1 Monday, 29 January 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Judge Harhoff being absent, today we sit pursuant

7 to the provisions of Rule 15 bis.

8 Ms. Marcus, you are to continue and to be concluding soon, I hope.

9 MS. MARCUS: I'll do my best, Mr. President.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: And Mr. Tapuskovic?

11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we had to finish

12 because that was the close of working hours. The doctor had been examined

13 and to give his interpretation of certain documents, and my view is that

14 the doctor cannot act as an expert witness here and provide explanation as

15 to how this could or could not be assessed. This is something to be done

16 by an expert witness, as I see it. Therefore, the doctor cannot interpret

17 documents and everything else that is to be addressed by an expert

18 witness.

19 I remember that we began a discussion about paramedial right and

20 paramedial left, things like that, and I think this is something an expert

21 witness should do.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is your response to that, Ms. Marcus?

23 MS. MARCUS: Your Honours, the witness can be of assistance to the

24 Court in providing information based on his professional expertise. He

25 can assist the Chamber in deciding on the narrow issue which arose in

1 relation to sniping incident number 5. The exhibit in question was

2 originally put to the Court by the Defence and we are seeking merely to

3 ask the doctor to assist the court in explaining this document.

4 I would also like to point out that during the cross-examination

5 of a previous witness, a major general, the Defence put to that witness

6 numerous questions based on his professional training, his professional

7 knowledge of weaponry, rules of engagement, et cetera, and that witness,

8 without being certified as an expert witness, answered questions based on

9 his professional expertise in those areas. He was also asked to assess

10 certain situations in which he did not directly conduct an investigation

11 but he was in a -- he was -- due to his position and due to the fact that

12 those investigations were conducted by his subordinates, he provided his

13 professional opinion.

14 Dr. Nakas is no different, I would submit. As with the doctor who

15 testified earlier in this case, these hospital records are a mechanism to

16 officially tender material that would otherwise require the Prosecution to

17 call scores of medical professionals to speak to each record individually.

18 This is -- Dr. Nakas is a highly trained physician. His authority during

19 the relevant time included not only supervising all medical procedures in

20 operation of the state --

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: I don't think that's the point. I don't think

22 there's any question about his proficiency. The point, really, is that if

23 he's giving evidence that is expert evidence under the rules, there is a

24 particular procedure to be followed.

25 MS. MARCUS: Yes.

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: And there are certain procedural requirements,

2 and had you followed those requirements, you would have produced a report

3 by the doctor, given notice to the Defence so that they would have had

4 time to assess it and to determine their response to it.

5 I quite agree that he's able to give the evidence, but it is

6 evidence of an expert nature. Exceptionally I'm going to allow it, but if

7 the Defence requires time to determine their response to it, I believe

8 I'll be obliged to allow them the time. The doctor is here as a fact

9 witness. You didn't call him as an expert witness. And that's the point

10 which is being made by the Defence, and there is merit in it. And in

11 future you should follow the rules so that the Defence can have the

12 opportunity of determining their response to what is, in fact, expert

13 evidence.

14 Let me ask Mr. Tapuskovic. Mr. Tapuskovic, I find that there is

15 merit in your submission, but you may very well be in a position to

16 cross-examine the doctor on the basis of the preparation that you have

17 made. And this is my inquiry.

18 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, over the weekend

19 we discussed this problem that has arisen and we have taken certain

20 positions regarding this issue that has already been raised by the

21 Prosecution. But this is a matter of principle. The doctor put his

22 signature in order to verify the documents that had been prepared by other

23 physicians. We did not object to that. We merely think that, apart from

24 this case and the continuation of the examination, if it happens that this

25 will be the only case, and we could allow the Prosecution to finish their

1 examination about this particular incident, but if this happens with

2 dozens of other reports that the doctor has only verified and that he

3 would be examined by the Prosecution about those, then I truly believe

4 that this Chamber should take a position to allow at least this but to

5 restrict this to only this one document. His expert opinion should not be

6 sought about other documents. We are not denying that he has enough

7 professional expertise to answer these kinds of questions.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well, Mr. Tapuskovic. I understand what you

9 have said. In future, when you bring witnesses who are going to give

10 expert evidence, then you must follow the provisions of Rule 94 bis and

11 prepare a report, notify the other party, and time may be saved because

12 the other party may not wish to cross-examine the witness.

13 In this case, I am going to allow it because I have formed the

14 view that there is no prejudice to the Defence. The Defence is in a

15 position to cross-examine. It's for the Chamber to assess the weight of

16 the evidence given. We have to take into consideration all the facts,

17 including those mentioned by Mr. Tapuskovic, as to the weight to be

18 attached to the evidence of the doctor in these matters.

19 So proceed.

20 MS. MARCUS: Thank you, Mr. President, Your Honours.

21 WITNESS: BAKIR NAKAS [Resumed]

22 [Witness answered through interpreter]

23 Examination by Ms. Marcus: [Continued]

24 Q. Good morning, Dr. Nakas.

25 A. Good morning.

1 MS. MARCUS: May I please request the court officer kindly to pull

2 up Exhibit D19, 65 ter number 1484, page 12.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: We are waiting for it.

4 MS. MARCUS: Thank you.

5 Q. Doctor, on Thursday, during our last session, we were looking at

6 the surgical report for Dzenana Sokolovic. You had just informed the

7 Court that the liver is on the right side, and you were in the process of

8 describing for the Court a blast injury. I'd like to continue from there,

9 please, sir.

10 Doctor, could you please explain for the Court what would cause a

11 blast injury.

12 A. Depending on the velocity and the power of the projectile, when it

13 passes through the air and through certain tissues, they create certain

14 stream, and this augments the impact. This is the transferred power of

15 the projectile, which is being then transmitted through the tissue and

16 causes the impact on the surrounding tissue in this particular area.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.

18 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I am truly sorry that I have to

19 react again. This is not only medical science. We now have introduced

20 another science, and it's being sort of leading, and this is a completely

21 new science. This is not only medicine. Perhaps we should need to hear

22 the opinion of some other experts. I think this is something up to you,

23 Your Honours, to assess and judge.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Tapuskovic.

25 Ms. Marcus, what I'm going to require you to do is to lay a

1 foundation for this witness to give this kind of evidence. As far as I'm

2 aware, you have not laid any foundation which would suggest that this

3 witness has this kind of expertise. He is a doctor, but for several years

4 he's been working in an administrative capacity. What was the measure of

5 his medical expertise that would allow him to give this kind of evidence?

6 MS. MARCUS: Understood. Thank you, Mr. President.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: And if you don't succeed in laying this

8 foundation, I will not allow the witness to give this evidence.

9 MS. MARCUS: Understood.

10 Q. Dr. Nakas --

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute.

12 [Trial Chamber confers]

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please go ahead.

14 MS. MARCUS: Thank you.

15 Q. Dr. Nakas, are you familiar with medical documents such as the one

16 that you see before you?

17 A. I saw these documents during the preparations as well as all the

18 other documents offered for verification. This one is of a poorer quality

19 than the one that I had seen during the proofing.

20 Q. Dr. Nakas, on what would you base your familiarity with this kind

21 of a medical report?

22 A. Each medical history contains certain elements containing

23 interviews, objective findings by the physician regarding the patients;

24 and also, if we are dealing with patients who had undergone surgery, the

25 main surgeon is bound to compile a so-called surgery sheet describing the

1 course of the operation. Therefore, these kinds of documents were

2 available to me in my work with my surgeons when we were doing certain

3 analysis, all the effects of specific surgeries.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's not his familiarity with the document that

5 is at issue; it is his familiarity with the science that is the foundation

6 for the conclusion set out in the medical document. That's what I need to

7 be assured of.

8 MS. MARCUS: Yes.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: What experience did he have in these areas, the

10 questions of the impact of bullets, exit and entry wounds. What

11 experience does he have in those matters?

12 MS. MARCUS: Yes, understood.

13 Q. Dr. Nakas, you have -- you have explained your familiarity with

14 these documents. As a medical doctor, in your capacity in the hospital,

15 what would you -- would you have been in a position to use this

16 information; and if so, in what way would you have used it?

17 A. Yes, this kind of information was used for the purpose of

18 assessing the appropriateness of certain surgeries that were conducted or

19 performed on patients.

20 Q. And what would have been your role with regard to assessing these

21 kinds of documents and this kind of information?

22 A. Not so crucial as the role of the surgeon and the team who were

23 directly involved.

24 Q. On what do you base your knowledge that you've provided of the

25 surgical report and the contents therein?

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Does he have any practical experience in these

2 matters? Did he actually carry out any operations of this nature?

3 MS. MARCUS:

4 Q. Doctor, could you comment for the Court, please, on any practical

5 experience you have particularly with these kinds of injuries?

6 A. No, because I am not a surgeon. I am a specialist in infectious

7 diseases, not a surgeon who would perform operations.

8 [Trial Chamber confers]

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: I don't think he's capable of giving this

10 evidence.

11 MS. MARCUS: May I ask one follow-up question --

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

13 MS. MARCUS: Just one last one?

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

15 MS. MARCUS:

16 Q. Doctor, would it have required surgical training for a physician

17 to be able to understand a blast injury and explain it?

18 A. During my studies I passed an exam in general surgery and war

19 surgery and therefore I used this knowledge that I acquired in that

20 period. I also had an exam in forensics which also provides you with a

21 certain amount of knowledge in this area. But this is not my specific

22 area of expertise, no.

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: My ruling on this particular point is that this

25 witness does not have the required expertise to give this kind of

1 evidence. It is true that he would have been exposed by his studies to

2 matters of this kind. He indicated that in his studies he covered

3 forensic science and blast injuries. But he has no specialised knowledge

4 in this area to give this kind of expert evidence, and it is expert

5 evidence. The Prosecution must call a witness with the required expertise

6 to give this kind of evidence.

7 MS. MARCUS: Understood, Your Honours. I will move on.

8 Q. Doctor, what kind of information did the hospital gather from

9 patients throughout the indictment period with regard to each patient?

10 A. Each patient that had been referred to the hospital or came on

11 their own seeking medical assistance, in their contacts with the medical

12 staff, had an opportunity to provide information about their illness, how

13 they contracted it, when they contracted it and how; and if we had to deal

14 with injuries, they would provide information of how the injuries had been

15 sustained.

16 Q. Did you record whether the patient was a civilian or a soldier?

17 A. In this period, for the reasons of monitoring the morbidity, we

18 carried out certain statistical examination of patients and provided

19 statistical data. We divided the patients into two categories, the

20 civilians and members of the armed forces. However, in the records

21 themselves, we took due care when we dealt with members of the armed

22 forces to specify whether their condition was caused within the military

23 service or outside their military service.

24 Q. Could you just clarify that a little further? In other words,

25 what would be the difference in how you would record the information if

1 the soldier had been injured within active military service or outside of

2 that?

3 A. In most cases these records were kept by the medical corps in

4 order for them to monitor the medical condition of the members of the

5 armed forces. Our records, however, dealt very little with that aspect.

6 When they dealt with the patients in the emergency unit, we just specified

7 or recorded that the patient had been injured, and we recorded his or her

8 health condition.

9 Q. What was it in the rules of the hospital or the medical community

10 that required you to note down whether the patient was a civilian or

11 affiliated with the armed forces?

12 A. That was simply a sort of agreement that we had in the city of

13 Sarajevo to monitor the number of casualties and injuries sustained by

14 both the civilian population and the military population.

15 Q. If a family member, the wife or the child, of a soldier were to

16 come in as a patient, would they be listed down as a soldier or as a

17 civilian in the hospital records?

18 A. In most cases they were recorded as civilians.

19 Q. When you interviewed patients coming into the hospital, did you

20 learn about the incident in which they were injured?

21 A. In most cases the patient who came to the emergency ward, and when

22 they provided information about their condition, they also provided

23 information about how they had contracted the disease or sustained the

24 injury. These were the basic data provided for the medical term and

25 enable them to establish the diagnosis and decide which procedure to apply

1 in each particular case.

2 Q. Doctor, did you generally learn from patients or persons who came

3 with them to the hospital what the origin of fire was of their injury?

4 A. Most often the patients provided this information and they thought

5 it more important to tell us where and how it happened to them rather than

6 how they actually felt and what the wounds they had sustained. They were

7 more involved in providing information about how the injury was incurred

8 and where it had happened.

9 Q. Can you compare your ability to gather this information from

10 patients as it was before the war as compared with how it was in --

11 between August 1994 and November 1995?

12 A. Most certainly in peacetime the number of patients who used to

13 come to the hospital was almost negligible in terms of injuries, and those

14 injuries were nothing like those that had happened during the war years of

15 1994 and 1995.

16 The second difference was in the extent of burden on medical teams

17 who were understaffed and didn't have enough time to devote the best

18 attention to each patient by entering their details on records. They were

19 more focused on identifying the condition and treating their injuries and

20 other problems.

21 Q. Did you gather statistical information based on the records?

22 A. I already said that since 1992 and in 1994 and 1995 as well, we

23 relied mostly on the humanitarian aid, including medicines, medical

24 supplies, and fuel. The basic elements that we used to calculate the

25 quantities of medicine, bandages, sutures and other supplies were those

1 acquired on the number of people that had been treated in a certain period

2 of time. Therefore, we kept daily records, weekly records, and monthly

3 records.

4 Q. And did these statistics include the type of injury sustained?

5 A. In certain cases this statistical data, if we were required to

6 provide them, had those characteristics as well. For a certain period of

7 time we were required to provide information about the number of

8 amputations carried out on patients in order to know the number of people

9 for whom certain material had to be prepared, for prosthetic procedures

10 and for alleviating their conditions. The same applies to the injuries

11 sustained by shelling.

12 Q. Did your statistical numbers include numbers of civilians as

13 compared with number of soldiers treated in your facility?

14 A. All of our statistics distinguished between civilians and

15 soldiers.

16 Q. And if a soldier had been injured on a weekend, when not on active

17 duty, not in uniform, unarmed, would that soldier be listed as a civilian

18 or as a soldier in your hospital records?

19 A. As a soldier.

20 Q. What percentage would you say, approximately, of the soldiers you

21 treated were wounded when off duty?

22 A. Although we didn't keep any precise records, I would say that

23 about a third of the soldiers had sustained injuries off duty.

