Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 4775

1 Monday, 4 March 2002

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.34 a.m.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

6 THE REGISTRAR: Case Number IT-98-29-T, the Prosecutor versus

7 Stanislav Galic.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.

9 I think there are a few things left from last week we have to do.

10 First of all, I think we have to take decisions on the admission in

11 evidence of the documents that have been used during the examination of

12 Mr. Kucanin. Apart from that, Mr. Stamp, there's an oral submission you'd

13 like to make. We'll do that next, and then first continue with the next

14 witness and whatever oral arguments there has to be done, we'll do that at

15 a later stage.

16 Yes, please.

17 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I take it that includes the 92 bis

18 argument. That will come at a later stage.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Because we only received now the statements and

20 it's a bit difficult for us -- of course we could hear oral argument, but

21 since these documents arrived today -- no, last Friday, but it was three

22 binders and I was not able to read them all over the weekend. And I think

23 we have a better idea of what the 92 bis is about if we have seen the

24 statements. So I'd rather -- yes, unless this disturbs you.

25 MR. IERACE: Not at all, Mr. President.

Page 4776

1 JUDGE ORIE: Not at all. Okay.

2 So Madam Registrar, could you please help us, guide us, through

3 the documents used during the examination of Mr. Kucanin.

4 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2792 is the photo file bearing on the

5 first page the ERN number 0028-4265.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is there any --

7 THE REGISTRAR: And the English translation, P2792.1.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any objection, if not, it is admitted into

9 evidence. Next one, please.

10 THE REGISTRAR: P1840 under seal, the record of on-site

11 investigation by Sarajevo CSB. And P1840.1 is the English translation,

12 also under seal.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. No objections, so they are admitted in

14 evidence.

15 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2790, an official note, Republic of

16 Bosnia-Herzegovina, Ministry of Interior, date 22/07/1994. And

17 the English translation, P2790.1.

18 JUDGE ORIE: No objections there. Admitted in evidence.

19 THE REGISTRAR: Map of Sarajevo marked by the witness P3644.MK1.

20 JUDGE ORIE: It is admitted in evidence.

21 THE REGISTRAR: An additional map marked by the witness P3658.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's admitted in evidence as well.

23 THE REGISTRAR: Defence Exhibit P54, document bearing ERN number

24 0205-6300.

25 JUDGE ORIE: No objections -- Mr. Ierace.

Page 4777

1 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I note the date of that document,

2 which is the 27th of July, 1994, it therefore being many months after the

3 relevant date for the incidents which took place in Alipasino Polje. It

4 was to those incidents which the Defence intimated this document relates.

5 So I object on that basis, but it's not a strong objection,

6 Mr. President.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Piletta-Zanin or Ms. Pilipovic.

8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. President.

9 I checked the documents which were produced. It is quite possible that

10 there is a problem concerning the date because there are two sets of

11 documents, the first refers to the 20th of July, 1993, and therefore I

12 believe there would be no objections to it. The other one is of the 27th

13 of July, 1993, likewise. If that is not the case, then obviously it is a

14 question. But with regard to the document that we are talking about, it

15 is D54. Yes, I do not think that it is possible for a Defence because

16 these documents have not been translated into English by the Prosecution.

17 We could not find the documents which apply to the 9th of July, 1993,

18 which is I believe the date of the incident. And a short time after the

19 incident and during the period of the indictment, there are certain events

20 which --

21 JUDGE ORIE: No further observations. Yes, please.

22 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the relevant date in fact is the 9th

23 of November, 1993. So it's some eight months prior. The reason I said

24 that I don't make it a strong objection is the document as tendered is

25 clearly of little weight. I understood my friend to be suggesting that in

Page 4778

1 fact the date of this document which he seeks to tender is not the date

2 which appears on it in the top left-hand corner. One doesn't need to

3 understand B/C/S to see that the date of the document is 27.07.1994. If

4 my friend is suggesting that the date of the document is in fact 1993, I

5 think that should be made clear at this stage before it's tendered.


7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President. I think

8 this is not a linguistic matter to all, of course. One does not need the

9 knowledge of B/C/S. It is simply that within the means of the Defence to

10 show what happened at a particular period of time. And around that period

11 of time if there were some elements, it is quite possible that they also

12 sometime before that. And Mr. President, this is a time of war, and we --

13 one does not move brigades or armies just like that. I mean, a brigade

14 will have 2.000 people. And therefore, I hope that the Prosecution has

15 heard all of the -- all of this in mind.

16 [Trial Chamber confers]

17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, do I understand you well, that you

18 accept to be the date of this document, the 27th of July, 1994?

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. The date

20 was not manipulated by the Defence. It is the date on the document.

21 Therefore presumably, it is the date which is on the document, and as the

22 Prosecution says.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Well, partly because of the strength of the objection

24 of the Prosecution, we'll admit it into evidence. But as I have indicated

25 before, that the probative value of this document for something that

Page 4779

1 happened many, many months before is, of course, of a relative character.

2 Madam Registrar, this document, D54, is admitted into evidence.

3 Then the next document.

4 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D55, document bearing ERN number

5 0205-6280.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Ierace.

7 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, there's a similar objection. The date

8 of this document is some three months after the relevant event. I would

9 add to that the fact that the relevant portion relied upon by the Defence

10 translates as a reference to a "command point of 102 Motorised Brigade in

11 Alipasino Polje area." In other words, there's no suggestion in the

12 document as to where precisely within that large part of Sarajevo the

13 command point was. The Defence seem to be suggesting that because there

14 was a command pointed in Alipasino Polje area, that therefore the mortar

15 shell impacting either on the school or at the point 2 or 300 metres away

16 is explicable as having a military objective. Essentially I say that

17 again it's of such little weight as to be of no assistance to the Trial

18 Chamber, but again if it is admitted then the same argument applies.


20 MR. IERACE: Thank you.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I see that this

23 morning the position of the Prosecution is bis repetita placent, it seems

24 that they do it more often than I do.

25 JUDGE ORIE: It's not quite clear to me the English translation.

Page 4780

1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I'm sorry,

2 Mr. President. I said that the position of the Prosecution this morning

3 is bis repetita placent, and I repeat, those who do more, do less.

4 [Trial Chamber confers]

5 JUDGE ORIE: With a similar observation as I made in respect of

6 D54, the document is admitted into evidence.

7 Then, Madam Registrar, we come to D56. Yes, could we do 56, 57,

8 and 58 in one. Could you please, Madam Registrar, yes, because they seem

9 to be similar documents.

10 THE REGISTRAR: None of these documents bear any ERN numbers. D56

11 bears the date 19.7.1993, and 20.7.1993. D57, a report, UNPROFOR report.

12 And D58 is a portion of an UNPROFOR report.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, perhaps for the clarity of the transcript, they

14 are all parts of what seems to be annex Roman VI, page 583, page 591, and

15 page 592.

16 Mr. Ierace.

17 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, could I trouble the Registrar for

18 either a copy or at least a quick look at D56. I don't seem to have a

19 copy of that.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, there have been some difficulties as far as

21 numbering is concerned. It is page 583 and 584.

22 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, could you now clarify the source of these

23 documents.

24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, because of the

25 size, I did not bring all the whole set of the documents that we discussed

Page 4781

1 on Friday. But I believe these are the military reports of the UNPROFOR.

2 Isn't that so?


4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] And what I will do,

5 Mr. President, is as follows: To indicate the source, because last week I

6 was called -- had somebody told me last week, we should be asking for the

7 source then I would have brought everything. But it is now that I'm asked

8 this and I will therefore do as follows: I will copy the page, the

9 cover page of the document that we have, and that is the annex, I

10 believe. I believe, I repeat, regarding the final report of the

11 UNPROFOR. I will photocopy this particular page. I will communicate it

12 both to the Prosecution and to the Registry so that all the questions

13 which are relative to the source of the document and how it was produced

14 are fully clarified. This seems to me the logical procedure, to provide

15 the cover page of this document.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I wondered whether these annexes to the report

17 of Committee of Experts?

18 MR. IERACE: They appear to be that, Mr. President. And in fact I

19 did ask Mr. Piletta-Zanin in open court last week, last Friday, to

20 indicate the source but I'm not too fussed by that at the moment. These

21 documents relate to the little girl being shot dead on the 20th of July,

22 1993. I object to their tender and I do so strenuously on this occasion

23 for the reason that there is simply no connection at all. My learned

24 colleague suggested on Friday that the connection was that there was

25 fighting, and that was the English translation, in Sarajevo, therefore

Page 4782

1 implying that the bullet could have been a stray one in the context of

2 shooting by both sides.

3 When one examines these documents more closely, one sees that

4 there's no reference to outgoing fire at all, more importantly, the

5 fighting was in the vicinity of Mount Igman which is to the southwest of

6 the city whereas this incident occurred in the north or northeast. There

7 is simply no connection. Thank you.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, would you please.

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, with pleasure,

10 Mr. President. It takes me a few seconds. It did not escape -- your

11 Chamber surely noticed that an appeal is made, an urgent appeal is made to

12 the International Community by the Bosnian Presidency to say that there

13 would be a general attack on the city. Now, this attack began on -- from

14 Mount Igman. That is quite true. But in the military technique, when

15 there is an attack as such, and I believe that is something that our

16 Prosecution failed to notice, one has to move the soldiers in order to

17 bring them to the front, and there are forces which go through the city.

18 And when troops passed, what happens? Simply when the soldiers pass by

19 one place or another place, obviously then they can be the contact. And

20 it happened -- it also happened by night because there was fighting at

21 night, major fighting at night unfortunately when this child was killed.

22 We know Mr. President that what is happening, that there must be movement

23 of troops. And this is proven by these troops. And therefore we think

24 that this is the probative value of this document, and therefore so with

25 which the Prosecution objects to the adoption of this document seems to me

Page 4783

1 precisely one of the elements which is indicative of the probative value

2 of this document. And here the date is fully exact, not only with regard

3 to that date but also with regard to the night. And therefore the day

4 which follows the day after the fact, it shows that all that week nothing

5 could be done by the police, by the police, because presumably this whole

6 area was the theatre of fighting. As I said, this is this gap between the

7 20th of July and 29th of July, 1993. And it seems to me that this

8 document shows that the reason why the police could not reach the area was

9 because of this fact, and that is why the Bosnian government launched that

10 appeal. Thank you very much.

11 [Trial Chamber confers]

12 JUDGE ORIE: We'll take a decision on the admission into evidence

13 of these three documents after the break.

14 Mr. Ierace -- yes, we have still another document, Madam

15 Registrar.

16 THE REGISTRAR: D59, under seal. Photocopy of three photographs

17 and a cover page --

18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, for the Registrar.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, could you please put your microphone

20 on.

21 THE REGISTRAR: 00269223. D59 under seal.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, could I just see the exhibit. Yes,

23 thank you.

24 Since there's no objection, they are admitted into evidence. Then

25 I think we dealt with all the documents used during the examination of

Page 4784

1 Mr. Kucanin, and we will then proceed with your next witness. And

2 protective measures involved are voice -- face distortion as far as I am

3 aware of.

