know Mr. Groome has got
14 himself involved in another case which seems to be his prime concern and
15 that we play very much a second fiddle, but I am getting, if I may say so,
16 a little irritated that we are being left so far behind when he knows the
17 real problems that we face.
18 If we do not finish this case in the first two weeks of next year,
19 then there will be grave problems about trials that have been fixed to
20 start because there simply aren't the courtrooms to run more than six
21 trials at once, and this will be the seventh.
22 Now, I think that we are entitled to know what is going on and I
23 realise that Mr. Groome isn't here and it's a personal matter, and we
24 don't wish to blame him for not being here at the moment, but that was
25 something which I understand arose very late last week and I would have
1 expected that there would be something on the way by way of statements so
2 they can be served on Mr. Domazet so he can be ready to cross-examine
4 So when you speak to him, I think you better get some details and
5 ask him in which drawer of his desk he has kept these statements from us,
6 and I suggest that when you have spoken to Mr. Groome, you contact
7 Mr. Domazet and put him in the picture as well so that tomorrow, we will
8 know a little bit better about where we're going.
9 Now, there is one other or two other matters I want to raise. I
10 don't know if it has ever been formally stated in court, Ms. Bauer, as to
11 the results of the testing that was done by the Prosecution on these
12 documents. They were given leave to test certain documents that were
13 seized. For example, I'd be interested to know whether document 137,
14 which was the thin book, the so-called war zone book, was one of those
15 which was tested. Do you know?
16 MS. BAUER: I think that's correct, both books were tested.
17 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, I'd like to have that properly confirmed in the
18 morning, and that the Prosecution is not able to challenge the genuineness
19 of the documents. I had always understood that 136, the very big book,
20 was the one being tested but perhaps you could tell us tomorrow whether
21 136 and 137 were the subject of those tests and the Prosecution is unable
22 to challenge their genuineness. That's one matter.
23 The other matter, Mr. Domazet, is for you. Your client was asked
24 when he was giving evidence why Dr. Jovicevic, I'm sorry, the doctor who
25 admitted or signed the document admitting your client, was not on the
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 witness list and he said words to this effect, he has to have some spinal
2 surgery and that we should ask you about it. We are asking you about it,
3 what is the position about that doctor?
4 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my information is that
5 he's on sick leave. He was to have had an operation on his spine. I
6 don't know whether he has had the operation yet, and it was only for these
7 health reasons that he personally wished to be exempt from coming here and
8 testifying. I can make inquiries if you consider that that witness's
9 testimony would be important if he would not be able to come here, perhaps
10 by videolink, but that was the only reason he gave me, his health. That
11 was why he asked not to be called as a witness, because he felt that a
12 sufficient number of the doctors from the hospital had already come to
13 testify. So that was the only reason.
14 JUDGE HUNT: I don't intend this in any way as a comment but you
15 do understand that whilst we have today's doctor saying he saw him at the
16 time, this particular doctor is the only one who actually signed something
17 to say that he saw him on that particular day, and if the case comes down
18 to an issue of not was he there but when did he get to the hospital,
19 obviously, this doctor's evidence is significant.
20 Now, it may be that a videolink would have to be dealt with next
21 year at this stage. We can't send anybody out within the next few days.
22 They do take some time to organise. But either that or if he's not going
23 to be called, we would need something more than either triple hearsay from
24 your client or double hearsay from you; in other words, some sort of a
25 medical report saying he's unable to travel. But it is, if I may say so,
1 an issue which could very well arise in the case because if your expert on
2 the x-rays casts some doubt upon Dr. de Grave's evidence which, on the
3 report we've got, it tends to do so, then the issue is going to be not
4 when he was in hospital but when did he get there as being the vital issue
5 in the case.
6 Whilst you bear no onus of proof, only you can produce the
7 evidence which will demonstrate the Prosecution case has failed. I
8 emphasise, I'm not suggesting you bear any onus of proof at all, but
9 it's just a question that the only person who can produce that evidence
10 would be you. That's a matter for you, it's how you deal with it, but it
11 is a matter that I suggest you should give some careful consideration to.
12 Where inferences can be drawn about failures to draw witnesses, and I'm
13 not saying that they are available here or not, that's something I haven't
14 really had to work out, but to meet any such inference, at the very least,
15 some sort of medical report would be vital.
16 All right. Well, now, tomorrow we are due to start at 9.00 in the
17 morning, I remind you, because we are sharing the courtroom with the
18 Appeals Chamber, I think, because of some terrible mix-up in the
19 registry. So we'll start at 9.00, and it doesn't look as if it's going to
20 be a very long day, but I think we'd better, having arranged 9.00, start
21 at 9.00. So we shall see you in the morning. We will adjourn now until
22 9.00 a.m.
23 ---Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4.03 p.m.
24 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 4th day of
25 December, 2001 at 9.00 a.m.