24 Q. Can you describe for the Court the kinds of injuries suffered by

25 the civilians whom you treated in the period between August 1994 and

1 November 1995?

2 A. For the most part the injuries were a result of shelling or

3 shrapnel. Sometimes they were caused by bullets or by sniping. As far as

4 the files that I've looked at, I can say a lot of the patients would come

5 in with mental disturbances caused by the shelling, firing, and everything

6 else that went on in Sarajevo back in 1994 and 1995. The number of those

7 who came calling with some form of mental disturbance was very often

8 greater than those who came in with various wounds and injuries.

9 Q. Dr. Nakas, you provided for the Prosecution a statistical chart of

10 sniping victims treated in your hospital between August 1994 and November

11 1995; is that correct?

12 A. Yes.

13 MS. MARCUS: May I request the court officer to put up on the

14 monitor this chart: It is 65 ter number 2877, page 3, please.

15 Q. Dr. Nakas, can you please describe for the Court what this

16 document is that we're looking at.

17 A. There are two documents. The one on the right, on my right --

18 well, it's just one document now. These are two tables, spreadsheets,

19 containing information about people who suffered sniping injuries and who

20 were admitted to the Sarajevo General Hospital. One is in relation to

21 August 1994 and the other, the general number of people who suffered

22 sniping injuries in January and December 1995.

23 Q. Who prepared this document?

24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the witness, please.

25 MS. MARCUS:

1 Q. Doctor, could you please --

2 MS. MARCUS: Now my microphone is off.

3 Q. Doctor, I'm sorry, could you please repeat the answer to the

4 question of who prepared this document.

5 A. I prepared this document.

6 Q. Where did you prepare the document, sir?

7 A. I prepared this in my office in the General Hospital just before I

8 came to the Tribunal.

9 Q. What documents did you use to prepare this report?

10 A. To prepare this report, I went through all the protocols of the

11 emergency unit.

12 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the witness, please.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] October 1995.

14 MS. MARCUS:

15 Q. I'm sorry to ask you, Doctor, to please repeat the answer to that

16 question - the microphone went off in between - explaining what documents

17 you used to prepare this report.

18 A. To prepare this report, I used protocols of the emergency centre

19 that were kept between August 1994 and October 1995. There were six or

20 seven of those with records on all patients admitted to the emergency

21 centre.

22 Q. Doctor, can you confirm that this report is a true and accurate

23 reflection of those monthly reports?

24 A. This, in essence, is a true reflection of the daily examinations

25 conducted on patients who were admitted and recorded in the protocols each

1 day between August 1994 and October 1995. These were called on a daily

2 basis and arrive in the emergency centre, the patients.

3 Q. Are these the complete number of victims of sniper injuries

4 treated in a State Hospital between those dates of August 1994 through

5 October 1995?

6 A. This is a list of all the wounded of Sarajevo who claimed they had

7 been wounded by sniping. The doctors would establish that, and then this

8 particular piece of information would be added to a patient's file.

9 Q. Just for clarification, Doctor, this chart does not include any

10 sniping victims treated in any other of the medical facilities in

11 Sarajevo; is that correct?

12 A. That is absolutely correct. The number includes those who were

13 treated in the General Hospital or the State Hospital of Sarajevo alone.

14 It is possible that a rather small number of these patients had been sent

15 over from the emergency unit where they had first been seen to and then

16 sent on to our hospital. So this number does not include those who were

17 treated in health clinics or the University Medical Centre.

18 Q. In total, between August 1994 and October 1995, how many

19 civilians, adults and children together, did you treat for wounds due to

20 sniping?

21 A. The total overall this time would be 115 cases; 74 of these were

22 civilian casualties, eight of which were children.

23 MS. MARCUS: I'd like to tender this chart into evidence.

24 [Trial Chamber confers]

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it will be admitted.

1 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P108, Your Honours.

2 MS. MARCUS:

3 Q. Doctor, can you estimate approximately what percentage of the

4 total number of patients you treated during the time period between August

5 1994 and November 1995 were civilian victims of sniping and shelling,

6 please?

7 A. If you look at the total of those treated throughout that time,

8 about 10 per cent of them were sniping casualties and about 90 per cent

9 were shelling casualties.

10 Q. Did the number of civilian casualties of sniping and shelling

11 fluctuate in this period?

12 A. Yes, it did. There were certain months and days when the number

13 was smaller and months and days when the number was considerably larger.

14 Q. To what do you attribute this fluctuation?

15 A. Fluctuation was normally influenced by increased movement of

16 citizens across Sarajevo or by increased shelling and such injuries as

17 were normally caused by a new round of shelling.

18 Q. You have seen the schedule of incidents to the indictment which

19 the Prosecution seeks to prove as examples of the sniping and shelling

20 campaign; is that correct, Doctor?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Do you recall any of these incidents based on your work in the

23 hospital?

24 A. We had already got used to greater numbers of injured civilians

25 being admitted throughout 1993 and 1994. So the 1994 and 1995 period

1 wouldn't be marked any particular way; only the figure was beyond

2 something we had expected. What I remember most of all was the Markale

3 shelling on the 28th of August 1995, and that's when the hospital really

4 stepped in.

5 Q. Can you tell us what you remember about that incident, please.

6 A. I remember the circumstances that preceded this incident. It was

7 a rather peaceful day when suddenly one could hear the sound of sirens,

8 mostly car sirens and not ambulances. I had a conference with some

9 colleagues and people were saying things like, Maybe someone is getting

10 married. However, the original concerns were confirmed when the first

11 injured persons started streaming into the hospital. I still remember the

12 moment clearly, because I stopped the meeting, and along with a small

13 number of other people who were at the emergency centre at the time - a

14 small number because we had not expected to have more injured persons

15 coming in than usual - we admitted the first wounded. We carried out some

16 sort of a triage and we called on some people who were outside the

17 hospital at the time to come in and give us a hand, since at this point we

18 were beginning to expect more casualties coming in on that particular day

19 than was usual.

20 Q. Do you recall, Doctor, if the injured were civilians or soldiers?

21 A. What I do remember is that most of those people were wearing

22 civilian clothes. Given the location of the incident, one thing is

23 certain: There was no fighting going on there. And if any soldiers just

24 happened to be there, they were there for the market, to buy their

25 groceries, and not for any other reason; meaning nearly 100 per cent of

1 the casualties that we treated on that day were civilian casualties.

2 Q. Are there any other incidents on the list that you remember

3 personally from your own experience, Doctor?

4 A. There was another similar incident in June 1995, the time the

5 radio-television centre was hit by an air bomb. A number of those injured

6 during that particular incident received medical assistance in our

7 hospital. I met a number of those people later on. I talked to them.

8 Q. Was this incident different in any way from other shelling

9 incidents?

10 A. Yes, in a way. In addition to the fact that there were injuries

11 caused by shrapnel or bits of the building falling off, there were also

12 those who had suffered the so-called blast syndrome. Everyone knows what

13 that looks like and one doesn't need to be an expert in any medical field

14 to recognise and identify the effect of a blast shock on a patient.

15 Q. Can you describe, in your opinion, what the blast shock looks

16 like.

17 A. As I pointed out already, when there is a powerful explosion,

18 there is air turbulence, so this impact caused by the turbulence is much

19 greater when an air bomb goes off. Those in the vicinity of the explosion

20 suffer injuries to internal organs in which there is air - the lungs, the

21 stomach, the middle ear. There is increased air pressure and there can be

22 ruptures caused to certain tissues in those cavities. One thing that must

23 be noted is that very often this is not easy to spot externally. It is

24 not necessarily accompanied by shrapnel wounds bleeding or anything like

25 that.

1 Q. Doctor, you have much experience treating both wounded soldiers as

2 well as wounded civilians. Based on this experience, what would you say

3 was the impact of the shelling and the sniping in Sarajevo between August

4 1994 and November 1995?

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: What do you mean by the impact of the shelling

6 and the sniping? That's at a fairly general level.

7 MS. MARCUS: Yes.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: What kind of impact are you referring to?

9 MS. MARCUS: I was referring to his observation, based on the

10 patients who came in, the impact on the civilian population who were

11 treated in his facility.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, let's hear from the doctor.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Generally speaking, in addition to

14 the immediate impact, meaning the injuries caused by firearms, there were

15 other kinds of impact on the mental state of patients, whether they were

16 injured or not. There was a possibility every day that you might be

17 killed or wounded, and this certainly had mental ramifications,

18 psychological ramifications, and this applied to children and adults in

19 equal measure.

20 MS. MARCUS:

21 Q. Doctor, do you have any personal lasting effects of the war on

22 yourself that you can tell the Court about?

23 A. In my capacity as hospital administrator, I have knowledge of

24 certain experiences of what occurred over the past years. Had it not been

25 for all of that, Abdulah Nakas and Dr. Sehovic, one of our two famous war

1 surgeons, would still be alive; they would not have died at age 60 or

2 thereabouts. Another very able anesthesiologist would not have died aged

3 under 65 or thereabouts.

4 What affected me personally --

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: The question that you were asked was whether you

6 had any personal lasting effects of the war, effect on yourself. Could

7 you address that?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I may not even be aware of the

9 consequences that I have suffered yet. However, I read this book by

10 Professor Richard Mollica who is the head of the war trauma institute at

11 the Harvard Institute in Boston. It's called, "Healing Invisible Wounds,"

12 and my war story is right there, my own trauma. He, as a psychiatrist,

13 believes that I must have suffered some sort of a war trauma, although I

14 may not have been aware of it. It may have been my reaction to that

15 trauma that preserved me from its potentially negative effect. I used

16 whatever energy I had at the time, whatever energy I would muster up, to

17 help other people.

18 MS. MARCUS: No further questions, Your Honours.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Ms. Marcus.

20 Mr. Tapuskovic.

21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if I could have the

22 lectern, please. Thank you.

23 Your Honours, I will not be wasting any time with this. There is

24 this letter that I'll be tendering later on. I would like to use this

25 opportunity to tell you, I mentioned that I'll be seeking your

1 intervention for the state of Bosnia-Herzegovina to meet certain

2 conditions. I can tell you that -- well, it's in progress. I'll probably

3 be getting the documents on the 2nd of February. My investigators will

4 take delivery. On the 5th of February, my investigators will be able to

5 go through the archives of the Supreme Command of the BH army. So for the

6 time being, I'll not be submitting that motion or, indeed, burdening the

7 Chamber with that.

8 Cross-examination by Mr. Tapuskovic:

9 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Nakas, I am Defence counsel for Mr. Dragomir

10 Milosevic, Branislav Tapuskovic, attorney-at-law from Belgrade.

11 You have provided a number of statements, quite a number, and they

12 were all tendered under Rule 65 ter. I will be using no more than three

13 of those, although there must be a total of seven or eight. The one dated

14 the 10th to 12th of November, 1995, which is the first statement that you

15 gave in November 1995. The next thing is a statement taken by the

16 Prosecution in September, and finally, the one dated the 16th of January,

17 1997.

18 Before I start with these, I, of course, will not be asking for

19 any explanations regarding what the Prosecutor wanted to know about -- but

20 if you could please briefly explain what the median axis is. It's

21 something that goes down the central axis of the human body. It's an axis

22 that divides the human body into equal halves. Is that right?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. A moment ago you said that casualties would come in. They always

25 knew where they had been hit from and they would tell you; is that right?

1 Not you personally, the doctors there. Yes, please, if you could comment.

2 A. Yes. The first impressions upon arriving at the emergency centre

3 would be about being hit --

4 Q. And where they were hit from?

5 A. Yes, there would normally be assumptions.

6 Q. Given the state they were in, they were still able to say that?

7 A. Yes, in as far as they were aware of it, them or the people

8 accompanying them to the hospital.

9 Q. Thank you very much. A while ago you spoke about the so-called

10 blast syndrome, which is something that I'm aware of as far as bombs are

11 concerned. But you started talking about the blast syndrome also in

12 relation to -- the Prosecutor asked you in relation to sniping. Can there

13 be any such thing as a blast syndrome when talking about sniping? Because

14 there's no air impact.

15 A. It may have been a misinterpretation. It was not about the blast

16 syndrome --

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let me hear Ms. Marcus.

18 MS. MARCUS: It appears to me that learned counsel is attempting

19 to ask the same kinds of questions of the Doctor that he objected to the

20 Prosecution putting, based on his expertise.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: When you carried on your examination-in-chief, I

22 did allow him to give fairly general evidence about the blast but not

23 anything which would require specialised knowledge. And I believe this

24 question is at that level.

25 Mr. Tapuskovic, you must remember that I did not allow the witness

1 to give evidence which, in my view, required specialised knowledge in

2 relation to the blast syndrome, and that resulted from the submission that

3 you made which I upheld. I'll allow you to ask this question and any

4 other question which is at a very general level, which does not require

5 specialised knowledge. This kind of question, I think, falls into that

6 category, so let us hear the answer.

7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I agree, Your Honour. If my

8 learned colleague, the Prosecutor, had asked the question as she had done

9 just now, I wouldn't have objected. However, I do appreciate your

10 intervention and I may withdraw the question.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let's move on.

12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. I will start with what my learned colleague finished off.

14 Mr. Nakas, your statement given between the 10th and 12th of

15 November, 1995, and the table that is contained therein --

16 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] And I would like this document,

17 65 ter number 02839 be placed in front of the witness, and we will first

18 go to page 5, paragraph 1 of the English version, and page 4, paragraph 2

19 from the bottom in the B/C/S version.

20 Q. Do you see that?

21 A. No, I don't. Not yet.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: We are waiting for it.

23 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The English version, for

24 Mr. Nakas, could we please have page 4, second paragraph from the bottom,

25 and for Their Honours, page 5, paragraph 1, please.

1 Q. It begins with "The year of 1994 ..." Can you see that?

2 Paragraph 2 from the bottom, Mr. Nakas, can you see it?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Is it true what it reads here: "The year of 1994 was better than

5 the others," and then you go on to say: "In the first half of the year,

6 the number of patients was only 431 as compared with 1996."

7 First of all, is this correct? Can you tell me?

8 A. Compared to the previous years, 1992 and 1993, in absolute terms

9 and according to the statistics, there were fewer injured people in 1994

10 than in the previous years. It is obvious that in 1992 there were 2.400

11 and in the next year there were 3.411, and in 1994 it was a considerably

12 lower number.

13 Q. Thank you. Can we look at the next passage, please. Maybe it's

14 not necessary for me to read it out to you. Just look at what it says in

15 the last sentence, which says: "Only those who were wounded or who had an

16 acute problem which affected their life would be admitted. All others we

17 did not admit." Is that correct?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Since the beginning of the war until the beginning of this month,

20 so you are talking about this in November 1995, when the war was still

21 going on, you said that you had treated 8.000 patients, and until the end

22 of October it can be broken down as follows, and then you list the table.