4 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, would you entertain at the outset --

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course. I'm sorry, Mr. Stamp.

6 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President, Your Honour. I

7 would first like to make an oral application for protective measures --

8 JUDGE ORIE: Can it be done in open session or do we have to --

9 MR. STAMP: It can be done in open session.


11 MR. STAMP: These witnesses only require facial distortion so it

12 is not broadcast on television. The first witness is witness Mirza

13 Sabljica. He is on the schedule for this week. He has arrived, and he

14 indicates that as a result of his present occupation now, he has to travel

15 quite extensively through the Republika Srpska.


17 MR. STAMP: And he fears that if his is broadcast, then persons

18 might recognise him. And it might adversely affect the operations of his

19 business. That, briefly, is his concern.

20 The next witness is the witness Esrema Boskailo. She lives in

21 Sarajevo, but her father lived in Republika Srpska. He has recently died,

22 and the family house now belongs to her, and she has to travel to

23 Republika Srpska to look after affairs in respect of that house. Her

24 concern is that if her face is broadcast and she is recognised, then she

25 or her family, she has three children, may be in physical danger as a

Page 4785

1 result of her being recognised as a witness here. And those are her

2 concerns. And she also only asks for a facial distortion, so that her

3 face is not broadcast. No distortion in Court.

4 JUDGE ORIE: So the main reason is to avoid some being recognised

5 in the streets.

6 MR. STAMP: Being recognised in Republika Srpska, the fear being

7 that it would endanger herself and her daughter.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. I was

10 hesitating to tell my colleague that there are people who know these

11 speakers. We can certainly have them represented. It is possible to

12 testify in normal circumstances in a trial of this nature under the

13 obligation to make it possible for them to still do business, because what

14 you said before this Chamber is that in order not to have commercial

15 activities of a witness affected so that he can do more business, so that

16 he can make more money, this Prosecution is asking protective measures

17 only to protect the business and profit of a witness. I really did not

18 expect such arguments, Mr. President.

19 And then, another witness to say that someone else is asking for

20 protective measures so they can look after a property, and Mr. General

21 Galic cannot do anything about it. I don't think this is founded, these

22 arguments given by the Prosecution, they are only economic, and they are

23 not really protected by the rules, and I do not believe they should be

24 heard in this way by your Chamber.

25 [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 4786

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp, we'll give a decision after the break.

2 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Any other application?

4 MR. STAMP: Not an application. There's a matter I think I should

5 raise just to make the Court aware. Having regard to the postponement of

6 the testimony of Witness Mirza Sabljica and he had been scheduled to take

7 quite a long time, and logistic problems in bringing some witnesses here

8 in the order as was indicated in our letter of the 25th of December, there

9 will of necessity be --

10 JUDGE ORIE: The 25th of December?

11 MR. STAMP: 25th of February, 2002. I beg your pardon.


13 MR. STAMP: There will be some changes in the schedule of

14 witnesses.

15 JUDGE ORIE: As a matter of fact, you are talking about the 25th.

16 I have also the 27th of February. That seems to be a more recent one.

17 MR. STAMP: Yes. I don't think --

18 JUDGE ORIE: I think for the first witnesses, the following order

19 is the same as far as I can see. Yes, I think the it

20 doesn't make any difference.

21 Please proceed.

22 MR. STAMP: In the circumstances, the order and to some extent it

23 depends on the travelling arrangements which can be made for other

24 witnesses will be Sead Besic to follow, and that is in accordance with the

25 order indicated. But instead of Mirza Sabljica, it would be Ezrema

Page 4787

1 Boskailo for whom I made the application just now, Esad Hadzimuratovic,

2 then Mirza Sabljica. He could make it here earlier than the Witnesses AF

3 and P.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That would mean first Sead Besic.

5 MR. STAMP: Yes.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Then Ezrema Boskailo.

7 MR. STAMP: Yes. Then Esad Hadzimuratovic


9 MR. STAMP: Then Mirza Sablijeca.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The --

11 MR. STAMP: The Witnesses AF and P, we could not change their

12 travel arrangements.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Do we know who comes after Witness Sabljica?

14 MR. STAMP: It would be AF.


16 MR. STAMP: But originally they were before the witness Sabljica.


18 MR. STAMP: And Witnesses Zecevic, Kolp and Audhuy have indicated

19 that they will have difficulties being here in the next few weeks, but as

20 soon as we can confirm a time for their arrival, we will advise the Court

21 and our learned friends.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so at the earliest possible moment

23 because of course the Defence also has to prepare the cross-examination of

24 these witnesses.

25 MR. STAMP: Mr. President, Your Honour.

Page 4788

1 JUDGE ORIE: Any observations from the Defence?

2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, there would be a lot to

3 say, Mr. President, but I think I would rather sit down.


5 So we have taken notice of the change of the order in which the

6 Prosecution will call its witnesses.

7 Then I don't know to whom to address, but then I think we are at

8 your next witness.

9 MR. STAMP: Indeed, Mr. President.

10 JUDGE ORIE: And it would be Mr. Besic.

11 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, might I be excused during this next

12 witness, and perhaps I should say something which is probably quite

13 obvious to you and Your Honours, and that is that we are now moving into

14 the third phase of the four phases of the trial, which is the shelling

15 evidence in relation to the shelling of civilians. And during this fourth

16 phase, Mr. Chester Stamp will be frequently in Court. There are a few

17 sniping witnesses still to come, and of course the videolink evidence.

18 And whilst I'm on my feet I might indicate that we're planning on that

19 occurring on March the 18th, 19th, 20th, and 21st.

20 JUDGE ORIE: The videolink?

21 MR. IERACE: Yes.


23 MR. IERACE: Thank you.

24 JUDGE ORIE: I must indicate to you that I received this morning a

25 suggestion from the Court management that I think we would not sit on the

Page 4789

1 8th of March -- let me just have a look. There would be a small change on

2 the 8th and the 15th. I only saw it briefly, but you told me that this

3 would be the 18th, so it's not affected by any change on the 8th or the

4 15th. I'll inform you about that also after the break.

5 Yes. Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. The

7 Defence wanted to draw the attention of the Prosecution and your Chamber

8 to the following point: Your Chamber still hasn't decided on the Rule 62,

9 but then there was a decision to have two statements of two witnesses who

10 were in The Hague last week. And so it seems that the position of the

11 Defence is that not to accept this, and that's what we are stating because

12 we were not invited formally to give our opinion on these two witnesses,

13 that's the first thing. And subsequently --

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you're referring to Rule 62.

15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, that is an error. I was,

16 of course, talking -- I'm not reading the transcript, but I could do it.

17 It is -- I'm talking about Rule 92 bis. And thank you for noting it in

18 the transcript. And of course, the position of the Defence is not to

19 accept this, although your Chamber it seems has already taken a decision

20 to designate an officer in this case, which --

21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, the designation of an officer is

22 done by the Registry, not by this Chamber.

23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I apologise, by the Registry,

24 by the Registry not by the Chamber. But we have to indicate to the

25 Chamber not to the Registry what our position is. That's the point

Page 4790

1 first. And the second point or perhaps I should wait for -- yes -- so

2 that we can have less noise. So by chance, if your Chamber does not take

3 a positive decision on Rule 92 bis, then we are going to have to again

4 reactivate ourselves in this area on sniping incidents. So we are then

5 going back to the shelling, and then going to the sniping. So I think

6 that could cause confusion, that's all.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Until now we could not finally decide on the 92

8 bis applications because there were no translated versions of the

9 statements available to the Chamber, and for final decisions of course the

10 content of the statement is relevant. So that's the reason why we

11 postponed oral argument on it. We just received them, and so we'll do

12 that as soon as practical. Yes.

13 Nothing else to be discussed. Yes, Mr. Stamp. You will then call

14 Mr. Besic.

15 MR. STAMP: Yes.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Facial distortion is the protective measure which is

17 in force. Yes, please, Mr. Usher, could you bring in Mr. Besic.

18 [The witness entered court]

19 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Besic.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Can you hear me in a language you understand?

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, very well.

23 JUDGE ORIE: And Mr. Besic, I'll first tell you that I checked

24 that your facial distortion, which is one of the protective measures which

25 will be applied in respect of you, is functioning. Before giving

Page 4791

1 testimony in this Court, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence require you

2 to make a solemn declaration that you speak the truth, the whole truth,

3 and nothing but the truth. The text of this solemn declaration will now

4 be handed out to you by the usher, and may I invite you to make that

5 solemn declaration please.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

7 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much. Please be seated.

9 You'll first be examined by Mr. Stamp.

10 Mr. Stamp, please proceed.

11 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President.


13 [Witness answered through interpreter]

14 Examined by Mr. Stamp:

15 Q. Could you please state your name and occupation for the record.

16 A. My name is Sead Besic. I work at -- I'm a police officer at

17 the Sarajevo canton MUP, and I am a criminal technician.

18 Q. How long have you been a police officer?

19 A. Since 1975.

20 Q. And do you have any specialised training as a criminal technician?

21 A. No, except for a course which lasted for six months, a criminal

22 technicians' course.

23 Q. Now, you live in Sarajevo?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And as a police officer, you worked in Sarajevo?

Page 4792

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Now, could you briefly describe in a couple sentences the nature

3 of your work as a criminal technician.

4 A. Well, the work of a criminal technician means that it is

5 investigating the scene of an incident, a crime scene. We are marking or

6 fixing the scene that we find. We sketch the area, the scene of the

7 incident. And then we gather the evidence, the material evidence, that

8 could help in clearing up the case. So we have to mark them with numbers,

9 photograph things in detail. We gather any evidence, any traces, and we

10 keep them as evidence. Anything that has to be expertly examined is then

11 sent to be examined, and then some others can be kept under seal for later

12 examination. This is more or less what I do.

13 Q. Apart from sketching scenes of crimes and photographing items on

14 the scenes of crimes, is there another way that you use to record the

15 scene of a crime?

16 A. What I said, we take a picture, we take photographs. We video --

17 we have a video evidence, and these -- we gather evidence, and these are

18 the three ways that we can record the scene of the incident.

19 Q. Thanks very much.

20 Now, were you working as a criminal technician in the police force

21 during the war of 1992 to 1995?

22 A. Yes, I did.

23 Q. And this was in Sarajevo?

24 A. Yes, that's right.

25 Q. Now, in the course of that conflict, did you investigate shelling

Page 4793

1 and sniping incidents?

2 A. Yes, I did.

3 Q. Just an approximation, about how many shelling incidents would you

4 have investigated in the course of that conflict?

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. I would

7 like to object because the question, the way it is asked, does not allow

8 it to be -- to find out whether this gentleman was intervening on the

9 sniping incidents coming into the city as well as those coming out of the

10 city that we know about, unfortunately.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp, would you like to respond.

12 MR. STAMP: I merely wanted to have an idea as to how many

13 shelling incidents the witness has investigated so the Court could get an

14 idea of his experience in his field.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The objection is denied. And of course,

16 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, there's nothing that prevents you from asking

17 additional questions for the witness during cross-examination. Please

18 proceed, Mr. Stamp.