23 Is everything that I read correct?

24 A. I don't know what you mean.

25 Q. What I just read to you.

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. The next question: Neither here nor anywhere else you spoke

3 nothing about the number of the people wounded, but you never mentioned

4 sniping. How is it possible that all those people in 1994 had been

5 wounded by sniping?

6 A. My statement refers primarily to the years of 1992 and 1993

7 because that was the subject of investigation. These were just the

8 comments about the general state of affairs without going into details as

9 to what kind of injuries were sustained. And in that context, maybe the

10 number is not as relevant as the nature of what had been going on. In

11 other words, in the interview I was not asked to separate the number of

12 casualties caused by sniping or shelling, and in this particular case this

13 was asked of me.

14 Q. If I understand you correctly - I would like to be mistaken - you

15 said that the Prosecutor asked you about the people who suffered injuries

16 in 1994 and 1995, between August 1994 and November 1995, when you made

17 this statement, and you said that they were all victims of sniping. Is

18 that what you said just now?

19 A. No, I didn't say that they were all sniper victims. It was just a

20 table extracting the number of people who were sniper victims.

21 Q. So all these 607 in 1994 and 668 in 1995 were sniper victims?

22 A. You didn't get it right. The total number that you just

23 mentioned, there were 115 of them and they were included in the table made

24 in January. Absolutely in my first statement there was no question asked

25 of me about that.

1 Q. Thank you. Now I understand, but I am entitled to comment on

2 this. If you said that by mid-1994 there were 431 casualties in 1994 -

3 I'm not good at figures - you say here that there was a total of 670 in

4 1994. If, as you said, there were 431 victims in the first half of the

5 year, if we deduce this number from the figure stated here, it seems that

6 between -- from August onwards, there were 176 victims. Now I'm talking

7 about the year 1995. Am I right?

8 A. If your arithmetic is correct.

9 Q. Does this figure of 176 include those wounded in Markale?

10 A. I'm only talking about 1994.

11 Q. Very well. Let's go for a moment to 1995.

12 A. Yes, you're right.

13 Q. Does this figure of 668 include all the victims at Markale,

14 80-something?

15 A. No. It only includes the people who came to the hospital. This

16 is not the number of victims in Markale; only the people who came to see

17 me from Markale.

18 Q. Now, if we compare the years 1994 and 1995, the total figures for

19 these years, with the previous period, don't you find that there is an

20 amazing difference in numbers?

21 A. Yes, in total numbers, but not in the nature of wounds.

22 Q. In 1995, was the number of casualties affected to a great extent

23 by the offensive, an all-out offensive, carried out by the BH army

24 throughout the summer of 1995?

25 A. Partly. A number of injured members of armed forces are included

1 in this number.

2 Q. Another question in this respect. If this offensive had an impact

3 on this, how is it possible that the number of civilians who were

4 casualties in 1995 was greater than the number of soldiers wounded in that

5 same year? It says here 388 civilians and 280 troops. How is it possible

6 that more civilians were killed in an offensive than soldiers?

7 A. They were not killed.

8 Q. I apologise.

9 A. Secondly, this is not the total number, this was just the number

10 that refers to the State Hospital in Sarajevo which accounts for only

11 one-tenth of all the capacities, which means that nine times this number

12 were taken care of in other institutions.

13 Q. This is your report, and if we receive some other report, I am

14 going to deal with this. I would like you to explain to me this huge

15 difference between the number of killed soldiers, wounded soldiers, and

16 wounded civilians.

17 A. To tell you the truth, this is the number of wounded taken care of

18 in our hospital. What is the number taken care of by other hospitals I

19 cannot really say.

20 Q. I have -- I think that I sought enough explanation regarding the

21 figures. And then you go on to say: "It should be noted that the

22 military totals include people who are soldiers but were injured as

23 civilians, for example, while shopping, et cetera." Is that correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. You want to say that while these things were happening in the city

1 of Sarajevo, the soldiers walked around in civilian clothes and unarmed.

2 A. Concerning carrying the arms, specifically automatic weapons,

3 could not be seen frequently in Sarajevo. The only weapon that the armed

4 forces carried were small arms, and nobody took an automatic gun to a

5 market.

6 Q. And they could walk around without any arms?

7 A. Absolutely.

8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I wanted to avoid using a map

9 because it takes up a lot of time, but if I can please be helped in having

10 map number D222.

11 THE REGISTRAR: I'm sorry, could I have the document ID number,

12 please.

13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] This is up to my associates to

14 provide this. D22 has been tendered as a Defence Exhibit. It's DD000261.

15 My apologies to Your Honours.

16 JUDGE MINDUA: This one?

17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: Yes.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Judge Mindua has it. Why don't you have it?

19 With apologies to Milton, they also [Realtime transcript read in

20 error "only"] serve those who sit and wait. Have you found the map?

21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

22 Q. You have shown us last time, Dr. Nakas, where your hospital is.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And you also mentioned the hospital at Kosevo.

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. You also mentioned First State Clinic. Can you show me, please,

2 where the Jezero Hospital is?

3 A. [Indicates]

4 Q. And can you please mark it.

5 A. [Marks]

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just to ensure that you have what I said

7 correctly, it is "they also serve" not "they only serve."

8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. Have you shown it?

10 A. Yes, yes.

11 Q. Can you please mark it with the letter J?

12 A. Yes. [Marks].

13 Q. If we are talking about the confrontation or demarcation line

14 between the warring parties, this hospital is very close to it.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. At that time was that a hospital or did it have some other

17 purpose?

18 A. What time? You mean in 1994? In 1994 it was an abandoned

19 hospital, in 1992, after the first shelling.

20 Q. Were there any military or police units in this hospital?

21 A. I don't know about that.

22 Q. What about the Bethania Hospital? Was that a maternity ward?

23 A. No, that was another facility, the construction of which started

24 back in 1976 and it is far away from the Jezero Hospital, towards Vogosca.

25 Q. Can you please show it.

1 A. In this direction.

2 Q. Was it within the area of responsibility of BH army?

3 A. I think that was the area of demarcation line and they are not

4 quite acquainted with this.

5 Q. BH army?

6 A. As far as I can remember, it was under the control of our forces.

7 Q. Were there any police or military troops there?

8 A. I don't know that. It was a facility under construction, and it

9 just had concrete walls and foundations, and it's still in the same state.

10 Q. Can you mark it with B.

11 A. I'm not sure where it is exactly located.

12 Q. All right, Doctor, it's not of such importance. The hospital on

13 Skerliceva Street, I think that was a children's hospital in peacetime.

14 A. There was only an out-patient children's clinic on Skerliceva

15 Street that was never a hospital.

16 Q. Can you please show it.

17 A. It is approximately here.

18 Q. Just approximately. It's not crucially important. Perhaps where

19 you have this little cross.

20 A. You have Mejtas, you have a big park here. This is the Skerliceva

21 Street, and that was an out-patient clinic.

22 Q. What did it do during the conflict?

23 A. It was still a children's hospital.

24 Q. Was it ever targeted?

25 A. I think it was targeted a few times but it was not directly in the

1 line of fire because it's surrounded by buildings.

2 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: It's impossible to

3 translate this overlapping conversation.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic and Doctor, the interpreters are

5 finding it difficult to follow you. You speak the same language, so

6 observe a pause between question and answer, in the interests of the

7 interpretation.

8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. I don't see that it's displayed, Doctor.

10 A. It's right here, the letter D.

11 Q. Can we agree that this is in the center of Sarajevo?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. There was another hospital, the hospital for lung diseases. I

14 think it was called Potrastovina [phoen].

15 A. Indeed.

16 Q. Whereabouts was it, exactly?

17 A. It's right next to the confrontation line between the army of

18 Republika Srpska and the BH army. No, it's a lot further from -- then my

19 own hospital.

20 Q. From the confrontation line?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. What was there during the war?

23 A. Patients and doctors.

24 Q. Do you know if people were at risk in that hospital?

25 A. Yes, as much as anyone else in Sarajevo.

1 Q. Oh, that's what you mean. Fine, thank you.

2 Are you aware of the two hospitals that were on the Republika

3 Srpska army side, "Ernest Grin"?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. It was emptied --

6 A. Abandoned. There was no one there.

7 Q. No one there for safety reasons, for the sake of the patients'

8 safety. And the same applies to the mental hospital near Jagomir, that

9 had been emptied, too?

10 A. Yes, back in 1992.

11 Q. Thank you. The hospital of which you were later director --

12 before that, you used to be a JNA hospital; right?

13 A. Yes, it was a JNA hospital, the third in terms of importance

14 throughout the former Yugoslavia.

15 Q. At your time there, after the JNA had withdrawn, in that same

16 hospital compound there was a clinic used by the garrison, a clinic used

17 to treat military personnel exclusively. Was this clinic used for

18 military purposes during the war, or was there a military unit that was

19 stationed there?

20 A. No, that was the rehabilitation centre. I mentioned that when

21 asked if there were any military facilities within the State Hospital

22 perimeter. I pointed out that there was a building that was mobilised for

23 the rehabilitation of soldiers, members of the armed forces.

24 Q. There was probably some military security around the building.

25 A. No, just some police guarding the perimeter, the Marin Dvor police

1 station reservists.

2 Q. They were armed?

3 A. No, the policemen were not carrying any weapons.

4 Q. Can you please say, what about within the perimeter of the Kosevo

5 Hospital? Was the 105th Mountain Brigade not there, with its forward

6 command post right there at the Kosevo hospital, in an unfinished

7 building? I found that in an order of the commander of the 12th Division,

8 which I will be tendering. Do you remember the command post of that

9 brigade being there?

10 A. First I hear of it.

11 Q. Thank you. Can you say in relation to your own hospital, at a

12 mere 200 metres from you, in peacetime there used to be the Zagreb Hotel.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. The Zagreb Hotel during the fighting was full of policemen going

15 about certain duties that they had, which very often involved the BH army;

16 right?

17 A. Maybe. This is something you know. I know it was an abandoned

18 facility. I don't know who was there, reservists, policemen, it's

19 certainly possible. But this was certainly not a military target, if

20 that's what you're implying.

21 Q. There were special units stationed there.

22 A. This is not something that I know of.

23 Q. Thank you.

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think this is our

25 usual time for our first morning break. Do you think I should press on

1 or ...

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: No, we'll take the break now and we'll break for

3 20 minutes.

4 --- Recess taken at 10.25 a.m.

5 --- On resuming at 10.46 a.m.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, as much as I don't like being a

7 timekeeper, I must inform you that the examination-in-chief was roughly

8 two hours. You have utilised roughly half an hour. You will have another

9 hour and a half. You do not have to use that time, of course. You're not

10 obliged to use it. Your questions must be relevant and to the point.

11 Proceed.

12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours --

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: I see the accused is not present.

14 [The accused entered court]

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Proceed. The accused is now here.

16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I realise that

18 there are some problems with the map. I'm not planning on dwelling on the

19 map, so if it could please be assigned a number the way it is now, and

20 then I will be requesting another map.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, let that be done.

22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Can have I the UNPROFOR map,

23 please; 65 ter number 02829, if that could be brought up, please.

24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, if I understand correctly, they seek

25 to tender map document ID DD000261 as well as the map as it was marked by

1 the witness. Is that correct?

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Would you confirm that, Mr. Tapuskovic?

3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

4 THE REGISTRAR: In that case, Your Honours, the map as marked by

5 the witness will become Exhibit D27 and the map itself will become Exhibit

6 D28.

7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Could I perhaps use this

8 opportunity to tender that letter as well, the one that I forgot about

9 when we were examining Mr. Nicolai. It's the letter that I had no English

10 translation of at the time, DD000286 and DD000261. I've just made another

11 mistake, Your Honours. I'll be tendering that a little later because I

12 just made another mistake when I wrote down the numbers. I would like to

13 forge ahead with my questions, since I see the map. It's right there.

14 Q. No need for you to mark anything, Doctor, but one thing I would

15 like to, at a distance of 200 metres from the hospital of which you were

16 general manager, was there not the old hospital building, the building of

17 the so-called old hospital?

18 A. It was perhaps several dozens of metres, not 200 metres.

19 Q. Okay, at a distance of 20 metres from you. During the war and

20 between the 10th of August 1994 and November 1995, what was there? Who

21 was there? Who was in that building, soldiers, police?

22 A. The hospital had been hit in the first months of 1992. It caught

23 fire and burned down. It was virtually a ruin. Throughout 1994 and 1995,

24 and even later on, this was a ruin of a building burned down. No living

25 creatures there except maybe for a handful of stray dogs.

1 Q. I'm asking you about Dragomir Milosevic's time. It wasn't hit

2 during Dragomir Milosevic's time.

3 A. It had been hit back in 1992. It had all burned down by the time

4 of the events that we are discussing.

5 Q. Was it not just behind your hospital that there was a -- the two

6 hills, Crni Vrh and Gorica? You know Sarajevo well, don't you? Crni Vrh

7 is 614 metres, and the other hill is 170 metres. Those two were right

8 behind you as well as Debelo Brdo; right?

9 A. Yes, geographically speaking, Crni Vrh and Gorica. Yes, Debelo

10 Brdo is on the other side.

11 Q. So the mistake is mine. Nevertheless, these positions were being

12 held by the BH army at the time.

13 A. Citizens of the city of Sarajevo were there, civilian facilities,

14 houses, residential buildings.

15 Q. No soldiers at all?

16 A. There was no confrontation line there anyway.

17 Q. That wasn't my question. That was a bit further off. Those hills

18 were within the area of responsibility of the BH army.

19 A. Yes, indeed.

20 Q. And you don't know if there were any military positions there or

21 not, do you?

22 A. No, I do not.

23 Q. I'll only be dwelling on this map briefly. You are and have been

24 for a long time a citizen of Sarajevo. You are familiar with this

25 environment. Debelo Brdo is pretty high up, isn't it? What about Colina

1 Kapa, that was within the BH army zone of responsibility, too, and the

2 peak is at nearly 1.000 metres; right?

3 A. It's not 1.000 metres. It's somewhat less.

4 Q. About 900; right?

5 A. I think under 900.

6 Q. This is all part of Trebevic isn't it?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. This is one of the hills or ridges belonging to Trebevic.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. What about Debelo Brdo? Isn't Debelo Brdo another elevation that

11 was held by the BH army? They had their positions there; right?

12 A. Yes. I think the confrontation line ran along Debelo Brdo. It

13 was roughly half, half.

14 Q. Then we have Mojmilo, which is also quite an elevation, quite high

15 and quite long, isn't it?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Mojmilo Brdo, wasn't this a place that throughout the war, or

18 perhaps at the beginning, was held by the BH army which had its position

19 there; right?

20 A. I think it was in the second half of 1992 that it was part of the

21 free territory.

22 Q. I don't have much more on this. Colina Kapa, 940 metres; is that

23 right?

24 A. [No audible response]

25 Q. Several questions about this. The hills that we discussed,

1 they're down south; right? You had left and then you had right, and then

2 as far as Nedzarici and then over there, you have the hills that we have

3 been discussing. Debelo Brdo, Colina Kapa, Mojmilo. To the north -- I'm

4 not going into any details on this; I'd be wasting a lot of time. To the

5 north there is the hill known as Zuc, 800 metres; right? That's where the

6 BH army positions were; right?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And there's Orlic, 876 metres, the peak. The peak was also at the

9 time held by the BH army; right?

10 A. Probably.

11 Q. And we have the neighbourhood of Sokolje, Bresce Brdo, Sabino

12 Brdo. The peak is at 689 metres, and that too at the time was held by the

13 BH army; right?

14 A. Yes, all part of the free territory.

15 Q. I agree with you, but it's all to the north; right? If you head

16 right on this map -- left, rather, to the right, these are all hills up

17 above the centre of Sarajevo; right?

18 A. Yes, but quite distant from it, too.

19 Q. But within the zone of responsibility of the BH army, and posing a

20 threat to all the Serb settlements on the other side; right?

21 A. Yes, probably both in geographical and practical terms.

22 Q. I won't be dwelling on this anymore.

23 I'd like to return to your statements. I know that I have a time

24 limit. There are seven or eight statements that you made, but I'm using

25 three. The one you gave between the 10th and the 12th of November, 1995,

1 this is 65 ter 02389, paragraph 3. I would like to read the whole

2 paragraph and you can tell me if that is, in fact, the case.

3 I said the English, page 2, paragraph 3; B/C/S, page 2, paragraph

4 3. I hope you have that in front of you. That's page 2. It's the first

5 page of the actual statement; do you have that?

6 A. I think so. I still have the maps.

7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Page 2 of the English, paragraph

8 3; the same reference for the B/C/S. That's it. That's it. Right.

9 Q. You see paragraph 3 there, don't you? It reads: "During the

10 aggression ..."

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. I'll read it for your benefit and you confirm, please.

13 "During the aggression on Croatia, some of our staff were deployed

14 to other places in order to be ready to go to the front line. A large

15 number of people went to areas close to the front lines. In 1991 and

16 early 1992 we spent a lot of time working in the hospital near the front

17 line."

18 What you have in mind here is other parts of Yugoslavia; right?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. "And we took turns every three weeks. We could in this way see

21 what was going on. We met many people," and then quotation marks, "C".

22 I'm not sure what you mean here, "many people" and then a "C" under

23 quotation marks. Maybe there's something missing. And then it says

24 "Croats."

25 A. No. It's probably a matter of interpretation. Maybe this stands

1 for Croats, people marked with an S.

2 Q. Okay. "We met many people who expressed their political views.

3 It was obvious that we did not believe in the same things. The JNA became

4 more and more involved in politics in Croatia and then in Bosnia." Is

5 that right?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Can you please tell me, sir, you went outside Bosnia-Herzegovina.

8 It was all the same country at that time. Did you ever go to Slovenia?

9 Did you realise what was going on there?

10 A. Our units, or rather, members of the former war hospital, were

11 assigned to the Tuzla area and the Banja Luka area for the medical corps

12 there that were supposed to set up war hospitals. They were members of

13 these medical corps, and some of them went to Gradiska, the front line

14 there, and to Banja Luka. And a number of surgeons were working there. I

15 personally was stationed at Tuzla, at Husinska Buna, the intention

16 being --

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm sorry to interrupt you there. There is no

18 interpretation in French. There is now?

19 JUDGE MINDUA: There is now.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: There is now interpretation in French, so you may

21 now continue.

22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Mr. Witness, I would like to hear from you, had you heard that the

24 JNA had been attacked in Slovenia and that the fronts actually were the

25 surrounded barracks in Slovenia?

1 A. That's the information we had at the time.

2 Q. Did you ever hear information that as many as 50 unarmed soldiers

3 had been killed there or even those who had surrendered?

4 A. As far as I know it wasn't such a high figure. There could have

5 been some accidentally soldiers, but I don't know about over 50.

6 Q. I didn't say over 50. I am not asking you to say what you don't

7 know. Do you know that also in Croatia there were a large number of

8 surrounded barracks?

9 A. Yes, there was such information in the media.

10 Q. From the document that I have in front of me - English version of

11 this same document, page 2, the penultimate passage - it begins "On the

12 6th of April, an aggression started, one person was shot on Vrbanja

13 bridge. We knew what was going to happen. From then until mid-April,

14 many of us who were military left."

15 Is that correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Before 6th of April, would it be fair to say that in early March a

18 Serbian member of a wedding party was killed at Bascarsija? I may have

19 the location wrong, but at any rate this man was killed there. Is that

20 correct?

21 A. Yes, and he was buried at Bare on the same day when my father,

22 whom I found dead in the street on the 2nd of May, was killed.

23 Q. Immediately after that you say as follows:

24 "After the 2nd of March, when members of the SDS --" do you know

25 who killed your father?

1 A. My father died of heart attack in front of a tobacconist shop. I

2 found him in a morgue, he was 69 years old in quite good health, and he

3 died of stress.

4 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Doctor, you said that your father

5 was killed on that same day, or did I not understand you?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that the killed Serb was

7 buried on the same day at the Bare cemetery where my father was buried as

8 well, whom I found dead in the morgue on the 2nd of March. That was the

9 morgue of the Kosevo Hospital, probably after he had suffered a heart

10 attack in front of the news agent shop close to our house.

11 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you.

12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. Above this passage where you talk about the 6th of April, it says

14 as follows:

15 "After March the 2nd, when members of the SDS," which is the

16 Serbian Democratic Party; right?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. -- "put up barricades when they realised what could happen." Is

19 that correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Right. But isn't it true that they had put up barricades

22 precisely because of this killing and because the SDA, the Party of

23 Democratic Action, had also put up barricades?

24 A. These barricades had nothing to do with the killing of this member

25 of the wedding party. They were the result of the referendum that were

1 positive for the future of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the course that she

2 decided to take as an independent state. And that was the reaction by the

3 Serbian Democratic Party to the result of the referendum and it had

4 absolutely nothing to do with the killing that took place at Bascarsija.

5 Q. Very well. I presume that you must have read books written by

6 Halilovic, his son, the accused Delic, and many others. Did you read

7 those books?

8 A. I must disappointment you. I didn't read any of them.

9 Q. Do you know about the Official Gazette which says that the status

10 of combatants was granted to all members of the Patriotic League, the

11 Green Berets and other paramilitary units in the spring of 1992? That's

12 what's written in a decision published in the Official Gazette. Do you

13 know about that?

14 A. No, I don't know about that. I know that I was a lieutenant

15 colonel of the JNA and I did not have the status of a combatant granted

16 for the period between 1992 and 1995. I was just an ordinary citizen with

17 a war assignment, and I didn't have the status of a combatant.

18 Q. You mentioned your status. You were born in 1949, and I'm a

19 little bit older than you. Do you know -- let us put aside the period

20 between 1945 and 1950, but let's take the period after 1950 until 1990,

21 was it ever the case in the area where we all lived together, was there

22 any more peaceful time and better life in the history of all our peoples

23 there?

24 A. If you ask me, I'm one of those who admit that it was very nice to

25 live during Tito's era.

1 Q. You know that before the 6th of April, that is, in late March, in

2 Sijekovac, around 30 or more Serb civilians were brutally killed in the

3 area held by the BH army.

4 A. It is possible. I don't know about that.

5 Q. Do you also know that at the same time before the 6th of April, in

6 Glamoc and other areas, a large number of civilians were killed when there

7 was no war operation there?

8 A. There was some information about that. What I mentioned is

9 something that I mentioned from my personal experience in Sarajevo.

10 Q. Of course what you don't know --

11 A. Yes, it's difficult to say.

12 Q. I suppose that you should know this, because this refers to what

13 was happening in Sarajevo. We are going back to this document, last

14 passage on the same page: "I left the hospital on the 8th of April, but

15 my brother, who is also a doctor, was still here, and I was relatively

16 well informed of the events here." Is that true?

17 A. Yes. On the same day when I left the hospital, that is, on the

18 8th of April, my brother was mobilised for the Sokolac War Hospital as a

19 surgeon, and with the assistance of his friends he was transferred to

20 Sarajevo, so he came back in mid-April and I had reliable information

21 about what was going on in the hospital.

22 Q. If you had reliable information, do you know that on or around

23 that date, and I heard that from Dr. Mandilovic who testified here the

24 other day, the hospital had been surrounded for almost a month by members

25 of the Patriotic League and Green Berets?

1 A. It wasn't literally surrounded. It was surrounded in order to

2 maintain the spirit of patriotism, not by patriotic forces in that sense.

3 Q. Were the barracks in Sarajevo also surrounded?

4 A. As far as I know, yes, they were under the blockade.

5 Q. Were there any casualties among the JNA soldiers in the barracks?

6 A. As far as I know, a small number of wounded members of the JNA

7 were treated at the time in the military hospital, which means that it

8 wasn't -- there were not too many casualties, people wounded, if that's

9 what you're referring to. There were probably isolated cases.

10 Q. Since you know what was going on in the hospital -- inside the

11 hospital, there was a special unit in the hospital, as you said in your

12 statement, that had come from Nis, and that was also surrounded during the

13 month of blockade, which was also mentioned by Mr. Mandilovic.

14 A. As far as this special unit was concerned, the day after I left

15 it, the hospital, they were deployed there. I know that my office was

16 given to the commander of this unit. His name was Golub or whatever. But

17 they were not surrounded. They were free to go out with their vehicles,

18 to go to their command headquarters without any restrictions whatsoever.

19 No -- there were no roadblocks and things like that. And these soldiers

20 in the hospital were free to communicate.

21 Q. On the 2nd of May, is it true that a large number of soldiers were

22 killed on Dobrovoljacka Street?

23 A. I know about that incident and I know that a number of members of

24 the then special units deployed in the military hospital headed for

25 Skenderija, and that a number of those soldiers were killed.

1 Q. Both you and Mr. Mandilovic claim that it was possible to leave

2 the hospital. But after people learned about the incident of the 2nd of

3 May, is it not true that a large number of medical personnel, including

4 Dr. Radulovic, left the hospital and were killed on Dobrovoljacka Street?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Was anyone killed?

7 A. Dr. Radulovic had left the hospital earlier. He wasn't there at

8 all. Colonel -- Dr. Radulovic, as far as I can remember, was the chief of

9 the medical corps and he used to stay at the corps HQ. And he left with a

10 corps command, so none of our doctors had left the hospital and got

11 killed. They were not in the convoy of the staff command that had left

12 these facilities.

13 Q. So he was killed?

14 A. He was brought dead on arrival to the hospital, but as to the

15 circumstances of how it happened, I don't know anything about that. The

16 only thing I know is that when I came and became the director of the

17 hospital on the 10th of May, the late Dr. Radulovic was in the morgue of

18 our hospital.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Ms. Marcus.

20 MS. MARCUS: Yes, Your Honours. I'd like to object to this

21 historical line of questioning on the grounds of relevance.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, explain the relevance.

23 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The relevance is that I'm trying

24 to question and challenge certain things established in the Galic

25 judgement, primarily the roots of the conflicts and what was the

1 background. I'm not going to ask the witness about the events in the

2 Galic period. But all of this is something that Dragomir Milosevic is

3 directly being charged with, the incidents in 1992 and the general

4 situation that was conducive to the conflict. Most probably a number of

5 medical staff had left the hospital, which was surrounded, and they never

6 returned because they were killed when the tragedy with the soldiers on

7 Dobrovoljacka Street took place. This is not true --

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: You are not to comment on anything. I'm hearing

9 the argument advanced by Mr. Tapuskovic, and I'm about to consider it.

10 You say that this relates to the roots of the conflict and the

11 background, and you say that "all of this is something that Dragomir

12 Milosevic is directly being charged with, the incidents in 1992 and the

13 general situation ... conducive to the conflict." Is it correct to say

14 that he's been charged with these incidents?

15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, in the amended

16 indictment, the culpability of Dragomir Milosevic was established by

17 claiming that he was aware of the strategy being employed from the answer

18 that he inherited and took over the same strategy and pursued it. If you

19 pay careful attention to the indictment, it seemed that he developed this

20 strategy back in 1992, and once he took over the command in August 1992,

21 he just continued with it. That is what the indictment says. And I'm

22 trying to prove that Dragomir Milosevic, although he was a JNA officer at

23 the time, had nothing to do with all these things at all.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Where does the indictment say that he developed

25 the strategy back in 1992? Can you direct me to that paragraph of the

1 indictment?

2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I could do that very easily if

3 you could please just give me three minutes. Not only that. That he took

4 over this strategy from Galic and continued to pursue it. The initial

5 indictment did not contain --

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: You do not have three minutes. You'll have a

7 minute to find it.

8 Let me ask Ms. Marcus if she has anything in reply.

9 MS. MARCUS: Your Honours, all I would say in reply is that the

10 indictment begins on the 10th of August, 1994, and does not charge the

11 accused with any events prior to that date.

12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm not receiving any

13 interpretation.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: That necessarily rules out evidence of incidents

15 before. But would that be your contention?

16 MS. MARCUS: No. I wouldn't say it rules out evidence. But there

17 was quite an extensive line of historical questioning, going back to 1991

18 in Slovenia, which led us gradually forward. So it was my question, what

19 was the relevance of the extent of the historical line of detailed

20 questioning.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: He says it's relevant to the roots of the

22 indictment, of the charges.

23 Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, paragraph 13 of the

25 indictment, "when, on the 10th of August --" "when on or about the 10th of

1 August, 1994, Dragomir Milosevic took over control of the corps, he took

2 over -- he inherited this campaign from General Galic. For the next

3 approximately 15 months, he continued to implement this campaign of

4 attacks against the civilian population of Sarajevo."

5 The previous paragraph, it says: "For 44 months, the SRK

6 implemented that campaign." Dragomir Milosevic only stands indicted on

7 the basis of his command responsibility during this time. I could go on,

8 but it's about this first moment where it says that the mens rea was

9 established at this early stage.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, it's not clear to me how that

11 paragraph substantiates the claim that you're making. What it says is

12 that "Dragomir Milosevic inherited the campaign from General Galic when he

13 took over on the 10th of August, 1994." So it's not clear to me how

14 evidence of what happened before would be relevant.