19 MR. STAMP: Thank you, Mr. President.

20 Q. Yes, approximately how many shelling incidents have you

21 investigated?

22 A. Well, I cannot give you an exact number, but approximately 1992,

23 1993, 1994, 1995, I worked perhaps not on all of them, but almost all.

24 Many, many cases for shelling and for sniping incidents.

25 Q. Now, what was the procedure used when you went to investigate

Page 4794

1 incidents? Did you go alone or did you go as a team?

2 A. No, the normal police procedure, after we would have a report from

3 the citizens or from the civilian defence, there would be a team created

4 by the security services. They would then inform the investigating judge,

5 and they would create an operative team that would go to the scene of the

6 incident. So we wouldn't go on our own, no.

7 Q. In respect of the investigation of shelling incidents, you said

8 that there was sometimes an investigative judge. Was there any other

9 specialist that would accompany the team in investigating shelling

10 incidents?

11 A. No, whoever was on duty, whichever investigating judge was on duty

12 on that day, he would go out. So it would not always be the same person.

13 And of course, criminal technician it wouldn't be the same. So there

14 would be people who would be on duty. There would be different people.

15 Not every technician would go to do shelling, investigate shelling every

16 single time.

17 Q. Very well.

18 Now, do you remember investigating a shelling incident on the 5th

19 of February, 1992?

20 A. Yes, I do.

21 Q. Can you remember where you were when you got the information about

22 this event?

23 A. I was on the premises of the criminal technicians' department. As

24 always, if someone was on duty, if a technician was on duty, then it would

25 be in the premises, in the office.

Page 4795

1 Q. May I get back to the date. The date I'm asking about is the 5th

2 of February, 1994.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And the evidence which you gave, that you were at the office of

5 the police, is in relation to that date?

6 A. Yes, yes, that's right.

7 Q. Now, did yourself and a police team go to investigate a shelling

8 that day?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Where was this?

11 A. It was in Markale.

12 Q. What is Markale?

13 A. Markale is a marketplace where people go to buy and sell things.

14 It's an open marketplace. There are many stands and many things are sold

15 there.

16 Q. When you say "it's an open marketplace," do you mean by that that

17 it is not covered?

18 A. That's right. There's no roof. It's between buildings, and

19 normally there are tables with small roofs. These are so to speak some

20 kind of stands. It would have a little table and then it would have a

21 small plastic cover above it.

22 Q. Now, where in Sarajevo is Markale?

23 A. It's right in the centre of town.

24 Q. Now, the 5th of February, 1994, what day of the week was that?

25 A. It was a Saturday.

Page 4796

1 Q. And normally on Saturdays, would Markale market be crowded or

2 empty or somewhere in between?

3 A. Well, considering that it was a Saturday and the other days were

4 working days, so the people who were on work obligations on those other

5 days, the Saturday was a day when people could go and go to barter

6 cigarettes for oil, flour for sugar, and try and buy things that they

7 needed. So yes, I presume that there were many, many people there. I was

8 not there when it happened, but, yes, I presume it was quite crowded

9 there.

10 Q. Now, could you tell us what you observed when yourself and your

11 team arrived at the market that day?

12 A. When we arrived in Markale, we did not find any civilians there

13 because the police station Stari Grad was securing the area until the

14 investigation team arrived. So the whole place -- the whole scene was

15 secured already.

16 Q. Could you describe the scene as you saw it when you arrived

17 there.

18 A. When we arrived and we looked at the scene of the incident, we

19 found many tissues, we found many stand's tables overturned, a lot of

20 blood.

21 Q. Now, when you arrived at the scene, did you do anything as a

22 criminal technician?

23 A. Normally we would start a procedure to find out where the

24 projectile landed, where it fell, because a crater was found, and then

25 that had to be processed in the sense of it being photographed, sketched,

Page 4797

1 recorded.

2 Q. So did you photograph, sketch, and otherwise record the scene?

3 A. Yes, we did.

4 Q. You referred to the -- to trying to find the place where the

5 projectile fell. Did you find that place?

6 A. Yes, we did. We located it, and we started to record the scene of

7 the incident, because the actual location, there were lots of human

8 tissues, lots of blood, a lot of items. I personally proceeded to clean

9 this area so that we could see as much as possible the actual projectile

10 and the way the projectile landed.

11 Q. You said photographs were taken. Who took photographs of the

12 scene at Markale?

13 A. I took photographs.

14 MR. STAMP: May it please you, Mr. President, Your Honours, I

15 would like to hand to the witness what is designated Exhibit P2262.

16 Before that, may I just ask him one question.

17 Q. If you saw those photographs again, the ones you took at Markale

18 market that day, would you be able to identify them?

19 A. Yes, I could.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed, Mr. Stamp.

21 MR. STAMP: Thank you.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please assist Mr. Stamp.

23 MR. STAMP: May I indicate to the Court that I think the procedure

24 is that the translation is attached to the exhibit at the back, to the

25 back of the document that has been handed to you. I think there should be

Page 4798

1 a P2262.1.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if it's dot 1, it's the English translation.

3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Mr. President.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I apologise. Dot 1 is the English translation

5 of the same document.


7 Q. Just have a quick look at the folder which is in front of you, and

8 I just want to tell you if that is a selection of some of the photographs

9 that you took at Markale that day.

10 A. Yes, these are the photographs.

11 Q. Are those all the photographs you took at Markale that day?

12 A. There are missing the photographs of people, of victims. In this

13 particular file you do not find the photographs of victims, and their

14 photographs were taken in the morgue of the Kosevo Hospital.

15 MR. STAMP: May I respectfully indicate to the Court and to my

16 learned friends that those photographs are in the possession of the

17 Prosecution. They were disclosed to the Defence a long time ago. And if

18 they are needed we could make them available to the Court, but it was

19 decided that the photographs of the bodies would not be necessary.

20 Q. Now, in the set of photographs in front of you, could you have a

21 look at the photograph numbered 1.

22 MR. STAMP: One moment, Mr. Besic.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Just make clear, what

25 photographs are we talking about, those which the Defence has? What are

Page 4799

1 the photographs? Could you please specify which of the photographs which

2 we have?

3 JUDGE ORIE: As far as I understand, it was indicated by the

4 Prosecutor that they had photographs of the bodies of those who have been

5 brought to the morgue, and that they would not use that. And what we're

6 talking about at this moment is this photo documentation 2262.

7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Indeed, Mr. President, what I

8 wanted was the ERN number to merely check. If Mr. Stamp can give me the

9 ERN number of those other photographs so that we can check if we did

10 receive them.

11 MR. STAMP: If I could assist my friend.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.

13 MR. STAMP: The photographs in the folder here --

14 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just take it short. You're asking about ERN

15 numbers of those photographs we are not using at this very moment. Ask

16 Mr. Stamp during the break, and I'm certain that he'll inform you.

17 Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.

18 MR. STAMP: Thanks, Mr. President.

19 Q. Now, in these photographs in this folder, there is writing below

20 the photographs. Who did this writing?

21 A. I did. I'm the author of both the text and the photographs.

22 Q. Now, the photograph in this folder numbered 1, could you have a

23 look at that, please. It says it's a view of M. Baseskije Street?

24 A. That's right.

25 Q. And it refers to an arrow which points to the market. Is there an

Page 4800

1 arrow in that photograph? Can you show us an arrow if there is one?

2 MR. STAMP: Could the witness be allowed to use the device there.


4 Please, Mr. Usher, could you assist the witness.

5 A. Because we had to work here, because we had to do it very hastily,

6 we made some omissions. And there is no arrow to point at it, but I can

7 tell you that to the left is the market, and this is the view towards old

8 bastia [phoen].


10 Q. Could you point out on that photograph, Mr. Besic, where the

11 market is.

12 A. [Indicates].

13 Q. Is that the front of the market or the back of the market?

14 A. The front part of the market, the market ends in a large

15 supermarket which is still there. And this is the lateral part.

16 Q. Now, the -- what's the name of this street which abuts the front

17 part of the market and which is shown here in this photograph?

18 A. Now it is called Mula Mustafe Baseskije, formally it was called

19 Marsal Tito Street.

20 Q. Now, could you have a look at photograph number 2.

21 A. Same street, but the photograph is taken from the different

22 direction. That is looking from Bastacija towards Marin Dvor, and the

23 market is to the right.

24 Q. Could you just point to the right.

25 A. [indicates].

Page 4801

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp, if the witness is pointing, could you

2 please describe it for the record. If I could assist, the witness is

3 pointing to some iron structures just below the letters "TRAV."

4 MR. STAMP: I'm grateful for your guidance, Mr. President.

5 Q. Could you have a look at photograph number 3. This on the text is

6 a view of Markale market with an arrow indicating point of impact and

7 explosion of mortar shell. Is there an arrow on the photograph?

8 A. There is no arrow. I just told you, because we were doing -- we

9 were working there very quickly, we forgot to put the arrows. But I can

10 point at the place where the projectile fell.

11 Q. Could you point to that, please, on the photograph, please.

12 A. [Indicates].

13 MR. STAMP: For the record, Your Honour, the witness indicates a

14 structure to the lower right-hand section of the photograph.

15 Q. Is that a building there?

16 A. A moment ago I told you it was a supermarket. So it is a

17 structure made of solid material. That is in the rear. So this is the

18 rear part, and the front part is this one here.

19 Q. That impact site, was that an impact of the same day?

20 A. Yes.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Sorry to disturb, but again

23 for the transcript, could we in line 13 mention what is it that the

24 witness pointed. Thank you.

25 MR. STAMP: The witness pointed to the structure to the right,

Page 4802

1 lower right section, of the photograph.

2 Q. Witness, you said you indicated the point of impact and explosion

3 of mortar shell. Which mortar shell is that?

4 A. It is 120 millimetre mortar.

5 Q. Now, have a look at photograph number 4. And this is a panoramic

6 view of Markale with arrows indicating point of impact and damage to

7 neighbouring building caused by unidentified projectile. Do you see the

8 arrow in that photograph?

9 A. Yes, it is in the upper left corner. This damage is older. It

10 was -- it did not happen that day. But we merely recorded it on this

11 photograph simply so as to show that this area had been targeted -- was

12 targeted before, that this part of the city was targeted even before that

13 day, or rather the area around the Markale market was already a target

14 before that day.

15 Q. Now, apart from that arrow, to the top left of the photograph,

16 there's another arrow to the photograph.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. What does that arrow point to?

19 A. That arrow is pointing at the site of impact of that mortar

20 projectile, the arrow that is missing on the previous photograph.

21 Q. And right across the bottom of this photograph, number 4, there

22 are some metal structures. What are those?

23 A. It is a table, like a stand, market stand. And the detonation

24 simply sent it back to the wall, so it flew over towards the wall.

25 Q. Could you have a look at photograph number 5, please. That's a

Page 4803

1 photograph of inside the market itself?

2 A. That is right. Taken from -- it's a side view of the market.

3 Q. Is there an arrow in this photograph?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Could you point out to the Court the point of impact of the mortar

6 projectile.