15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] During my case I will try to

16 challenge some of the issues that the judgement seems to have established

17 beyond doubt. I've no time to go into this now, but I'm trying to track

18 down a huge paragraph about this. This was not in the judgement, but then

19 this was quoted as one of the major reasons for his culpability. I can

20 read that for you, Your Honours.

21 "Pursuant to Article 7(1) of the Statute of the International

22 Criminal Tribunal, Dragomir Milosevic" this is 19, "Dragomir Milosevic is

23 individually criminally responsible for planning and ordering the crimes

24 charged in this indictment. Dragomir Milosevic implemented and authorised

25 the campaign of sniping and shelling of civilians which had the primary

1 purpose of spreading terror within the civilian population of Sarajevo.

2 From May 1992, when he was commander of the SRK's 1st Romanija Infantry

3 Brigade, and from July 1993 when he was the SRK's chief of staff, Dragomir

4 Milosevic knew of the campaign against the civilian population. When he

5 became corps commander from on or about the 10th of August, 1994, Dragomir

6 Milosevic inherited this campaign and proceeded to maintain and further it

7 through direct orders, including orders to launch" and I don't wish to

8 tire you with this, "launch and fire air bombs," so on and so forth.

9 So this is the original indictment -- this is something that

10 wasn't in the original indictment against Dragomir Milosevic, and then

11 this was added and we were left facing a situation where we only had two

12 or three months and we had to start pondering this whole new substance to

13 the indictment that posed an enormous problem for us.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Marcus, our attention has just been drawn to

15 paragraphs which say that from May 1992, when he was commander of the

16 SRK's 1st Romanija Infantry Brigade, and from July 1993, Dragomir

17 Milosevic knew of the campaign against the civilian population. It would

18 appear, then, that there are periods prior to 1994 when the indictment

19 does allege knowledge on the part of Dragomir Milosevic of certain matters

20 relevant to the charges.

21 MS. MARCUS: Yes, Mr. President. The indictment charges the

22 accused under several modes of liability, one of which, of course, is

23 Article 7(3), and the intent behind this paragraph was to show that the

24 knowledge element required to prove that mode of liability was something

25 which began from the first day that the indictment begins, so in other

1 words, from on or about the 10th of August, 1994, that he had knowledge.

2 I'll defer to Your Honours on this, but I would also submit simply

3 that perhaps the doctor is not the right witness to be going into this

4 issues with. But I will certainly defer in terms of relevance to Your

5 Honours' determination, of course.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, the Chamber will allow you to

7 pursue that line of questioning, but bear in mind that the doctor may not

8 be able to help you much in relation to this matter.

9 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The doctor is what he is, first

10 and foremost. I'm not asking him to answer military questions; I'm asking

11 him to tell us what he knows. I've been dropping a whole lot of questions

12 along the way precisely for this reason.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just proceed. You have a tendency to be overly

14 loquacious.

15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I fully respect your position,

16 Your Honour, but you had requested an explanation which left us in a

17 helpless position. Two or three months before the beginning of the trial,

18 our strategy had been quite different -- had it not been for this change,

19 it would have been. And now we're facing this huge bulk of new material

20 and all I'm trying to do is --

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, proceed with the

22 cross-examination. Proceed with the cross-examination. I've already

23 ruled in your favour. Do you not understand that?

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. My apologies. I will

25 be dropping a lot of questions that I had planned for. But let me go to

1 page 3, paragraph 6 of the English. Same reference in B/C/S. It's the

2 same document, page 3, paragraph 6.

3 Q. You talk about the month of May. You say the 13th through the

4 16th of May.

5 A. I don't have that on my screen yet. I do now.

6 Q. "The worst period of targeting was 13 to 16 of May, just after

7 they had left. The hospital was hit by about 40 shells of various kinds,

8 mainly tank and artillery shells. The shelling started in the afternoon

9 and that night we emptied all the patient rooms on the south side of the

10 hospital."

11 Is that how it was?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. In the next paragraph you say: "It appeared to me that they were

14 intent on destroying vital parts of the hospital. This was a JNA hospital

15 so they knew where everything was. They tried to hit the sterilisation

16 rooms, operating theaters, and also patient rooms on the 5th, 6th ..." and

17 so on and so forth. Right?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Dr. Mandilovic spoke about the fact that he wasn't even certain

20 that the hospital had been targeted intentionally, deliberately. But let

21 he ask you something else. There was a special unit in that hospital,

22 special JNA unit, that had arrived from Nis. After this they left the

23 territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina altogether and went back to where it had

24 come from.

25 Let me ask you: If they wanted to, they could have blown the

1 whole thing sky high. They were inside, but they never touched any of the

2 vital parts of the building. How do you explain that, if they had wanted

3 to destroy the hospital or any of its vital parts, why didn't they just

4 blow the whole thing sky high when they were there?

5 A. Based on what we knew, there were no plans for the destruction of

6 the hospital. They wanted to keep it under the control of the Serb

7 forces, because the demarcation line was supposed to run along the

8 Djurejako [phoen] Street and not the bridge. So had the Pofalici battle

9 been a success, the hospital would have remained in territory under the

10 control of the JNA, which means there was absolutely no need or, indeed,

11 intent to destroy the hospital as such. However, on the 9th of May, as

12 soon as the sudden decision was taken to evacuate, there was no time and

13 no chance to do it in such a brief period of time. Therefore, our

14 conclusion, based on whatever information we had, was what followed was

15 deliberate targeting of all those different parts of the hospital.

16 Q. What about the vital parts of the hospital, the operating

17 theaters? It all worked smoothly; right?

18 A. Which time period are we talking about?

19 Q. From August to --

20 A. No.

21 Q. No?

22 A. In August, when we left in May, we never went back until late in

23 1994 and early 1995. And I'm talking about the north wing, the one that

24 we could use. It was for technical reasons that we were unable to.

25 According to calculations established by statics experts, it seemed that

1 the 8th floor was the very heart of the hospital, and that the pillars

2 there were key to the building's stability. It seems that the intention

3 behind the first shelling was to destroy those, and in that case, had they

4 been successful, the four floors above us would have crumbled.

5 Fortunately, that's not the case.

6 Q. Something I heard from Dr. Mandilovic, he said only one side of

7 the hospital was hit, mostly the side facing the front; is that right?

8 A. The south side, that was not the confrontation line. It was an

9 area held by the Serb forces. And the hospital overlooks that area. If

10 you were watching CNN at the time, you would have seen a huge Red Cross

11 flag hoisted on that side of the hospital. The front side had been

12 virtually destroyed. This was deliberately targeted. They wanted to

13 destroy that wing of the hospital.

14 Q. In that part of the front line, the confrontation lines were about

15 15 or 20 metres and went across both sides of the front line; right?

16 A. That's right, but back in 1992 nobody was even thinking that any

17 of the Territorial Defence members might have a tank or might have

18 targeted the hospital from a tank.

19 Q. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the 10th of August

20 1994 and all the way to the very end of 1995. That's what I'm asking you

21 about.

22 A. But you asked me about May just a moment ago.

23 Q. May, yes.

24 A. Which May?

25 Q. May 1992. All right. I did ask that but I know why I asked

1 that. Now I am asking you, at the time during Dragomir Milosevic's time,

2 was the hospital ever hit?

3 A. To a far lesser degree. I did say that, didn't I.

4 Q. Was it ever targeted deliberately, the way Dr. Mandilovic

5 described this? He said he wasn't sure.

6 A. Not the way it had been targeted in 1992.

7 Q. Thank you. I won't be looking for the reference now, but you say

8 that one of your people -- that your staff often went to the front line to

9 help the wounded and evacuate them, help evacuate them; right?

10 A. This was the staff of the former military hospital and they went

11 until as late as 1992.

12 Q. I'm asking you about this time. You went to the front line, your

13 own medical staff went to the front line, what never?

14 A. No, no, not ours.

15 Q. What about any other front line?

16 A. No, never.

17 Q. Fair enough. What about you personally? Did you ever take that

18 tunnel out of town? Did you ever leave town by that tunnel?

19 A. Yes, many times.

20 Q. Whoever wanted to, as long as they had permission --

21 A. Yes, they could all leave.

22 Q. Do you know about the fact that throughout the whole autumn of

23 1994 there was an electricity cable going through the tunnel, electricity

24 generated at Neretva, Mount Igman; the cable was going through this

25 tunnel. This was all built at the time using a minimum of electricity.

1 And between autumn 1994 and until the very end, Sarajevo had a very good

2 electricity supply; right?

3 A. No. Sarajevo was virtually smothered. It was the only

4 possible ...

5 Q. Thank you. There is something in your statement, 002 -- 65 ter

6 002842. On page 1 of the English, it's page 1, the first paragraphs, the

7 first items or bullets, the first four or five, I suppose. I provided the

8 reference. It's the 26th of September, 2001. Can you see that, sir?

9 A. No, I still have the old one. Page 3.

10 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] 65 ter 02842.

11 Q. Can you see that now, sir?

12 A. I still have the same screen.

13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] This is supplemental information

14 sheet provided by Dr. Bakir Nakas on the 26th of September, 2001. Page 1

15 of both the English and the B/C/S, 65 ter 02842.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is this the document which is on the screen now?

17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: Yes.

18 Q. [Interpretation] You see what you say there. The first

19 bullet: "Military casualties were taken by all the hospitals, but this

20 one the most, as a number of former staff doctors were assigned to units

21 in the field and gave front line treatment ..."

22 So you say that your own medical staff did go to the front line.

23 A. Those who had been mobilised, the staff who had been mobilised,

24 then they were members of the armed forces.

25 Q. Did they go back to the hospital?

1 A. No, they were out in the field the whole time.

2 Q. Did you ever notice them being deliberately targeted? So this is

3 a dangerous question for my own client. That's how far I'm going. Were

4 any of those ever deliberately targeted?

5 A. You mean the doctors?

6 Q. Yes.

7 A. I can't remember the year, but it may have been the year when

8 outside the war hospital at Igman, Dr. Dragan Stevanovic was hit. He lost

9 his foot.

10 Q. He was a Serb; right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. I was asking about members --

13 A. He was an employee of my hospital, regardless of his ethnicity.

14 Serb or non-Serb, he was a hospital employee.

15 Q. Do you know about how the nurses and the medical staff got killed

16 at Igman? Autumn of 1994, a huge scandal erupted over this. Are you

17 aware of that?

18 A. No, I am not.

19 Q. What about bullet 2, where you say that SkyNews and other

20 journalist groups stayed here and were located on the 12th floor. You

21 spoke about that a wile ago. They filmed night shelling from there in

22 1992. Stayed a month or so then occasional visits. Then you go on to

23 speak about a Van Lynden who you say was well known to you. Is that

24 correct, sir?

25 A. Having taken over the hospital in May 1992, the responsibility of

1 the hospital as a general manager, several groups of journalists were

2 announced to me at the time, I mean their arrival. The most famous among

3 those was the SkyNews crew. The application was about publishing images

4 and footage from Sarajevo, and they wished to use the highest floors of

5 our hospital for that purpose. We tried to dissuade them by telling them

6 that this was risky business, indeed. And despite this, the SkyNews crew

7 went up to the 12th floor of the hospital, and on several occasions they

8 managed to take footage of the night shelling of Sarajevo. They would

9 stay several weeks at a time. And normally they were in the northern

10 sector of Sarajevo which was not directly next to the front line.

11 Q. Did they ever film any shells that were launched on the Serb side?

12 Did you know anything about that?

13 A. No, not as far as I know.

14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to ask

15 a question and I would like to hear what your position is on that. It

16 concerns what the doctor described as stress that they had been exposed

17 to, himself and the citizens of Sarajevo.

18 Q. You said that, but there were also 40.000 Serbs in Sarajevo

19 suffering from the same stress.

20 A. All the people who lived in Sarajevo were equally exposed to the

21 level of stress, regardless of their ethnicity, whether they were Serbs,

22 Croats, or Bosniaks.

23 JUDGE MINDUA: [No interpretation]

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm sorry.

25 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] I would like to clarify one point

1 please before Defence counsel moves on to the next question.

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: We now have the French.

3 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Before Defence counsel moves on to

4 another subject, I would like to clarify one point.

5 You discussed the doctors and nurses who were killed at Mount

6 Igman; is that right?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. That's what the counsel said.

8 I mentioned one of my doctors who was mobilised for the BH army who was

9 wounded on Mount Igman. The counsel was mentioning a completely different

10 incident and I never confirmed remembering it.

11 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] So let's set aside what Defence

12 counsel has said and let's concentrate on what you and your other

13 colleagues mentioned about these people that were hit at Mount Igman. I

14 would like to know in which year this occurred, because we have to stick

15 to the indictment, of course. Were people hit during fighting operations?

16 Was this person hit when he was a soldier or was he targeted because he

17 was a doctor? Because he was wearing insignia which is usually -- or

18 according to international conventions, he was wearing that kind of

19 insignia. I didn't hear your answer.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I said in my statement is that

21 I cannot remember accurately whether it was in 1994. It is possible that

22 it was in that year. The doctor was wounded right in front of the medical

23 unit while he was treating the patients.

24 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

25 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

1 Q. Concerning His Honour's question, let me just amend it somewhat.

2 You know nothing about how numerous medical staff were massacred, members

3 of the army of Republika Srpska, at Mount Igman, which was extensively

4 described in General Rose's book and which became, thanks to his book,

5 generally known fact. Did that happen during the tenure of General

6 Milosevic?

7 A. If I could remember, I would have told you. I have no reason to

8 withhold that. But at that time such information was not available in

9 Sarajevo, nor can I remember anything like that.

10 Q. I understand. I was asking you about the stress that everybody

11 was exposed to. I would like to ask you about an additional stress that

12 was laid on the Serbs, who, in Sarajevo in 1992, were being killed en

13 masse. Do you know about the Serbs who disappeared or were killed in

14 1992, not in war operations?

15 A. I was born in Sarajevo and I have many friends among Serbs. A

16 number of them, as well as a number of Bosniak and Croat left Sarajevo.

17 It was their decision. Those who remained in Sarajevo, including myself,

18 were never either maltreated or got killed. I'm talking about my friends

19 with whom I spent those four years. The stories that there was

20 maltreatment and persecution of Serbs by others were circulated, and some

21 of the perpetrators were prosecuted in Sarajevo. I think that was in

22 1993 -- 1992 and 1993, and some convictions were even made. But I

23 personally know no such person that was either killed or went missing

24 among my friends. And that equally applies to the members of my staff.

25 There were many Serbs on my staff and nothing ever happened to them. I

1 was a victim of harassment in 1992 when I left JNA --

2 Q. You're talking about the killings and the persecutions.

3 A. Yes, there were stories about that.

4 Q. And there were people who were convicted of these crimes.

5 A. Yes, there were such people.

6 Q. Was there a widespread fear that anyone -- that this could happen

7 to anyone?

8 A. There was fear that this same thing could happen equally to the

9 Bosnian Croats and everyone else. They could have been taken to the lines

10 to dig trenches and be maltreated by units that did not follow the spirit

11 of the rules of conduct.

12 Q. Were they active inside Sarajevo as well?

13 A. Yes, there was such cases.

14 Q. Thank you very much.

15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] This concludes my

16 cross-examination.

17 Thank you, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Any re-examination, Ms. Marcus?

19 MS. MARCUS: No, Your Honours, except that I would just like to

20 tender the -- I know I tendered the two spreadsheets relating to the

21 hospital records, but I don't believe that we tendered the underlying --

22 the actual hospital records which underlie those spreadsheets. So I'd

23 just like to tender that, please.

24 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: As these involve spreadsheets, we'll adopt the

1 same procedure that we did. The court deputy will, overnight, assign the

2 various numbers and tomorrow we'll admit it into evidence.

3 MS. MARCUS: Thank you very much.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Doctor, that concludes your evidence. Thank you

5 for giving it, and you may now leave.

6 [The witness withdrew]

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: The next witness.

8 MR. DOCHERTY: Your Honour, the Prosecution calls Sanela Dedovic.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

10 And while that's being done, I take the opportunity to give a

11 decision on the Prosecution motion of the 9th of January, which requested

12 protective measures for a number of witnesses, including W-138. The

13 Defence has not responded to this motion. In court, on the 24th of

14 January, the Prosecution noted that W-138 had previously been granted the

15 requested protective measures in Galic. W-138 is scheduled to testify on

16 Tuesday, 30th January, and consequently we now address the request for

17 protective measures.

18 We note that W-138 was previously granted pseudonym and voice and

19 image distortion in Galic. This is evident from the transcript of the

20 hearing on 14th April 2002 when the witness gave testimony with these

21 protective measures. Under Rule 75(F)(i) of the Tribunal's Rules,

22 protective measures that have been ordered in respect of a witness in any

23 proceedings before the Tribunal continue to have effect mutatis mutandis

24 in any subsequent proceedings unless and until they are rescinded, varied

25 or augmented, in accordance with the procedure set out in that Rule.

1 As a result, the Prosecution need only have requested a variation

2 of the pseudonym. Therefore, the Trial Chamber confirms that the

3 protective measures of pseudonym and voice and image distortion will

4 extend to the present proceedings. The only variation on those protective

5 measures is the pseudonym itself, and in that regard the Trial Chamber

6 considers that the witness is to be referred to as W-138.

7 [The witness entered court]

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness make the declaration.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

10 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

11 WITNESS: SANELA DEDOVIC

12 [Witness answered through interpreter]

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: You may sit.

14 And you may begin, Mr. Docherty.

15 MR. DOCHERTY: Thank you, Your Honour.

16 Examination by Mr. Docherty:

17 Q. Good morning. Would you please begin by telling us all your name.

18 A. Sanela Dedovic.

19 Q. Ms. Dedovic, how old are you?

20 A. I'm 26. I'll be 26 in June this year.

21 Q. And what city and country did you grow up?

22 A. In the city of Sarajevo, in the state of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

23 Q. Do you still live in Sarajevo?

24 A. I do.

25 Q. Did you live in Sarajevo throughout the siege of 1992 through

1 1995?

2 A. I did.

3 Q. I'm going to be asking you some questions about something that

4 happened to you during that siege, but before I do, did you meet with an

5 investigator from this Tribunal on 13 November 1995?

6 A. Yes, I did.

7 Q. And since coming to The Hague last week, have you had the

8 opportunity to read that statement over carefully?

9 A. Yes, I had the opportunity to read that statement.

10 Q. In what language did you read it?

11 A. In Bosnian.

12 Q. And when you read that statement over, can you confirm that that

13 was a true and correct account of what you told the investigator on 13th

14 of November, 1995?

15 A. Yes. Everything is exactly as I said and what I said in my

16 statement.

17 Q. Later, on the 20th of April, 2006, did you again meet with an

18 investigator, a different investigator this time, but still from this

19 Tribunal?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And, again, since arriving in The Hague last week, have you had an

22 opportunity to read that statement over carefully?

23 A. Yes, I did.

24 Q. In what language did you read the statement of 20th April 2006?

25 A. In Bosnian.

1 Q. And was everything in that statement true and correct when you

2 re-read it last week or perhaps over the weekend?

3 A. Yes, it was. Exactly as the statement I gave.

4 MR. DOCHERTY: Your Honour, pursuant to Rule 92 ter of the

5 Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence, I offer the statements of 13

6 November 1995 and 20 April 2006 into evidence.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Please give them a number.

8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the statement 13 November 1995

9 becomes P109, and the statement 20th of April, 2006, will become P110.

10 MR. DOCHERTY:

11 Q. Ms. Dedovic, I just have a few questions concerning the events.

12 Were you shot during the siege of Sarajevo?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Do you remember the date on which you were shot?

15 A. It was the 22nd November 1994.

16 Q. And you mentioned a couple of minutes ago how old you are today.

17 How old were you on the 22nd of November, 1994?

18 A. I was 12.

19 Q. Were you still in school?

20 A. Yes, I was, elementary school.

21 Q. The area where you were shot, did you think that that was a

22 dangerous area?

23 A. Well, it was dangerous.

24 Q. And was there a safer way to go than the way you went, which I

25 understand took you out into an open square where three roads come

1 together? Was there a safer way to get where you were going?

2 A. Well, there was another route which we took between the houses and

3 through gardens in order to get some -- at least some protection. But

4 this was also exposed to sniper fire from Spicaste Stijena.

5 Q. Were you wearing new shoes on the 22nd of November, 1994?

6 A. Yes, I was. I put on my new tennis shoes and I decided to run

7 across this junction, because the day before it was raining and it was

8 muddy to go through this backyard and garden, so I decided to run across

9 this junction.

10 Q. So you didn't want to get your new shoes dirty?

11 A. Well, as a little girl, that's what I decided. And I wanted to

12 walk to town in my new tennis shoes.

13 Q. And new shoes can be important -- more important to a 12-year-old

14 girl than to a woman of 25, I take it?

15 A. Well, I wouldn't know that.

16 Q. On the 22nd of November, 1994, what was the weather like?

17 A. Well, the weather that day was dry, but the day before it was

18 raining.

19 Q. Let me ask a little different question. What was the visibility

20 like on the 22nd of November, 1994? Was there anything that would make

21 it -- like fog, that would make it difficult for a person to see more than

22 a few hundred metres?

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: That was slightly leading.

24 MR. DOCHERTY: Slightly.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was no fog, which means that

1 the visibility was good. It was all clear. You could see everything.

2 MR. DOCHERTY:

3 Q. Were there -- when you were on your walk, did you see any Bosnian

4 soldiers or other military equipment?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Was there any fighting, any armed combat, going on in the area?

7 A. No.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.

9 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this was also a

10 leading question, did she see the soldiers, et cetera. The witness I

11 mean. I would have understood if it would have put him --

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Docherty asked, did she see any soldiers, and

13 perhaps you could then ask about the ethnicity.

14 MR. DOCHERTY: I can do it that way, Your Honour.

15 Q. Let's back up and do that again, Ms. Dedovic. On your walk that

16 day, before you got shot, did you see any soldiers?

17 A. There were no soldiers there, so I didn't see anyone. I was alone

18 there.

19 Q. Did you see any military equipment?

20 A. No, I didn't.

21 Q. Did you see any combat, any fighting between soldiers, going on?

22 A. No. That was a quiet day, and that's why I decided to run across

23 this junction.

24 Q. Ms. Dedovic, now I've got some questions about where this took

25 place, and I'm going to ask you to take a look at a map.

1 MR. DOCHERTY: Mr. Registrar, could we please have displayed on

2 the monitor a map with 65 ter number 2872.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: We're still waiting.

4 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: I understand this takes quite some time to be

6 processed and it's on its way.

7 It's here now.

8 MR. DOCHERTY: It's here. And if I could then ask, could we

9 please scroll to the north-east area of the city of Sarajevo, that would

10 be the upper right-hand corner of this map. Thank you. All right.

11 Q. And then lastly, Ms. Dedovic, do you see a map in front of you?

12 A. Yes, I do.

13 Q. Can you tell us -- you said earlier that you grew up in Sarajevo.

14 Did you grow up in a specific --

15 A. Yes, I did.

16 Q. -- a specific neighbourhood or district of Sarajevo; and if so,

17 could you tell us the name?

18 A. Well, I grew up in Sarajevo, at Sedrenik, in the old city.

19 Q. Is the area of Sedrenik on the map that is on the monitor in front

20 of you now?

21 A. Could you please zoom it a little bit more, if possible.

22 It's right here. You need to go a little further up with the map.

23 Right there.

24 MR. DOCHERTY: And if I could ask the registrar to assist the

25 witness in using the pen.

1 Q. Just draw a circle on the map indicating Sedrenik.

2 A. [Marks]

3 Q. The second thing I'll ask you to mark on that map is, can you find

4 the intersection where you were shot on the 22nd of November, 1994?

5 A. Could you please zoom in a little more on this area.

6 Q. Ms. Dedovic, I'm sorry, we can't zoom in, because if we do we'll

7 lose the circle you've already drawn.

8 Is it possible for you to -- if it's not possible, that's all

9 right. We'll move on. This is not a test. But we can't zoom in on this

10 map, I'm sorry.

11 MR. DOCHERTY: Your Honour, could I -- perhaps this is the way to

12 proceed: Could I please tender the map as marked now, and then we'll

13 start over with a clean map, we'll expand the upper right-hand corner to

14 the point where the witness is comfortable and have her mark that.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we can proceed that way.

16 THE REGISTRAR: This will be admitted as Exhibit P111, Your

17 Honours.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's now time for the break, in fact.

19 We'll break for 20 minutes.

20 --- Recess taken at 12.13 p.m.

21 --- On resuming at 12.34 p.m.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please proceed, Mr. Docherty.

23 MR. DOCHERTY: Yes, Your Honour.

24 Q. Ms. Dedovic, on the monitor in front of you now we have an

25 unmarked copy of this map. I believe it's in evidence as Exhibit P104,

1 and I'm going to ask the registrar to zoom in once or twice until -- is

2 this close enough, or do you want it closer yet?

3 A. It's close enough.

4 Q. Now I'm going to ask the registrar to assist you in using the

5 marking pen, and I'm going to ask you to draw a circle around the

6 intersection where you were shot on 22nd of November, 1994.

7 A. [Marks]

8 Q. And would you mind writing a letter S beside that circle so we

9 know what it is for.

10 A. Right here. [Marks]

11 Q. Thank you. Now, I'll ask, do you see a hill marked on that map

12 called Sedam Suma?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Now, it's not actually written on the map, but does the hill Sedam

15 Suma have, or is it near to another feature called Sharpstone?

16 A. It's all connected, Sedam Suma and Spicaste Stijena.

17 Q. Could you use the pen and show us where Sharpstone is. Just draw

18 a line for Sharpstone.

19 A. Should I do it like this? [Marks]

20 Q. I just want to make clear, is that line running along Sharpstone

21 or is that some sort of an arrow pointing to Sharpstone? Because I notice

22 that you've drawn it right into the circle marked S. That's why I ask the

23 question.

24 A. Well, it's a line connecting Spicaste Stijena and it's as the crow

25 flies from the traffic junction to Spicaste Stijena, or Sharpstone. But,

1 you know, it's a bit like this. [Marks]

2 Q. All right. And then just for the record, could we indicate that

3 the second line you drew, could you mark that SS? I won't try and say

4 Spicaste Stijena in Bosnian but ...

5 I'm sorry, I ...

6 A. Perhaps here, this is where I should mark. [Marks]

7 Q. All right, thank you.

8 MR. DOCHERTY: And now, Ms. Case Manager, if we could please have

9 the panoramic shot of sniping -- scheduled sniping incident number 7. And

10 if I could please tender the map that is currently on the monitor into

11 evidence.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, let it be admitted.

13 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P112, Your Honours.

14 MR. DOCHERTY: And we're done with the pen at this point,

15 Mr. Registrar. Thank you.

16 Q. Ms. Dedovic, now on the monitor in front of you there is an aerial

17 photograph. Do you recognise what's in that photograph?

18 A. Yes, I do. This is the junction where I was hit or wounded, if

19 you like.

20 Q. There's a red circle in the middle of a square. Do you see the

21 red circle?

22 A. Yes, I do.

23 Q. Is that red circle on the place where you were shot? Is it in the

24 right place?

25 A. Yes, yes. That's where I was.

1 Q. And when you were in -- can you tell us where Sharpstone would be

2 in this photograph?

3 A. Well, Spicaste Stijena is this way, as the crow flies. This

4 photograph may, in fact, have been taken from there.

5 Q. All right. So just to make sure I've understood you properly, the

6 photographer may have been standing on Sharpstone when he or she took this

7 picture.

8 A. Yes.

9 MR. DOCHERTY: And now, Ms. Case Manager, could we please click on

10 the red circle.

11 Q. And, Ms. Dedovic, we're going to do a 360-degree view from that

12 circle, and I'm going to ask you at the end if this was a fair and

13 accurate photograph of the area where you were shot.

14 MR. DOCHERTY: Can we proceed, please. And could we rotate,

15 please.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You can stop right there. Right

17 there, this is where I was. I was crossing the junction, and Spicaste

18 Stijena is the hill that you can see over there. And this was the

19 location of the sniper, right in the middle of the hill.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Where is the junction? I don't see a junction.

21 MR. DOCHERTY: I don't either.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: We just passed it or ...

23 MR. DOCHERTY: We'll see it again. We'll rotate through a number

24 of streets, Your Honour.

25 Q. Ms. Dedovic, when you say "that hill," we can't really see where

1 you're pointing because we can't see your monitor. So for purposes of

2 clarity, there is a hill in the picture with a line of trees on the top of

3 that. Is that the hill you're referring to, or is it a different hill?