7 A. [Indicates].

8 MR. STAMP: The witness indicates an area of a pathway in the

9 centre of the photograph, may it please, Your Honours.

10 Q. Now, in this photograph, can you see a crater for the projectile?

11 A. No, not really because the crater is covered and therefore hidden

12 by rubble as you can see for yourself.

13 Q. So when this photograph was taken, you had not cleaned the area as

14 yet?

15 A. No, not yet. This photograph shows what the situation was like

16 when we arrived there.

17 Q. And have a look at photograph number 6. This photograph also

18 shows the condition of the market as it was when you arrived?

19 A. True, because one can see blood here, traces of blood.

20 Q. Could you have a look at photograph number 7. This is a

21 photograph of what? Could you describe what you see there, please.

22 A. This photograph shows the crater, that is, the point of impact of

23 the projectile, the crater, and the damage in the pavement caused by

24 shrapnel. The photograph was taken after the site was cleared, and I

25 personally cleared it, that is, removed blood, tissue, and various objects

Page 4804

1 from the site.

2 Q. And if you will, please, have a look at photograph number 8. The

3 description you wrote is the point of impact of mortar shell photographed

4 after incoming direction is determined.

5 What are those articles there looking like a "T"?

6 A. The cross -- the crosspiece of wood, a stake that we found there,

7 is put at the furthest parts of the damaged pavement, and we also used a

8 ruler at 90 degrees in order to point at the angle from which the

9 projectile made the impact.

10 Q. Where these items meet, is that the centre of the crater?

11 A. That's right. This is the centre of the crater, that is, where

12 the projectile hit the ground.

13 Q. Who placed these sticks in this area?

14 A. These two sticks were placed there by experts -- ballistic

15 experts, Cavcic and Sabljica. They were present at the investigation.

16 Q. Now, when your team set off to investigate shelling incidents

17 involving casualties, was it a normal thing for ballistic experts to

18 accompany the team?

19 A. By and large, yes. They were not always present, though, but it

20 depended on the number of victims. Where there were more victims, they

21 would invariably come out. And if it was only woundings or material

22 damage, they would not come out.

23 Q. Could you have a look at photograph number 9, please. The

24 photograph indicates a map and a compass. The map and the compass, I take

25 it, were used by the ballistic expert?

Page 4805

1 A. That's right. In this particular case, we see here the map of

2 Sarajevo which we used -- rather the ballistic experts used. It is always

3 positioned near the centre of the point of impact, and then the north is

4 established and compass helps us to establish the direction from which the

5 projectile came. That was the usual procedure.

6 Q. Now, could you have a look at photograph number 10.

7 A. It is the same photograph but taken at a smaller distance, and the

8 arrow points at the direction from which the projectile came. On this

9 map, the arrow points at a part of the city of Sarajevo which is in that

10 direction.

11 Q. And have a look at photograph 11, please. Could you describe this

12 photograph.

13 A. On this photograph, one can see the tail-fin of the mortar shell

14 in the pavement. I found this tail-fin because when I was cleaning the

15 ground, that is removing tissue and blood, and when I examined the point

16 of impact, I could see that the tail-fin was there. And I left it there

17 pending the arrival of the UN soldiers.

18 Q. By "UN soldiers," you mean UNPROFOR soldiers, United Nations

19 protection force soldiers?

20 A. Yes, in this case, members of the French battalion.

21 Q. Now, this is a photograph of the mortar tail-fin after you had

22 cleaned the vicinity. In your experience of investigating, as you

23 described, many shelling incidents, had you ever seen the mortar tail-fin

24 lodged in the ground at the point of impact before?

25 A. Yes, of course, repeatedly. Repeatedly.

Page 4806

1 Q. And the last photograph, photograph 13, is a photograph of what?

2 A. This is the tail-fin, that is, destablising device, of the mortar

3 shell which I took from the scene and took into the laboratory for the

4 crime investigation techniques. This is the so-called macro photograph

5 done in black and white.

6 Q. I take it you're saying that this photograph was taken at the lab?

7 A. That's right, in the lab, and it was done black and white because

8 we didn't really have colour prints, so we had to use them sparingly.

9 Q. The tail-fin, if you saw that tail-fin again, would you be able to

10 identify it?

11 A. Of course I would, yes.

12 Q. Now, in respect to your collection of the tail-fin, did you have a

13 report done?

14 A. No, because we do not -- our job description does not involve the

15 record of traces found. They are, instead, included in the crime report.

16 There is a column which says "traces discovered" and what was done with

17 them. Now, the description of that item then includes the type of the

18 trace, where it was found, and its filing number.

19 Q. Very well. May I ask you this way: Did you do a report on the

20 criminal technical investigation into the site?

21 A. Yes, yes, it is an integral part. It accompanies the photo

22 documentation and sketches. I mean, it always makes a part, such criminal

23 technical investigation, or rather report.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp, if it would be a suitable moment.

25 MR. STAMP: Convenient time.

Page 4807

1 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll adjourn until 11.30 a.m.

2 --- Recess taken at 10.59 a.m.

3 --- On resuming at 11.32 a.m.

4 JUDGE ORIE: I indicated to the parties that two decisions would

5 be taken after the break. The first one is about the admission into

6 evidence of three documents, D56, D57, and D58. The documents are

7 admitted into evidence because they contain information on the

8 circumstances around the relevant period in time. But of course, this

9 Chamber will, in proper time, assess what the exact probative value will

10 be. The Defence has suggested not only one but even two reasons for its

11 probative value, being both a delay in drafting a report on an incident,

12 or the movement of military people in this period of time. But we'll have

13 to assess that at a later stage, whether any of these -- whether it will

14 have any probative value in this respect or not.

15 The second decision I indicated that we would give the after break

16 about the protective measures. The Prosecutor has convinced the Chamber

17 that the measures sought are needed to enable the witnesses to continue to

18 make a normal living, or to look after their legitimate interests without

19 any disturbance. So therefore, the protective measures as sought are

20 granted.

21 I think, then, yes, Mr. Usher, would you then please bring in the

22 witness.

23 Just in order to avoid whatever misunderstanding, Mr. Stamp, could

24 you please repeat but quite in detail the name of the first witness, not

25 the lady, but the businessman so that we have no misunderstanding in who

Page 4808

1 it exactly is.

2 MR. STAMP: It is Mirza.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Sabljica?

4 MR. STAMP: Yes.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Then there is no misunderstanding.

6 Please proceed.

7 MR. STAMP: Could the witness be shown again the folder identified

8 as P2262.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Usher, could you please assist Mr. Stamp in

10 giving the folder containing photographs to the witness.


12 Q. Now, I had taken you a little bit too quickly through those

13 photographs and had moved from photo 11 to photo 13. So could you please

14 quickly have a look at photo number 12.

15 That, Witness, as described by you is a stabiliser of the 120

16 millimetre mortar shell photographed next to a comparison scale.

17 A. Yes, that's right. Yes, we call it a scale determinant.

18 Q. [Previous translation continues]... some damage to the flaps of

19 the fin.

20 A. Yes, you can see the way the tail-fin is slightly crooked in its

21 lower part. The deformation probably arrived when it arrived on the

22 surface because there is the entry bit which is deformed, and then the

23 other part is in its normal position.

24 Q. You also said that you did a criminal technical report in respect

25 to your investigations.

Page 4809

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Thank you.

3 MR. STAMP: With your leave, Mr. President, may I ask the witness

4 to have a look at the document designated P3209.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.


7 Q. And is that a copy of the criminal technical report that you made?

8 A. Yes, that's right. Yes, this is a part of the criminal technical

9 report, and I am the author of it. And precisely in the column, the

10 traces found, it says that the traces found was the tail of the mortar

11 shell.

12 Q. Sorry, one moment. Before we get to that column, you said you

13 made this document. Did you sign it?

14 A. I did not sign it, but it was checked by our chief at the time,

15 Muhamed Hadzisakovic.

16 Q. And the signature on the second page, bottom right, is his

17 signature?

18 A. Yes, considering that we were working as a team, Sefo, Edin and

19 Mikalem Sarvan, and Sead Besic, I was the team leader, but it was the

20 chief who signed this document.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. I would like to check

23 the -- to help the interpreters. I believe that one part of what the

24 witness just said was not audible, I'm afraid.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Were the interpreters able to hear what the witness

Page 4810

1 said or...

2 THE INTERPRETER: Not the names, Mr. President.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Not the names. Could you please repeat the names,

4 Mr. Besic, because the interpreters could not hear you.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sefo, Edin, Mikalem Sarvan, and Sead

6 Besic.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

8 Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.


10 Q. You were directing us to that part of the report referring to

11 traces found at the scene, and that's the part of number 6 in the

12 report?

13 A. That's right.

14 Q. And the traces you found are as written there, I take it?

15 A. Yes. That's right.

16 Q. You found shrapnel on the scene?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. You said that you also found the tail-fin, which was stored by the

19 police authorities. Could you say what happened to the shrapnel that you

20 found?

21 A. The shrapnel was also taken to the criminal technical department,

22 and whether they are still there I wouldn't know.

23 Q. And in paragraph 4, there is a description of a criminal act

24 committed.

25 A. Yes.

Page 4811

1 Q. And I take it you received information that as a consequence of

2 the shelling, there were 66 persons dead and 200 persons wounded?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. You indicated that you'd be able to identify the tail-fin if you

5 saw it again.

6 MR. STAMP: With your leave, Mr. President, I'd like to show him

7 an artifact or an article.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so, Mr. Stamp.

9 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. I would

11 like to take this opportunity to indicate that this has been weeks and

12 weeks now that the Defence has been asking to be given these pieces of

13 this shrapnel so that we could have it examined, but we have not had any

14 reply. So we were not able to prepare for the most important allegations

15 against General Galic, and I would like to say that these shrapnel pieces

16 were not given to us for examination. And I believe this is a major

17 violation of the fairness of this trial.

18 JUDGE ORIE: There may be some misunderstanding. I did understand

19 that it was not shrapnel that was presented to the witness, but the

20 stabiliser fin. I don't know whether you --

21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, any part of a

22 projectile should be treated in the same way, whether it is shrapnel in

23 the strictest sense or any residual element, it's exactly the same thing.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I'm quite willing to accept that

25 your observation is valid for both type of artifacts. But I just wondered

Page 4812

1 whether there was any misunderstanding since I thought a different thing

2 was presented to the witness as you talked about. But I do understand

3 that your observation is valid for both.

4 This Chamber has not been informed before that there were any

5 problems, as far as I know, is that you must have had an opportunity to

6 inspect whatever is in the possession of the Prosecution. I do understand

7 that you want to have it examined by experts or -- I'm not aware of it.