4 A. Yes, yes, that hill over there, that's it.

5 Q. Right. And if we --

6 A. On the right-hand side of the photograph, that's it.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.

8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Prosecutor has

9 just done something that he is not supposed to do. They were leading the

10 witness. They said, "Is this the hill or the forest from which there was

11 sniping?" This is no way to go about examining a witness. The witness

12 should be able to tell us herself. And now it is being put to the witness

13 that shots were fired from this forest, and Spicaste Stijena, after all,

14 is a broad concept.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Point us to the part --

16 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, the Prosecution leading to

17 the witness, putting to the witness, where the shots came from; that this

18 was Spicaste Stijena and that that was where the shots came from.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: And this is an instance of something that is

20 important to the Defence, where the shot came from, whether it came from a

21 hill, and where the hill was.

22 So, Mr. Docherty, there is merit in the submission that you led

23 the witness as to a point of contention, and that is not permissible. The

24 evidence then has very little value when you lead like that. You must let

25 the witness give the evidence.

1 MR. DOCHERTY: Your Honour, may I be heard on that point?

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

3 MR. DOCHERTY: Your Honour, the only thing I was trying to do, and

4 I apologise if I crossed the line, is that the witness was pointing at her

5 monitor and saying things like, "here and here," and I was trying to

6 clarify. And given that there is only one hill in the photograph, I

7 understood I was leading, but given that there is only one hill, I thought

8 the risk was low. But I do apologise.

9 Ms. Case Manager, could we resume the rotation, please. Thank

10 you.

11 Q. Ms. Dedovic, you've watched that photograph all the way through

12 360 degrees. Is that a fair and accurate picture of the location where

13 you were shot?

14 A. Yes, it is. It's accurate. This is the junction in Sedrenik,

15 Perugina, Racaga [phoen], Gorasanovic [phoen], that's the junction.

16 MR. DOCHERTY: Your Honour, I tender the -- this 360-degree view

17 and the overhead photograph that preceded it.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, let it be numbered.

19 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P113, Your Honours.

20 MR. DOCHERTY:

21 Q. Ms. Dedovic, do you have an opinion as to where it was that the

22 bullet that hit you came from that day?

23 A. My opinion is the bullet came from Spicaste Stijena. I was facing

24 the other way. I was coming from over there. I was about to cross the

25 junction in order to reach Rogina Street. From there I would not have had

1 the Spicaste Stijena within my view because the slope was a downward one.

2 Therefore, had I headed down that slope, I would no longer have had

3 Spicaste Stijena within my view. It was from behind me that the bullet

4 came. It couldn't possibly have come from anywhere else other than

5 Spicaste Stijena, and we all knew that there was a sniper there, a

6 sniper's nest.

7 Q. When you say "we all knew," who is "we"?

8 A. Civilians, mostly civilians, local residents of that

9 neighbourhood. There was a sign there saying, "Caution: Sniper."

10 Q. And then lastly, as we look at this photograph, we're looking

11 slightly down a hill. Do you see a road going down a hill a little bit?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. I just want to get the direction that you were going. Were you

14 going up or were you going down?

15 A. I was coming from down there. I was walking up and then I came

16 here, a little further up. That's as far as I got, the piece of even

17 ground that you can see in the photograph. I had gone a little further

18 on, and by this time I had reached the middle of the junction.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Docherty, this is a matter that I've been

22 thinking about for some time --

23 MR. DOCHERTY: Yes.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: -- with this technology available to us. The

25 evidence that she has just given, pointing to where she was walking from

1 and exactly where she was when she was shot, that may be a matter of

2 importance, but we haven't been able to see that -- those marks.

3 MR. DOCHERTY: There are no marks, Your Honour, and my

4 understanding is that we can't mark on these videos because they come up

5 on the -- well, it's the monitor on your right.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: That's the point I'm making, because under the

7 old system, you would put the map on the ELMO and she would have marked

8 it, and then we would have had the benefit of seeing it.

9 MR. DOCHERTY: Your Honour, I'm --

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: So we have a description from her in words, but

11 we haven't actually been able to see the mark, and so the evidence doesn't

12 have the impact on us that it should. And I feel somewhat disadvantaged.

13 MR. DOCHERTY: Well, I'm sorry, Your Honour. I'm making use of

14 the technology that I was -- that's available.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: In my view, the older system with the ELMO where

16 you can mark the map, and then we can see, was more advantageous.

17 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, I believe that for important

18 photographs like this one, maybe it would be nice to also have a hard copy

19 that we could put on the ELMO so that the witness can actually mark it,

20 because right now we have no idea what really happened. It's really

21 difficult to reconstruct the whole thing.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, you wanted to say something on

23 this point?

24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, precisely. I'm not sure if

25 it's my turn to cross-examine. I wanted to change tack if it's my turn,

1 if that photograph could please be kept, for this photograph to be kept

2 for the beginning of my cross-examination, as soon as it is my turn.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, well, that will be noted. Yes.

4 Mr. Docherty, this, of course, is not a criticism of you. It's

5 just a comment on the system, and I hope it is taken into account.

6 MR. DOCHERTY: Well, anything the Chamber says, Your Honour, is

7 taken into account, and we will -- well, we --

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Do I understand, then, that whenever markings are

9 done on a map on the e-court system, as she was just marking that map, we

10 can't see the markings.

11 MR. DOCHERTY: That is not my understanding, Your Honour. My

12 understanding is as follows, and I am not a technology expert, but my

13 understanding is that we put in the clean map, and that's in as P104. The

14 witness then marks on that map and then the marked copy goes into evidence

15 as, I think in this case, P110. Then the witness marks on it again and

16 that again goes into evidence, and any one of these can be called up and

17 looked at by the parties or by the Chamber, if they know how to do it or

18 can have someone help them bring it up. They can be brought up at any

19 time. And that's why when a witness finishes marking on a map, I always

20 say, May I tender the marked-up copy of the map? And that way we have

21 both the clean map and the marked-up map in evidence.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: So in principle, the markings on that map could

23 be brought up on my screen.

24 MR. DOCHERTY: That is correct. Any marked map can be brought up

25 on your screen. And we've used this same map over and over again. And

1 all of those different markings have been preserved. This witness has

2 marked on it twice. You'll recall she had difficulty until we zoomed in.

3 So we have a clean map, we've got a map where she's circled Sedrenik, and

4 we've got a map where she's indicated the intersection and Sharpstone.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: So the markings that she just made as to where

6 she was walking from and where she was, can that be brought up now?

7 MR. DOCHERTY: No, because she didn't make markings. We can mark

8 on the map but we can't mark on photographs and things like that. Rather,

9 we can mark on some exhibits but not others, and I'm sorry, I don't know

10 all the technical ins and outs. But the witness made no markings on this,

11 and I knew she would not be able to, which is why I put the question, Were

12 you going uphill or downhill, because that's really the only way to

13 proceed.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: And I thought you said, "this is where I was," so

15 that's why I had the impression she was pointing to a particular place.

16 MR. DOCHERTY: The witness was saying, I was here and I was there,

17 but she was simply pointing with her finger and no marks were resulting.

18 That's why I had to clarify the record by saying uphill or downhill

19 because I understood that no markings --

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: That's my point. For that evidence to be most

21 helpful to us, we should be able to see those points.

22 MR. DOCHERTY: I agree with that. We do have a video that we're

23 about to show that may help, where the witness points out where she was

24 and where she was coming and where she was going, and that will be my next

25 exhibit and also the end of my examination-in-chief.

1 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Docherty.

3 MR. DOCHERTY: And now, Ms. Case Manager, there was a video with

4 this witness, and I'd ask to have that played for the Court at this time.

5 [Videotape played]

6 "Investigator: Witness, at this time I'd like you to please stand

7 in the location and in the position you were on the 22nd of November,

8 1994, when you were wounded.

9 "Can you please point in the direction that you were moving.

10 "Okay. That's fine. If you could come back, please.

11 "And if you could please point to the location on your body where

12 you were wounded.

13 "Thank you. Can you please point in the direction from which you

14 believe the shot came from on that day.

15 "Thank you."

16 MR. DOCHERTY:

17 Q. Ms. Dedovic, do you remember that encounter with the investigator

18 and making this video?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And was the video we just saw an accurate video? Is that actually

21 what happened with the investigator on the day the video was made?

22 A. Yes, it's accurate. It's just the way it was. It shows the

23 direction in which I was moving, the way I was facing, and that Spicaste

24 Stijena was behind me, that I was walking away from it. And I had got as

25 far as the midpoint of that junction.

1 MR. DOCHERTY: I have no further questions, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Docherty, I'm sorry to get back to this, is

3 this the way that you'd be dealing with this kind of situation, by

4 presenting a video after the witness has looked at the map?

5 MR. DOCHERTY: Well, it was the way that I was planning to do it

6 from now on. However, if the Chamber is not finding that persuasive,

7 believe me, I'll change it.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm just dealing with it, getting back to the

9 technical point --

10 MR. DOCHERTY: Yes.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: -- because that somehow I think compensates,

12 although not fully, for the fact that we're not able to see the markings

13 that she made. I just want to have confirmed that when she made those

14 markings on the map, because it was a map --

15 MR. DOCHERTY: The markings were made on the map, yes.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: -- it doesn't -- the fact that we were not able

17 to see it is not a reflection on our technical competence.

18 MR. DOCHERTY: No.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: That's the technology.

20 MR. DOCHERTY: That's the technology, but those markings have not

21 disappeared. That exhibit can be called back up and examined.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: I see. Thank you.

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Witness, please, I have one

25 question to make things really clear. You showed us which way the bullet

1 came from, according to you, but I'm not sure I really understood. You

2 did not say where you were hit on your body. I don't know if you were

3 very clear when it comes to that. Could you please tell us exactly where

4 you were hit on your body?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The bullet, the shot that came,

6 first ricocheted against the ground, against the asphalt, it splintered,

7 and then a bit of shrapnel hit my ankle.

8 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Witness.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was a fragmentation bullet, which

10 means that if I'd been hit directly in the leg, the injury would have been

11 more severe. This way, when I underwent surgery, they first had to

12 extract this piece of shrapnel from my leg or my ankle bone.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

14 Mr. Tapuskovic.

15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Judge

16 Mindua, I believe, has just asked the most relevant question. I can

17 perhaps drop most of my questions and thereby cut short my

18 cross-examination.

19 Can we please have back on our screens the photograph that we had.

20 Not the rotating one, the one that has no persons in it. That's the one

21 I'd like to have. Thank you. Yes, that's right. That's the right one.

22 Cross-examination by Mr. Tapuskovic:

23 Q. [Interpretation] Could the witness please point -- use her hand to

24 show where the small circle is, roughly speaking. Madam Witness, where

25 the small circle is, is that where you were standing? If you can see the

1 photograph.

2 A. Yes, I do.

3 Q. The small circle.

4 A. It was further up. It was further up that I was standing.

5 Q. All right. Let's try to draw a line between your position as you

6 showed that investigator, sort of a little to the right, in that general

7 direction. You pointed out the location of Spicaste Stijena. What about

8 your position? Can you answer this one, please: Between your position

9 and the position where you say the sniper was, do you know that between

10 the two there were BH army positions? Do you know that as a fact?

11 Otherwise, the army of Republika Srpska could have crossed the area any

12 time they liked. However, the truth of the matter is there were BH army

13 positions between your position and the position that the shot had come

14 from.

15 A. Yes. The Serb army were at Spicaste Stijena.

16 Q. What about your men?

17 A. They were further down at the foot of Spicaste Stijena.

18 Q. So the confrontation line ran along the entire length of Spicaste

19 Stijena; is that right?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Ms. Sanela, I have no intention of cross-examining you for a long

22 time. I merely wish to bring up some things that you mentioned in your

23 statement.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, you asked her, "Between your

25 position and the position where you say the sniper was, do you know that

1 between the two there were BH army positions?" What's the answer to that?

2 I'm asking you, Miss, the counsel asked you to confirm that there were BH

3 army positions between the position where you say the sniper was and the

4 position where you were. Is that so?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, the defence forces were at the

6 foot of Spicaste Stijena. The Serb soldiers were up there on top of

7 Spicaste Stijena and the BH army were at its foot. That's where the

8 defence line was. Had it not been for the defence forces there, one could

9 not have gone on leading normal lives, or indeed, staying there at all.

10 There had to be some defence there.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Your answer to the question, then, is yes.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. The defence forces were at the

13 foot of Spicaste Stijena.

14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I'll be skipping all these

15 questions --

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: I just have one more question. What was the

17 distance between the place where the BH army forces were and where you

18 were? What was the approximate distance?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The distance would be about 3

20 kilometres or thereabouts.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: And the distance between the position where the

22 Serb army was and where you were, what's the approximate distance?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It would be the same, the same

24 distance. They were at or around Spicaste Stijena and the defence forces

25 were at the foot of it. They were up there and the Bosnian defence line

1 was further down, at the foot of the hill. The distance should be roughly

2 the same.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Roughly the same, yes.

4 Mr. Tapuskovic.

5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thanks to what

6 we've just heard, I am now able to skip most of my questions, save for a

7 few.

8 The first thing I wanted to start with was the later statement.

9 Can we please have DD00-0356 brought up on our screens, please. This one

10 bears the following date: The 13th of November, 1995, which is soon after

11 the end of fighting in Sarajevo.

12 Q. Do you have that in front of you? Page 1, please. In actual

13 fact, there is only one page. Yes, I said it right. DD00-0356. Do you

14 have that in front of you?

15 A. All I have is the map. Nothing more.

16 Q. Page 2. There, that's the statement. Do you have the B/C/S

17 version in front of you, the Bosnian?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Here it is. Can you take a look at the middle of the page, the

20 sentence begins with, "I would say ..." Can you see that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. "I would say that the confrontation line is about 200 to 300

23 metres of air line from the position where you were." Is that correct?

24 And from the place where you were standing and the place where the

25 confrontation line was, was the distance 2 to 300 metres, as you said in

1 1995?

2 A. Yes, as the crow flies.

3 Q. Around 300 metres?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Very well. And then further on you said that a piece of metal had

6 been extracted from your leg in the hospital.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And then you said, "I assume that the bullet first hit the ground

9 behind me, a bit on the left side, and that it split in fragments. One

10 fragment entered above my ankle, behind my left leg, a little bit on the

11 left side." Correct?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. May I say that you did not receive a direct hit, but that rather

14 the bullet first fragmented and then hit you.

15 A. Yes. The bullet first fragmented against the asphalt surface,

16 because at that moment I started running.

17 Q. Very well. Why did you start running? Did you hear shots?

18 A. No, I didn't hear shots. I started running because of safety. I

19 wanted to cross this junction as soon as possible.

20 Q. Did you hear one shot fired before that?

21 A. No, I didn't hear anything. Everything was quiet. I started

22 crossing the intersection, and for my own safety, I decided to speed up a

23 little bit and run. And at that moment I first felt pain and then I heard

24 the sound of the shot. Then I saw blood and I was hopping on one foot.

25 And when UNPROFOR came, they were the only ones who were able to approach

1 me, because another shot came afterwards preventing anyone else from

2 approaching the intersection.

3 Q. Thank you. I'd like you to see another document that I received

4 from the Prosecution. It's been translated into English. It's DD00-0363.

5 It's a statement of yours that you gave on the premises of the police on

6 the 10th of March, 1995. Do you remember giving this statement?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Can you see the Serbian version -- I mean the Bosnian version?

9 A. Yes, I do.

10 Q. I'm not going to compare this with anything else, but this is a

11 statement that you gave to Omer Isanovic; is that correct?

12 A. Yes, that's what it says, that I gave this statement.

13 Q. However, I have another document, DD00-0362, another document that

14 I received from the Prosecution of which I couldn't find a translation,

15 compiled on the 22nd of November, 1994, which means on the day when you

16 were shot. This official note, compiled by Kemal Ibisevic, has it been

17 presented to you on that particular day? And more importantly, were you

18 made aware of the following, that says in this document? Can you see this

19 official note?

20 A. Yes, I can.

21 Q. Paragraph 3: "Upon receipt of information, the investigating

22 judge on duty of the High Court in Sarajevo, Nermina Mutalvolic [phoen]

23 was notified, but she did not visit the scene because an on-site

24 investigation could not have been conducted due to incessant sniping

25 against the area."

1 Did you make that statement?

2 A. I can't remember that.

3 Q. You don't remember; is that your answer?

4 A. Yes, I said that I cannot remember that now.

5 Q. Because if that was the case, it means that up there at Sedrenik

6 there was shooting along the confrontation line.

7 A. No, there was no shooting in terms of attacks or something like

8 that.

9 Q. But you see, the investigating judge did not dare go to the scene

10 because of the shooting.

11 A. I don't know what happened later, whether there was any shooting

12 or not when I was already at the hospital.

13 Q. I have one more question relating to your statement given on the

14 20th of April, 2006. It's DD00-0344. I originally intended to dwell more

15 on this one; however, I only have one question.

16 Can you please look at the last page. That's actually page 2.

17 And I think it's also page 2 in the English version. Page 2 of the

18 statement.

19 Can you see it?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Could you please look at the last passage, which reads: "During

22 the war, there were some periods where there seemed to be no shelling or

23 shooting," et cetera. "Sometimes there would be many days or even weeks

24 where there would be no sniping from Sharpstone, and we would say that

25 there was somebody nice in that sniper position."

1 Was that in the last year of war?

2 A. Yes, that's what we children used to say, that there must be a

3 nice man up there who wouldn't fire from the sniper rifle, and that's why

4 it seemed that the day was quiet.

5 Q. Was that in the last year of war?

6 A. Well, yes.

7 Q. Thank you very much.

8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender document

9 DD00-0362 into evidence, and as well -- and also the document DD00-0363,

10 if possible, please.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Docherty.

12 MR. DOCHERTY: I believe those are in evidence, Your Honour. I

13 believe these are the statements that we 92 terred at the beginning of the

14 witness' examination-in-chief. And the statement to the Bosnian police

15 officer would have been incorporated within the first statement, because

16 the witness says, "I have had read to me a statement I gave to the

17 authorities of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and I confirm that it is my own." That

18 is the opening of the 1995 statement.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: All right. We'll ask the court deputy if he can

20 confirm that they are already in evidence.

21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I wasn't able to locate that.

22 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: The court deputy says his records don't show that

24 either of these documents has already been admitted.

25 But I tell you what we'll do, in view of the ambiguity, please

1 proceed, Mr. Tapuskovic, and I'll ask the court deputy to further

2 investigate the matter. We'll come back to it.

3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thank you, but I

4 have no further questions. I have wrapped up my cross-examination. As

5 far as I know, these documents have not been entered into evidence under

6 65 ter and therefore I insist on them being entered as such.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: They will be entered one way or the other. It's

8 just that I've been alerted to what Mr. Docherty said, which is that they

9 are statements of the witnesses and normally these are tendered during

10 examination-in-chief. So it's just a matter of having it confirmed if

11 they have already been entered. If they haven't been, they will be

12 tendered as exhibits by the Defence, and I'll ask the court deputy to

13 check on that.

14 Now, is there any re-examination?

15 MR. DOCHERTY: No, there is not, Your Honour. And just so the

16 record is clear, I was not opposing the admission of these documents. I

17 just thought they might be getting duplicated.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. The court deputy will get back to me on

19 that issue.

20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I didn't understand

21 correctly. These additional two documents, are they going to be admitted

22 as potential Defence exhibits, including these two transcripts? I didn't

23 understand you, believe me.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, they will be admitted as Defence exhibits if

25 they have not already been entered as Prosecution exhibits. And although

1 the court deputy has already indicated that his records do not show that

2 they have already been admitted, I'm asking him to double-check that. But

3 they will be admitted one way or the other.

4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] And I would also like to ask you

5 something about document DD00-0286, although which I made a mistake. It

6 concerns the testimony of General Nicolai. That's a letter under this

7 number, and I would appreciate if this could marked for identification and

8 admitted into evidence.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: You'll have to remind me a little more about

10 that, that letter. General Nicolai testified last week.

11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. I presented a letter at

12 which point I didn't have an English translation. Later on it was found

13 by the Prosecution. That's the letter which refers to the conversation

14 between, as he claims, General Smith and Mladic. That's the letter I'm

15 referring to. And the document, in my view, says that it was Nicolai who

16 talked to Mladic through an interpreter.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Docherty?

18 MR. DOCHERTY: Your Honour, I, too, need to be reminded what this

19 document was. My concern is that it was the note concerning a

20 conversation between Ratko Mladic and an unknown person at General Smith's

21 headquarters, and if that is the document that we're talking about, I

22 believe that I had objected on the grounds of lack of foundation because

23 General Nicolai said he did not participate in this conversation. But, as

24 I say, I don't have my materials for General Nicolai at this time.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm going to ask the legal officer to investigate

1 this matter and to report to me, and I'll give you the Chamber's decision

2 on that when that report has been made to me. So I'm going to carry out

3 my own investigation.

4 Ms. Dedovic, that concludes your testimony. Thank you for giving

5 it, and you may now leave.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

7 [The witness withdrew]

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Marcus.

9 MS. MARCUS: Yes, Your Honours, the Prosecution called Witness

10 W-69, Afeza Karacic.

11 [The witness entered court]

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness make the declaration.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

14 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

15 WITNESS: AFEZA KARACIC

16 [The witness answered through interpreter]

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: You may sit.

18 And you may begin, Ms. Marcus.

19 Examination by Ms. Marcus:

20 Q. Good day, Madam Witness.

21 A. Good afternoon.

22 Q. Can you please tell the Court your full name.

23 A. My name is Afeza Karacic.

24 Q. Do you have any nicknames?

25 A. Yes, I do. Hafiza.

1 Q. What is your date of birth, please?

2 A. 3rd of May, 1963.

3 Q. Where were you born?

4 A. In the municipality of Foca.

5 Q. How long have you lived in Sarajevo?

6 A. For 26 years.

7 Q. Did you give a statement to the ICTY investigators on the 15th of

8 November, 1995?

9 A. Yes, I did.

10 Q. What language did you give that statement in?

11 A. In Bosnian.

12 Q. Did you re-read that statement before coming to court today?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Did you give another statement to ICTY investigators on the 20th

15 of May, 2006?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. What language did you give that statement in?

18 A. In Bosnian.

19 Q. When you gave the second statement, did you clarify a few things

20 from your former statement?

21 A. Yes, I did.

22 Q. Is there anything today that you would want to clarify or correct

23 from your more recent statement?

24 A. No, there isn't.

25 Q. Did you re-read that second statement before coming to court

1 today?

2 A. Yes, I did.

3 Q. Would you say that these two statements are true and accurate

4 representations of what you told the ICTY investigators?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. If asked the same questions today, would you give the same

7 answers?

8 A. Yes.

9 MS. MARCUS: Your Honours, pursuant to Rule 92 ter, I offer these

10 two statements into evidence, one of 15 November 1995 and one of 20 May

11 2006.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, they are admitted.

13 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibits P114 and P115, Your Honours.

14 MS. MARCUS: For the information of the Court, the questioning

15 will be now in relation to sniping incident number 8.

16 Q. Madam Witness, were you shot during the siege of Sarajevo?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Can you tell the Court what date the incident occurred.

19 A. 23rd of November, 1994.

20 Q. Where were you when you were shot?

21 A. I was in a tram.

22 Q. In which part of the tram were you standing?

23 A. In the middle.

24 Q. In which direction was the tram going?

25 A. From downtown towards my neighbourhood.

1 Q. Can you tell the Court what your neighbourhood is called?

2 A. Otoka.

3 Q. Which direction in the tram were you facing?

4 A. I was facing the back part of the tram.

5 Q. Were you seated or were you standing?

6 A. I was standing.

7 Q. In the summer of 2006 you met with an investigator of the ICTY and

8 you indicated on camera the location of the incident on the 23rd of

9 November, 1994. Is this correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 MS. MARCUS: I'd like to request the case manager, please, to show

12 that video.

13 [Videotape played]

14 "Investigator: I would like to ask you to come stand beside me

15 and point to the location where the tram was at the time you were wounded.

16 "Thank you. Can you please point in the direction the tram was

17 moving at the time you were wounded.

18 "Thank you. Could you please stand in the position you were

19 standing at the time when you were wounded.

20 "And could you please indicate where on your body you were

21 wounded.

22 "Thank you. And could you please point in the direction from

23 which you believe the shot came that wounded you.

24 "Thank you."

25 MS. MARCUS:

1 Q. Madam Witness, would you say that this video is a true and

2 accurate representation of what you told the investigators had occurred on

3 the 23rd of November, 1994?

4 A. Yes, it is.

5 Q. Did you give this information to the investigator entirely of your

6 own free will?

7 A. Yes, I did.

8 Q. Would you say that the video we've just seen looks any different

9 than that location did when the incident took place in 1994?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Can you indicate for the Court, please, where on your body the

12 bullet entered.

13 A. Yes, I can. Here.

14 MS. MARCUS: Could the record please indicate that the witness is

15 pointing to her upper right shoulder.

16 Q. And could you please indicate for the Court where the bullet

17 exited your body.

18 A. Yes. [Indicates]

19 MS. MARCUS: Could the record please indicate that the witness has

20 pointed to a little bit further down on her right arm.

21 Q. Madam Witness, when you pointed to the location from which you

22 believe the shots came, what part of town is that, please?

23 A. Grbavica and the Jewish are on this side.

24 Q. Just for clarification, when you say "the Jewish," can you tell

25 the Court what you're referring to?

1 A. I'm referring to the cemetery.

2 Q. Do you know who was in control of these locations that you just

3 mentioned?

4 A. I know. They were under the Serbian control.

5 Q. What were you wearing on the day of the incident?

6 A. A brown jacket and trousers.

7 Q. Were there any soldiers on the tram on the day you were shot?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Did you see any soldiers near the incident on that day?

10 A. No, apart from the IFOR or UNPROFOR, as it was at that time.

11 Q. Did you see any ABiH vehicles near the tram on that day?

12 A. No.

13 Q. Do you recall what the weather was like?

14 A. Yes. It was a clear day.

15 Q. Was the tram crowded?

16 A. Yes, it was.

17 Q. Were there leaves on the trees on the day the incident happened?

18 A. No, there weren't.

19 Q. Madam Witness, from your own personal recollection, how many

20 persons were injured in this same incident that you were injured in?

21 A. One person was killed and there were another six wounded.

22 Q. When you say "six," do you include yourself in the number six?

23 A. Yes, I do.

24 Q. Was the area where you were shot a dangerous area?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Why did you decide to take the tram that day, knowing that it was

2 a dangerous area?

3 A. The whole city was an unsafe area; the place where I lived was

4 unsafe, so it made no difference.

5 MS. MARCUS: I would like to request the court officer to pull up

6 a photograph, the 65 ter number is 2826, please. If I could request for

7 assistance, I'd like to ask the witness to mark the photograph when it

8 comes up.

9 Q. Madam Witness, I know you have a little bit of difficulty marking

10 things with that hand. Do you think you would be able to assist us in

11 marking the location on this photograph where the tram was, approximately,

12 on the day that you were shot?

13 A. Here. [Marks]

14 Q. Thank you. And is it possible for you to indicate for the Court

15 the direction from which you believe the shots came? Is it possible for

16 you to mark that in any way?

17 A. [Marks]. No. I'm not entirely capable. This arrow ...

18 Q. Okay.

19 MS. MARCUS: May I request the marked photograph, please, to be

20 entered into evidence.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Has she also indicated the direction from which

22 the shots came?

23 MS. MARCUS: That was the last question, Your Honour, but she says

24 she tried to draw an arrow but had a little bit of difficulty. She's not

25 as adept after the incident in using her hand to draw.

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. It may be tendered into evidence.

2 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P116, Your Honours.

3 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, just one question for you,

4 Witness, please. You say that you were hit by a sniper who must have been

5 somewhere in Grbavica or in the Jewish cemetery, in that area. So why are

6 you so sure? What makes you so sure? Is it a conclusion that you draw

7 yourself out of very objective statements or conclusions, or is it because

8 you were told that that is probably where the shooter was?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I came at this conclusion because

10 these first high-rise buildings behind the museum is the place where the

11 sniper was.

12 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, but that's my question. How

13 can you know that the sniper was in that high-rise? That high-rise

14 actually is ...

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because he couldn't have been at the

16 first two ones closer to the tram tracks. He must have been further

17 beyond.

18 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19 MS. MARCUS: I'd like to ask the case manager, please, to show us

20 the 360-degree ...

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: We are at the time for the break.

22 MS. MARCUS: Yes.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: So we'll break now and resume tomorrow. Is it in

24 the morning or afternoon? Afternoon. Tomorrow afternoon at 2.15.

25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m.,

1 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 30th day of

2 January, 2007, at 2.15 p.m.

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25