8 It's totally new for me. So I'm a bit surprised that we were not informed

9 by any wish which seems not to be fulfilled by the Prosecution. But

10 Mr. Stamp, could you clarify the position of the Prosecution.

11 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President, Your Honours. The

12 article has been on our exhibit list since last year, and therefore the

13 Defence was on notice that it was in existence, it was in our possession,

14 and it would be tendered. Subsequent to that, on the 15th of February by

15 records in my possession, the article was included in the list of exhibits

16 which the witness would be referring to. And in respect to this

17 specific article, and possibly having regard to the fact that the Defence

18 had not asked to inspect it before, we made a specific invitation to the

19 Defence, if I may read it: "With regard to the Prosecution's intention to

20 tender into evidence artifact Exhibits 3624, mortar tail-fin, the Defence

21 is hereby invited to --"

22 THE INTERPRETER: Could you please slow down, counsel, you're

23 reading. The interpreters have trouble following you.

24 MR. STAMP: I'm so sorry. I'm so sorry. I'll start again: "With

25 regard to the Prosecution's intention to tender into evidence artifact of

Page 4813

1 Exhibit 3624, mortar tail-fin, the Defence is hereby invited to inspect

2 the physical exhibit at their earliest convenience." And that was as I

3 said subsequent to them being put on notice last year that we intended to

4 use it in this trial.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you were talking about a request

6 from the side of the Defence to have an opportunity to examine these or

7 have them examined, these artifacts. Could you please indicate when you

8 requested this, because you said it was without any answer.

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. Gladly.

10 The request was rephrased last time in one of the offices of the

11 Prosecution in the presence of Mr. Ierace and Mr. Mundis and Mr. Waespi,

12 and we then learned that these pieces were being transported in a special

13 way and that they then had then arrived at the Hague. This meeting was

14 probably about two weeks ago, our last meeting. We then said that -- we

15 indicated to the Prosecution urgently that we wanted to have this examined

16 by our own ballistic experts who would come to The Hague, and I don't know

17 how long we have been waiting for a possibility to get the Visas for these

18 two experts who are able to say this, because I am just a humble lawyer,

19 so these experts would be able to tell us what these exhibits are.

20 Now, we waited for the arrival of these experts, and while these

21 pieces were not given to us, so our experts were not able to examine it,

22 and then we were not able to discuss it in our Defence team.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, what's the problem? Is the

24 artifact not made available to the Defence to have it examined by an

25 expert, or is the problem that the expert could not arrive in The Hague

Page 4814

1 because there was no Visa? It's not quite clear to me what exactly the

2 problem is. I mean, if the expert would be here, if he would have a Visa,

3 would he then be able to inspect the artifact or not?

4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. President, first of

5 all, these elements were not furnished to the lawyers, so we were not able

6 to examine them. Secondly, since these elements were not furnished, if

7 the experts were here, they would not have been able to examine it. So we

8 were not able to get the Visas which were refused, so today when we are

9 facing cross-examination, it's going to look very bad.

10 JUDGE ORIE: But you have, under the Rules, since there is this

11 reciprocal disclosure in effect, you're entitled to inspect whatever

12 artifacts the Prosecution has. Did you ever ask access to this specific

13 artifact?

14 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise. I would

15 like to add something to what my co-counsel said. Everything that was

16 related to the incident of Markale on the 5th of February, the Defence

17 asked on several occasions in writing from our learned colleagues to be

18 given this material so the Defence could examine it. The last meeting

19 that my colleague talked about, which was two weeks ago, and as it was

20 suggested by Mr. Ierace, said that this was in possession of the

21 Prosecution and we could have a look at it. We arrived at the meeting at

22 2.30, and Mr. Ierace said that we first of all had to furnish him with

23 photographs so that they would be able to know what we were asking. So we

24 are now very surprised to learn about the existence of this document in

25 the Prosecution.

Page 4815

1 JUDGE ORIE: Are we talking about a document or are we talking

2 about an artifact?

3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President. At the

4 time of the meeting last week that we're talking about, Mr. Ierace said,

5 what are the elements you'd like to see? So we indicated that in the file

6 of the Prosecution there were certain photographs, and Mr. Ierace asked me

7 for ERN numbers of these photographs, and I indicated them -- and I'm

8 still speaking from memory -- so I talked to his case manager --

9 JUDGE ORIE: Please slow down, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I apologise.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Please resume.

12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I apologise, Mr. President.

13 Thank you very much. At the time of the meeting, the case manager was

14 also there, who is also here in this courtroom, and I was asked what are

15 the elements we would like to see and examine. And so I said and

16 indicated which elements on the photographs. Mr. Ierace asked me about

17 the ERN numbers. There was a dialogue immediately with the case manager

18 who remembered very well which photographs were in question and indicated

19 the photographs, said that it was if it was necessary, I would give the

20 ERN number to Mr. Ierace but I could see which photographs they were.

21 Since then, we never received anything, not information, not a

22 possibility to see any particles of these material, whether it was

23 shrapnel or tail-fin stabiliser. So when we were promised things, we then

24 went from the principle that it would arrive to us, but we would like to

25 do the opposite, to actually receive these pieces to examine. Thank you.

Page 4816

1 JUDGE ORIE: First of all, if we are talking about artifacts, I

2 think that under the Rules -- but I have to check it carefully -- that you

3 are entitled to inspect it, not to be given. I mean, if you would lose it

4 in the street, then of course an exhibit of the Prosecution would not be

5 available any more. What surprises me most is that there seems to be an

6 exchange of these -- there have been meetings, and the result was not

7 satisfactory to the Defence. And why has the Chamber not been informed

8 about this unsatisfactory outcome of your discretions?

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we had

10 meetings, that's fine. And the Prosecution -- and I am talking here

11 before the case manager who is here now and who was also at the meeting

12 --- said that it would be possible to have these pieces examined.

13 However, nothing arrived. This is not our responsibility if the

14 Prosecution promised something and then doesn't deliver it. Every time if

15 I came before you and say that we were not given something we were

16 promised, then where would we be?

17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I always urged the parties to sit

18 together and to see whether they could solve their problems or not. If

19 finally they could not and if especially the Defence would suffer from it,

20 then of course this Chamber wants to be informed about it, and not on the

21 very last moment, but let's first see what happens. But do I

22 understand you well that apart from that you have not seen the artifact,

23 although entitled to inspect it with your own eyes, which is a different

24 thing from it being given to you, that your expert did not receive a Visa

25 in order to look at it and to examine it in the way an expert would do?

Page 4817

1 Am I correct in my understanding, so that we have two problems,

2 first of all you said we couldn't see it, and apart from that even if we

3 would have seen it, then our expert was not in a position to examine it.

4 When was it for the first time asked that your expert would like to

5 inspect or to examine the artifact, specifically this one?

6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I am unable to

7 answer this question from memory. We do not have the possibility to

8 communicate with email, so we have to speak directly as the Prosecution

9 can between them. But I believe this was several months ago that we've

10 asked to see these pieces, and I am talking about myself and I believe

11 Ms. Pilipovic could confirm this as well. If we have to retrace it in the

12 correspondence exactly the very first letter that we raised this question,

13 we could do it but we couldn't do it right at this moment. We could do it

14 in a few days, and I believe that Ms. Pilipovic who was involved in this

15 issue could do it, could give you the answer.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.

17 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I've become aware of what my learned

18 colleagues have said in the last few minutes. I apologise if what I'm

19 about to say does not entirely reflect their submissions. It's explained

20 by the fact that I haven't had a full opportunity to read over my friends'

21 submissions. That said, I understand that my learned colleagues have

22 raised the issue of the inspection of the tail-fin. The tail-fin came

23 into the possession of the Office of the Prosecutor within the last few

24 months. When it was transported to The Hague and had passed through the

25 necessary procedures, which is required of any piece of evidence, I

Page 4818

1 indicated to the Defence that we had it, and that it was available for

2 inspection, and that if they wanted to inspect it, they should arrange a

3 mutually-convenient time for that to happen.

4 I have not received any communication from the Defence as to a

5 date or time for its inspection. There is some -- I think there is some

6 correspondence on it. It has been done, as I recollect, partly by way of

7 correspondence and partly by way of oral discussion. But that is the

8 situation. Thank you.

9 MR. STAMP: Mr. President.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Stamp.

11 MR. STAMP: May I just add as you rightly indicated, this artifact

12 is not something that we would give, hand over, to any party. The

13 circumstances are such that it would be for the Defence, having been

14 invited by us, to indicate when they would like to inspect it. Our

15 records indicate that they have not done so. However, the problem could

16 be solved in this way: This witness is here merely to identify the

17 artifact.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes.

19 MR. STAMP: He will not go much further than that. They are

20 invited again to indicate when it would be convenient for them to have it

21 inspected.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, once again, we

24 are now placed between a the rock and a hard place. If we didn't answer

25 immediately when, it is simply because we said that we would need other --

Page 4819

1 the use of others, not the lawyers, but experts. And we asked that these

2 experts come to help us in The Hague, and we have been asking

3 it for weeks on end. This Tribunal has still not answered that request.

4 So we shall be in the same position tomorrow, the day after tomorrow,

5 until the experts are authorised to come. They are Yugoslav experts who

6 live in Yugoslavia and therefore need Visas which have not yet been

7 authorised in order to help us. And therefore, we are simply faced with a

8 technical impossibility. And however, that is not our fault. Thank you.

9 JUDGE ORIE: What I see, as a matter of fact, that there are a lot

10 of -- there seem to be a lot of problems being a bit confused. One of

11 them is whether the Defence had an opportunity to inspect this tangible

12 object in accordance with Rule 66(B) where I do understand that the

13 Defence expected to receive that tangible object, to have it examined by

14 an expert, which is something quite different. And the third issue is

15 that whether the Prosecution would allow any examination by an expert of

16 this tangible object once this expert arrives in The Hague, and it's my

17 understanding that a Visa has been applied for by the expert? Yes,

18 please.

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, we have already

20 interceded with the Tribunal, with the Registry, Mr. President. But I

21 must however clarify one thing. We are not necessarily requesting to be

22 given -- to enter into the possession of that object. We simply need the

23 presence of experts to help the Defence of General Galic.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand that you need your experts to

25 inspect this object. When did you apply for the Visa? Did you apply

Page 4820

1 through the -- since, of course, the Registry will certainly play a

2 certain role, but the Visa has to be provided by the Dutch government, I

3 assume? Yes.

4 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, let me clarify this

5 matter: The Defence has requested a Visa for a military expert,

6 Mr. Rabinovic. So far, we have not yet received an answer from our

7 distinguished colleagues when we could have a look. All the material

8 available about the incident at Markale, and for that reason, we have not

9 applied for the Visa because we did not see that it existed.

10 JUDGE ORIE: So there's no Visa applied for. I think it needs

11 perhaps some extra time. Mr. Stamp, did I understand you well that the

12 only thing you're going to do at this very moment is to have this object

13 identified by the witness? And I do understand that it's the sincere wish

14 of the Defence that the object will be inspected sooner or later by one of

15 their experts. I think for the cross-examination, I mean if there's

16 nothing in the examination-in-chief specifically on this object, we could

17 discuss what would be the best way for the Defence to have the information

18 their expert would provide presented at trial. Because that's what I

19 expect you to seek, is that whatever the expertise of your expert would

20 be, that it will be presented to this Chamber. So we'll -- I'm certain

21 that we'll find a solution for that sooner or later without making great

22 drama out of it at this very moment.

23 I suggest that we just proceed now and that the parties sit

24 together, see to what extent they can solve the problems amongst the

25 parties. That means that if the Prosecution would say, Well, this

Page 4821

1 tail-fin is available from now on for the next three months in order to be

2 inspected by an expert, you'd ask to come to The Hague -- the application

3 for Visa and then finally he'll come and inspect it and of course you can

4 call him as an expert witness or present his expertise in written form or,

5 well, whatever way we'll find for it.

6 So then at this very moment we'll proceed with the examination of

7 Mr. Besic as a witness.

8 MR. STAMP: Thank you, Mr. President.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp, proceed.


11 Q. Have a look at that article, please. Have a look at that

12 article.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Just a remark: This incident

15 shows something that is important, and that is the Prosecution seems to be

16 always relying on an email system which allows them to resort to it when

17 they need it. Fine. But I must note that this procedure has been denied

18 the Defence from the beginning, and what is a technical and delicate

19 problem the Defence does not have this technical possibility. The Defence

20 are completely cut off from the world electronically, which is not the

21 case for the Prosecution. So it seems there are two different yardsticks,

22 and I have already indicated it.

23 JUDGE ORIE: It's not quite clear to me, to be quite honest.

24 [Trial Chamber confers]

25 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just reread the transcript. You said the

Page 4822

1 Defence is completely cut off from the world electronically which is not

2 the case for the Prosecution. To be quite honest, I don't understand

3 you. Do you mean to say that you have no email available for your

4 communication? Is that what you mean?

5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Indeed, we do not have this

6 possibility when we come here to invite the help of whoever. This is not

7 the case of the Prosecution. That is merely what I said, that here, the

8 Defence has completely different means at its disposal from the

9 Prosecution, and I am talking again about the quality of arms, from the

10 moment that we enter the courtroom, we have no such means at our disposal,

11 and therefore the equality of arms is in question.

12 JUDGE ORIE: In the courtroom?

13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Indeed, because one can ask

14 the case manager, isn't it, and she sends an email to Mr. Ierace, and then

15 he turns up here, and he answers. Obviously we have just seen that the

16 answer is yes. However, such means are not at the disposal of the

17 Defence.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, whenever the actual situation of

19 this courtroom would require you to get in touch with anyone outside of

20 this courtroom and if the technical facilities are failing, you of course

21 always can ask for a short break and see whether you can make the

22 necessary communications.

23 Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.

24 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President.

25 Q. What is that article you have there in front of you?

Page 4823

1 A. This is the tail-fin, the stabilising part of a mortar shell which

2 I personally found in situ. It is marked DM74 and it says in Cyrillic

3 what it means is Krusik Valjevo 8701, which means that it was made in

4 January 1987. I'm referring to the inner part. This here is in my

5 handwriting. This is a projectile which I marked and then filed in our

6 file of traces.

7 MR. STAMP: If the witness, with your leave, Mr. President, could

8 be shown the folder marked 2262 again.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the photographs. Yes, please.


11 Q. Could you compare the article there, the tail-fin you have in

12 front of you, with photos number 12 and 13.

13 A. Yes, these are identical photographs, close-ups, where one can see

14 the markings on this part of the tail.

15 Q. And in -- that is in respect of photograph number 13. Have a look

16 at photograph number 12, please. Could you compare the damage on the

17 flaps of a tail-fin with the article that you have in front of you.

18 A. Yes, it should be this one here.

19 Q. I take it by your answer you're saying that the photograph depicts

20 the same article you have in front of you?

21 A. Identical. Identical.

22 Q. Thank you very much.

23 MR. STAMP: May I just indicate. You may take them, Mr. Usher.

24 Mr. President, I suspect that in the course of this case, there

25 will be many references to that tail-fin. We have photographs of the

Page 4824

1 tail-fin which were taken by our evidence unit. They would not be

2 exhibits, but I would propose, subject to the exercise of your discretion,

3 photographs of the tail-fin so that if persons are referring to various

4 aspects of it, you would have the photographs for ease of reference. When

5 the experts come, we will leave it to Your Honours' decision instead of

6 having to pass the article around.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I understand, Mr. Stamp. Would this mean that

8 you would tender the photographs first and not the object itself? Because

9 I am just thinking of what would happen with this object once it is

10 admitted into evidence because usually our Registrar keeps a close eye on

11 whatever is tendered and admitted into evidence and if it is to be

12 inspected by any experts later on, I have to give it some consideration on

13 how this is done.

14 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

15 JUDGE ORIE: It is the suggestion of the Registrar that this

16 exhibit would first be marked for identification, because that means that

17 it can be returned to you, that you keep it in your custody for the time

18 being, and that it can be examined by whatever expert, which might be more

19 difficult if our Registrar keeps it. And --

20 MR. STAMP: I see. I must confess that I was hoping that the

21 difficulties of the Defence inspecting the artifact would be -- would

22 disappear if they had to inspect it from the Registrar. But I see she

23 would prefer if we keep it.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Especially if an expert would need to -- I don't know

25 whether any test would have to be done or -- I've got no idea what an

Page 4825

1 expert does with this kind of artifact, so I'm a bit hesitant in -- it's

2 not just looking at it, perhaps. Perhaps measuring or I've got no idea,

3 but I'd like to give it some consideration before we finally make any

4 decision.

5 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course, another way of doing it is that it

7 would be tendered into evidence, that our Registrar keeps it under her,

8 and that it will be given to a party which shows a specific interest in

9 having it temporarily available to it so that it can be inspected by, but

10 then of course it will be under close control by the Registry.

11 MR. STAMP: Indeed, Mr. President.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Any observation as far as the Defence is concerned?

13 [Defence counsel confer]

14 JUDGE ORIE: No. Okay, then. Pictures will be easy anyhow, in

15 order not to come up with the artifact again and again.

16 Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. Sorry,

18 but to begin with, the Defence does not make any observation whatsoever

19 regarding the manner in which this artifact will be treated. I mean the

20 tail-fin. Secondly, I've already drawn your attention to it. Photograph

21 15 represents all the debris from the beginning. It is these elements

22 which we would also like to study, that is, all the shrapnel, but we would

23 like an expert to inspect them and all that is referenced on page 14, that

24 is the photographs 14 and 15, if that is how they are numbered.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, my photographs go until number 13,

Page 4826

1 so I'm a bit confused if you talk about 14 and 15.

2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Indeed. In that case, the

3 question arises if the photographs 14 and 15 will be shown at a later

4 stage by the Prosecution, but I also need those photographs, and we see

5 that the same problem would arise with them. Thank you.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, whenever photos 14 and 15 come, I've got no

7 idea. We'll see what happens then.

8 Mr. Stamp, you may proceed.

9 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I think before I

10 proceed, may I just make the observation for the Court, there are, as

11 indicated by the witness, many photographs. We did not think it

12 appropriate to flood the Court with unnecessary photographs, especially of

13 bodies and things which might not be too helpful. Those photographs are

14 in the possession of the Defence, I believe. If they wish to

15 cross-examine or if we wish to raise those photographs, they are, of

16 course, quite entitled to do so. If they need any assistance in respect

17 to any of the photographs, other photographs, we will be very, very happy

18 to assist them. Thanks, Mr. President.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm really

21 sorry. We're not talking here about bodies or wounds or whatever --

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, we have 13 photos. If you want to

23 use any other photo either during cross-examination or during

24 examination-in-chief of one of the Defence witnesses, you're entirely free

25 to do so. But we cannot discuss photos 14 and 15 if we have just got 13

Page 4827

1 photographs. So introduce them in one way or the other, we can discuss

2 it, if not, this Chamber has no idea what we are talking about.

3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President, for

4 the decision. And of course, you are quite right. What I'm saying is

5 that insofar as the Prosecution should enable -- should give us access to

6 the shrapnel, it is referenced in photographs to come, that is, 14 and 15.

7 And I want to indicate to the Prosecution so that things are clear, it is

8 this shrapnel here that we want to be in the possession in order to

9 examine them, to inspect them, so that the things are quite clear for the

10 Prosecution what we need. It is this shrapnel.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand that it is the same for the

12 shrapnel as the tail-fin.

13 MR. STAMP: May I proceed.


15 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much.

16 Q. Mr. Besic, you indicated that pieces of shrapnel were found at the

17 location?

18 A. Yes, they were found. And in the crater itself, we also found

19 parts of the fuse, of the firing pin.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Sorry, Mr. President, but we

22 shall now be preparing the cross-examination here. Everybody in this

23 courtroom, including the Chamber, could see this tail-fin, and the only

24 ones who did not see it are the counsel for General Galic.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think if you would have asked me whether I

Page 4828

1 could give it to you right now, I would have asked the usher to give

2 it to you. Mr. Usher, could you please give the tail-fin to

3 Mr. Piletta-Zanin and to Ms. Pilipovic.

4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,

5 Mr. President.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, if Mr. Galic would like to inspect it as

7 well.

8 Yes. Would you need time or may Mr. Stamp continue?

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Well, a few seconds at least

10 because this is the first time that we are discovering this object. We

11 are sorry. This is only to conduct an initial first inspection.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Usher, could you please...

13 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.


17 Q. Can you say what was done with the shrapnel which was found on the

18 scene?

19 A. Well, this object and shrapnel was then filed and kept in the

20 Criminal Investigation Department in Sarajevo.

21 Q. And for the purposes of this case, have you been able to

22 location -- locate the shrapnel which was found on the scene?

23 A. Well, that is part of my job, to try to collect all that is found

24 on the scene, including the shrapnel found on the scene.

25 Q. And the shrapnel which you found and you filed away, have you

Page 4829












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 4830

1 subsequently been able to find it to bring it here?

2 A. Well, had you told me so, I could have brought it. I would have

3 brought it, that is, I would have to check first whether it is still at

4 the Criminal Investigation Department.

5 Q. Very well. Let's move on.

6 Now, you said the website was -- sorry. The scene of the incident

7 was videoed.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I apologise very deeply,

10 but I think this is very important, even more so than before. I believe

11 that what we talked about between the parties that was two or three weeks

12 ago, these pieces of shrapnel had also arrived in The Hague. This is what

13 I believed I heard at the time of the meeting. If I understand correctly

14 what the witness just said, it seems that we simply do not know where the

15 debris is, the pieces of shrapnel, but we do know is that it is not in The

16 Hague. So the Defence would like to know if we have asked for

17 months to see the pieces of shrapnel, is it possible or not?

18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, what I want the parties to do is

19 to first sit together during either today or tomorrow's break and see

20 exactly on what part of the events of the last couple of weeks they do

21 agree, on what part they do disagree as far as what has been -- I mean

22 you're telling me that it was your understanding that the shrapnel would

23 be in The Hague as well. Let's first try to find out to what extent the

24 parties agree on what has been discussed. Whatever disagreement then

25 remains or whatever requests then remain, please inform the Chamber so

Page 4831

1 that we'll be in a position to give decisions on that. But let's not -- I

2 do fully recognise the importance of these issues, but let's not interrupt

3 again and again the examination of the witness, and let's first proceed.

4 Mr. Stamp.


6 Q. Who made the video of the scene at Markale?

7 A. It was a colleague, a technician who was also a member of the

8 team, together with me.

9 Q. And have you ever seen that video subsequent to it being made?

10 A. Yes, because it was somewhere put in the file, in the archive of

11 the Sarajevo MUP.

12 Q. Do you appear on that video?

13 A. Yes, I also appear on that video.

14 MR. STAMP: With your leave, Mr. President, could the witness be

15 shown the video designated P2279.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. With the assistance of our technicians, could

17 we please have the video on our screen.

18 [Videotape played]

19 MR. STAMP: Could you pause there. Just go back slightly to where

20 the sticks are.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Could the technicians help us in going back a bit.

22 You give the instructions, Mr. Stamp.

23 MR. STAMP: Pause there, please.

24 Q. What is being shown here, Mr. Besic? Could you describe it,

25 please.

Page 4832

1 A. This is a videorecord which is practically identical to the

2 photograph. We can see a crater here, which is marking the direction from

3 where the projectile arrived as well as the damage on the ground which

4 happened due to the impact of the projectile.

5 MR. STAMP: Could we go ahead.

6 [Videotape played]

7 MR. STAMP: Pause here, please.

8 Thanks.

9 Q. What is happening at that stage?

10 A. The actual site, the actual location of the impact, was processed,

11 and we did not touch it until the UN members arrived. When they arrived,

12 we then showed them where the projectile was, and then they started to

13 clean it, which you can see from the video. You can see a member of the

14 French battalion, and there is also my voice heard asking for the

15 interpreter so that he could come and indicate to them that the projectile

16 should be taken out. That could be heard on the recording.

17 Q. And the person with the knife cleaning the area you describe as is

18 where the projectile impacted, that is a member of the French forces that

19 arrived there?

20 A. That's right. Yes, a member of the French forces of the French

21 battalion. I don't know his name and surname. At the time it was not

22 possible to obtain a name and surname of a soldier like that.

23 Q. Do you notice the United Nations' insignia on his right arm, on

24 the sleeve of his shirt?

25 A. Of course, on the right-hand side they have the insignia, and this

Page 4833

1 is not the first time that we investigated the scene with their presence.

2 Q. Thank you.

3 MR. STAMP: Could you proceed, please, madam. Could you proceed.

4 [Videotape played]

5 MR. STAMP: Pause here briefly, please.

6 Q. Now, we see that there is a marking on the ground with a stick

7 across it. Could you say who placed that stick there and who did that

8 marking?

9 A. I was not present when it happened. This is the following day,

10 the 6th of February, and I was not there. This is the investigation

11 procedure, but this was not an official one done by the police, but this

12 was done by an expert witness who came, and he was authorised by the Court

13 who then conducted this marking by indicating the direction, the angle,

14 and so on. I was not present when this was done.

15 Q. Did you record the name of this expert witness?

16 A. Personally, at the time I did not see him. But then later I went

17 to the site later on, there was a truce, and this is Berko. And on that

18 day, Mirza Sabljica was also present.

19 Q. You said "Berko." Could you please tell us what you mean by

20 Berko. What is that name?

21 A. Berko, I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. The name is

22 Berko, and the last name, I think it's either Zelic or Zekic. I cannot

23 quite remember. It's something like that.

24 Q. All right. Thank you.

25 MR. STAMP: Could you please proceed with the tape.

Page 4834

1 [Videotape played]

2 MR. STAMP: I was asking if I could move a little bit quickly past

3 the scene with the crater. Next scene.

4 Okay, stop there. Proceed.

5 [Videotape played]

6 MR. STAMP: Could you pause there, please.

7 Q. Do you see some damage on the building there?

8 A. Yes, this is the damage which predates this incident, which has

9 nothing to do with this actual case.

10 MR. STAMP: Could you proceed, please.

11 [Videotape played]

12 MR. STAMP: Stop there, please.

13 Q. This is a scene of the market after it had been cleaned up?

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, I'm sorry

16 to intervene, but for the transcript there was one question that was asked

17 in relation to an image, and perhaps my colleague could perhaps describe

18 the scene that he was asking the question in relation to.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, would you please do so, Mr. Stamp. Your

20 question was: "This is the scene of the market after it had been cleaned

21 up." And then of course it's not clear for the transcript --

22 [Trial Chamber confers]

23 JUDGE ORIE: It's suggested by one of my colleagues,

24 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, that you were referring to the question about the

25 damage to a building which predates the incident, or were you referring to

Page 4835

1 this last question?

2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No. Thank you for this

3 question, but what I would have wanted is that the question was asked in

4 relation to an image, but there was no indication for the record what was

5 on the image. So perhaps we could have it for the transcript.

6 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues]...the last

7 question.

8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It was before last.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Then perhaps we should move the video back so you

10 could give a description. That's the question about the other damage done

11 to a building, that you indicate when you ask a question what is exactly

12 on the screen at that moment.

13 MR. STAMP: Could you go back on the video slowly, please.

14 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone to the counsel, please.

15 MR. STAMP: Could you move back on the video slowly, please.

16 [Videotape played]

17 MR. STAMP: And stop there.

18 Q. Where we have stopped, the video shows damage to a building. Is

19 this the same damage as you referred to as having been caused previously

20 by a mortar round?

21 A. Yes, this is the damage that I explained also on the photograph

22 that we observed, that in the top left corner there was an arrow pointing

23 at this damage.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps for the clarity of the transcript, it gives

25 us the time 13.56, and it's a building which is covering I would say some

Page 4836

1 80 per cent of the image and damage to the upper part of the building.

2 Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.

3 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much. Could we move on from the video

4 for the time being.

5 No, could we move on from the video for the time being.

6 Could we stop the video.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course that's what I understood that you

8 intended to be done. Move off from the video.

9 MR. STAMP: Yes, indeed.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

11 MR. STAMP: I'm trying to lower the time somewhat, but I may

12 return to the video.



15 Q. Now you said that the crater analysis was done by the ballistic

16 experts by the Cavcic and Sabljica?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Can you say what has happened to Cavic? Before you answer that,

19 his full name is Hamdija Cavcic?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Can you say what has happened to him?

22 A. Hamdija Cavcic died in 1994, in November 1994. It was natural

23 causes. These were consequences following a heart attack.

24 Q. Are you sure about the date that he died?

25 A. Yes, because I was with him.

Page 4837

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I am sorry,

3 Mr. President. I cannot see what has been written in the English

4 transcript. Page 61, line 7. I think there is a word missing, and perhaps

5 my learned colleague could perhaps rephrase his question since there is a

6 gap in the text. Thank you very much.

7 JUDGE ORIE: I think that there's hardly any misunderstanding

8 possible. I think who did the crater analysis. This could be easily

9 corrected during the evening hours. Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.


11 Q. Yes, I was asking if you are sure about the date of his death.

12 A. Yes, I am sure. It was at the end of 1994, beginning of 1995. It

13 was late 1994, end of 1994 when he died.

14 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

15 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.


17 Q. Now, the day before the 5th of February, 1994, did you also

18 investigate another shelling incident?

19 A. Yes. The day before, I worked on the 4th of February in

20 Dobrinja. I did an investigation where two mortars fell, and there were

21 nine people who died and several wounded.

22 Q. You said that this was in Dobrinja. Do you remember which part of

23 Dobrinja this was?

24 A. Dobrinja has several parts, I, II, III, IV, V. Whether it was III

25 or II, I can't tell you exactly.

Page 4838

1 Q. You said that you investigated two projectiles in Dobrinja. With

2 respect to the information you had on the 5th of February, 1994, how many

3 projectiles fell in the vicinity that you investigated?

4 A. We're talking about the 5th of February. It was Markale, only one

5 projectile fell.

6 Q. On the 4th of February in Dobrinja --

7 A. On the 4th of February in Dobrinja two projectiles fell, and we

8 investigated the scene of the incident for those two projectiles. Another

9 projectile fell, but we didn't investigate it because this was a priority.

10 Q. I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean when you say "because

11 this was a priority." From your answer I take it you mean that three

12 projectiles fell in Dobrinja, but you investigated two. Is that correct?

13 A. That's right. We only -- there were only two at the end of the

14 parking lot, the garage, two of them fell. It's a common parking lot of a

15 garage, and the projectile landed on the beginning of a plateau, and then

16 the other one fell near a building.

17 Q. Now, did you take photos of that scene when you went there?

18 A. Yes, photos were done and also a videorecord of it.

19 Q. Let's begin with the photographs.

20 MR. STAMP: With your leave, Mr. President, may I hand to him a

21 folder.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Usher, could you please assist.

23 MR. STAMP: Designated P2247. And if I could indicate, there's a

24 translation, P2247.1 at the back of it.

25 Q. Just briefly look at the contents of that folder and tell us

Page 4839

1 whether or not these are photographs that you took at Dobrinja on the 4th

2 of February, 1994.

3 A. Yes, these are the photographs that were taken on the 4th of

4 February, 1994.

5 Q. Have a look at photograph 1. There is writing below that

6 photograph in respect of the other photographs. Did you make that

7 writing?

8 A. Yes, I did. I'm the author of the text and of the photo file.

9 Q. Photograph 1 is a wide angle of the scene, and that is the area

10 between Oslobodilaca Sarajevo, and could you look at what you wrote and

11 tell us what street that is, Dz. Nehrua Street?

12 A. Yes, street is Oslo Borndna Sarajevo Street. It's the plateau

13 that you can see where two projectiles fell.

14 Q. You describe that area as a plateau. Could you be a little bit

15 more specific in two sentences to describe the area here. What exactly is

16 this area?

17 A. It's a surface made of concrete, and the intention was to have it

18 as a football pitch and for children playing area.

19 Q. And there's an arrow on this photograph.

20 A. Yes, this arrow indicates where one projectile landed, marked with

21 number 1. And the second projectile which fell is to the right on this

22 photograph. It cannot be seen, and it's numbered with 7.

23 Q. Can we make out the numbers on these photographs?

24 A. On the following photographs, you can see it. Not on this one.

25 Q. But let's speak about photograph number 1. The two arrows which

Page 4840

1 are on that photograph points to two impact sites.

2 A. That's right. Yes, they indicate two spots where two projectiles

3 landed.

4 Q. And these are two red arrows, one to the left --

5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm very sorry,

6 but I only see one arrow on this photograph. Could perhaps the witness

7 indicate on the ELMO where the second one is. I don't know whether it's a

8 problem of image that we have.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please indicate -- perhaps, yes.

10 THE WITNESS: [Indicates]

11 [Interpretation] This is the location where the second projectile landed.

12 JUDGE ORIE: And it's indicated by an arrow, Mr. Besic?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is, yes.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed, Mr. Stamp.

15 MR. STAMP: Before I proceed, I don't know if I may ask the Court

16 or ask the Court through you, Mr. President, whether or not the arrow

17 which is a little bit blurred here which does exist on my photograph, if

18 the Court has been able to identify it or see it.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Otherwise I would have asked. It took me some

20 difficulty but finally I found something, and I think the same is true for

21 all the others.

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, we managed to finally

23 discern something, perhaps there will be some light at the end of this

24 tunnel.


Page 4841

1 Mr. Stamp, but apart from all the arrows, perhaps one of the first

2 things you could do after the break which might be, if this is a suitable

3 moment for you, we'll restart at 2.30, perhaps ask the witness to mark the

4 same arrows again in blue so that it will save us a lot of time when

5 looking later on through these pictures to locate the arrows again.

6 Mr. Besic, we'll have a break anyhow for one hour and a half.

7 We'll adjourn until 2.30.

8 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.01 p.m.


















Page 4842


2 --- On resuming at 2.34 p.m.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp, before I ask you to continue the

4 examination of the witness, I'd like to inform the parties that while we

5 were intended to sit next Friday, the 8th of March and not on the 15th,

6 for all kind of technical reasons, this has changed. That means that

7 Court maintenance which prevents us from sitting will be on the 8th of

8 March; on the other hand, we'll sit on the 15th of March, and that will be

9 from 9.00 until a quarter to 2.00 in the afternoon.

10 Yes. Then please proceed, Mr. Stamp.

11 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I do not wish to

13 interrupt my learned friend, so I would like to say it now. I'd like to

14 raise two matters, mostly clarifications concerning the deposition of

15 Mr. Karel Lambr and Strand Oystein. I hope I have pronounced them

16 correctly. We have the following problem: The Registry, as you will

17 remember, authorised it would seem that these two statements be admitted

18 on the basis of 92 bis. I do not know whether that means that the

19 Tribunal will follow up on that decision, that is exclusively that when an

20 officer of this Tribunal is named to receive a deposition which is or is

21 not accepted on the basis of Rule 92 bis. What I'm saying now, we have

22 received formally these measures on the 25th of February, 2000, and we do

23 not know whether we have to react now, which is today, which will be the

24 deadline to file a motion against these two statements, and I do not know

25 whether we shall be able to do it only this afternoon. That is, now,

Page 4843

1 because the Registry, I believe, closes at 4.00, and we would have to do

2 it right now. This matter needs to be clarified.

3 Now, I did not hear the response of the Chamber regarding the lot

4 of these two witnesses on whose statements the Registry has passed a

5 decision, but we have not yet heard the reaction of your Chamber. Thank

6 you very much in advance.

7 JUDGE ORIE: It's not quite clear to me, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, what

8 the procedure is as far as Rule 92 bis is concerned, that first of all the

9 Registry will take care that all the formalities are fulfilled. Let me

10 just have a look. Especially 92 bis [B] asks that the declaration is

11 witnessed by a person authorised to witness such a declaration in

12 accordance with law of procedure -- the presiding officer appointed by the

13 Registrar of the Tribunal for that purpose. So whenever the Registrar

14 appoints a presiding officer, that only means that at least the formal

15 requirements are fulfilled, and then of course it's up to the Chamber to

16 decide whether or not we'll admit the evidence presented, which is not an

17 oral statement but is a written statement.

18 So I do not see at this moment whether there has to be a motion

19 filed. What's your understanding of what the procedure is?

20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. As

21 presently we have filed these two statements which already have their ERN

22 numbers, I do not want -- we received them on the 25th of February, 2002.

23 We need -- does it mean in advance that the Defence would accept them as

24 statements made under 92 bis? The Defence continues to challenge it, and

25 that whatever statements which are made on the basis of Rule 92. But

Page 4844

1 there is a deadline which has to be respected, that is seven days. If I

2 understood you well, this statement does not imply that the Chamber will

3 admit them; the Chamber has not yet accepted them. But I'm saying that

4 for the time being, the Defence does not have to take care of this

5 deadline. However, if that is not the case, then I shall be ready to --

6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, what exactly do you mean? You're

7 talking on -- about Rule 92, but that should be Rule 92 bis, I assume.

8 Rule 92 is about confessions. I do not think you refer to that.

9 What deadline exactly do you mean? You're talking about a

10 deadline of seven days.

11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. I will

12 look at it right now. But I believe we have seven days within which we

13 have to respond objecting to whatever decision. I'm now looking at my

14 text. I believe that according to -- according to 92 bis, we have seven

15 days to object against the production of such statements. But this

16 statement has already been produced, and it was communicated to us on the

17 25th. I'd merely like the things to be completely clear --

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's --

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] -- because the document

20 obviously came from the Registry, and there could be a confusion between

21 the two authorities. However, it is up to the Defence to clarify the

22 matter.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's seven days on from the day you have been

24 notified by the Prosecution as soon as the Prosecution seeks to adduce a

25 written statement. But as far as I know, but I may be wrong, that until

Page 4845

1 now, what the Prosecution has done is to ask the Registrar to appoint a

2 presiding officer.

3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] That is also how we understand

4 it, Mr. President. But as we see here, that the Registry has appointed

5 that person, but the decision obviously has already been taken. I'd

6 really like to be quite sure that no problem arises because -- and the

7 Defence does not have to respond now, because we have these two decisions

8 which have been taken, but they have not been taken on the basis -- they

9 have not yet been admitted by the Chamber. Thank you.

10 JUDGE ORIE: May I just ask the Prosecution to respond.

11 MR. STAMP: I think my friend was asking for some clarification as

12 to whether or not he would be held to a deadline.


14 MR. STAMP: The Registrar did appoint a presiding officer and the

15 92 bis declarations were taken. It has been indicated to the Court for

16 some time that we would propose to the Court that these were declarations

17 that could be adduced pursuant to the Rule, and I think the Chamber had

18 indicated that you would hear the parties in respect of 92 bis. The

19 relevant provision I think is Rule 92 bis [B], which makes the issue of

20 the deadline subject to Rule 127, and Rule 127 deals with the variation of

21 the time limits. So it is really matter which is in the hands of the

22 Court, if the Court feels that the matter could be conveniently disposed

23 of in oral arguments on a date when the Court sits, then I don't think my

24 friends should have any problems. And I think a date would be indicated.

25 JUDGE ORIE: I think there's no problem.

Page 4846

1 Okay, then, please proceed.


3 Q. Mr. Besic, could we move very quickly through --

4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.

5 MR. STAMP: Mr. Usher, could you hand to the witness the folder

6 marked P2247.

7 Q. Referring to photograph number 1, when we last broke, you were

8 showing us a second arrow. It's not very clear on the photograph. I

9 asked the Registrar to provide you with a blue pen. Could you mark on the

10 photograph where that arrow is to the right of the photograph.

11 JUDGE ORIE: It's the blue marker that is used? Yes, please

12 proceed.

13 A. [Marks]


15 Q. Photograph number 2, Witness, that's a view of the same area from

16 a different angle?

17 A. Yes, from a different angle, that's right.

18 Q. It says "a wide-angle view of the scene where the first shell

19 landed." Are you in a position to tell us what sequence the shells landed

20 in?

21 A. I do not have that information, and it is not in the record,

22 because we did not know and we were not on the spot when it happened.

23 Q. The photograph on page 3, therein number 1 marks where the shell

24 landed photographed close-up.

25 A. That's right. Yes.

Page 4847

1 Q. I beg your pardon. Marks where the shell landed and exploded.

2 Now, could you compare photograph 3 with photograph 1. Is that shell in

3 photograph 3 the one designated by the bright red arrow or the one you

4 just marked in blue?

5 A. The red arrow.

6 Q. If I could move on quickly to photograph 5, this is the place

7 where the shell landed, with the number 1 beside it. Is that so?

8 A. It is, yes.

9 Q. And the arrow is pointed to the east?

10 A. The arrow is pointing in the direction from which it came.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, the

13 question seems, to me, leading, because he immediately -- because in the

14 question immediately, the direction is given as to the alleged direction

15 of the shot.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Your objection is sustained, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.


18 Q. In that photograph, who put the map and the compass there? Can

19 you say?

20 A. This map, the compass, and the direction from which the shot came

21 were made by Zlatko Medjedovic and Sabljica because they are ballistic

22 experts.

23 Q. By Sabljica, you mean Mirza Sabljica?

24 A. Yes, Mirza Sabljica.

25 MR. STAMP: Mr. President, it's a little bit late to respond to

Page 4848

1 the objection. Notwithstanding that, I will not repeat the question

2 asked. I was merely quoting the writing in respect to that photograph.

3 JUDGE ORIE: If you say -- let me just look at the text of your

4 question again.

5 Yes, I do agree with you that it refers to the text underneath.

6 But as far as I understand, is that an arrow always has some meaning,

7 apart from that it's just going to the east. And keeping in mind the

8 significance of arrows we've seen before, there is certainly a leading

9 element in it which becomes not quite clear from the text under the

10 photograph. Yes.

11 MR. STAMP: Very well, Mr. President.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.


14 Q. And there is photograph number 6 with bloodstains, et cetera. Is

15 that correct?

16 A. Yes, yes, this is blood, yes. Bloodstains.

17 Q. And the same in respect of photograph number 7?

18 A. In this case, it is a set of denture.

19 Q. And photograph number 8, what is depicted there?

20 A. I can see part of -- it's some footwear, whether a sneaker or

21 perhaps a shoe. I would say a sneaker is there.

22 Q. Can you say what would cause the condition it is in, in this

23 photograph?

24 A. I suppose that person was nearby when the projectile landed so

25 that a part of this sneaker, the canvas part, was torn off. I suppose

Page 4849

1 that is how all this damage was done.

2 Q. Have a look at photograph number 9, please. This is a wide-angle

3 view of the scene next to the building where the 120 millimetre shell

4 landed, and the arrow marks where the shell landed and exploded. Could

5 you please point to that arrow, please.

6 A. [Indicates]

7 MR. STAMP: I do believe that this one is sufficiently clear.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's sufficiently.


10 Q. And photograph number 10, in that photograph, the number 7 marks

11 where the shell landed, photographed close up. Is that correct? Please

12 don't nod. Please --

13 A. Yes, it is.

14 Q. Thank you.

15 A. That's quite right. That is where the projectile was found.

16 Q. Now, comparing photograph 10 with photograph 1, is this photograph

17 in photograph 10, is this impact site in photograph 10 --

18 A. Yes, it is.

19 Q. -- the one designated or pointed to in photograph 1 with the blue

20 arrow which you marked?

21 A. That's right.

22 Q. And photograph 11 has on it a map, a compass, and an arrow.

23 Again, who used the map and the compass for their work?

24 A. The ballistic expert who were members of the team, Mirza Sabljica,

25 and Zlatko Medjedovic.

Page 4850

1 Q. Now, there are in both photograph 4 and photograph 11 two

2 stabiliser fins still intact. Is that correct? Please don't nod.

3 A. Yes.

4 JUDGE ORIE: The problem is, Mr. Besic, when you nod, it will not

5 be in the transcript since only spoken words are in the transcript. So

6 whenever you agree with something, say it. Yes?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.


10 Q. Did you do anything in respect of those two stabiliser fins?

11 A. Yes, these stabiliser fins were photographed and they were marked

12 on the sketch, and they were taken and they were sealed in the criminal

13 technicians' department.

14 Q. Have you been able to locate them, those two stabiliser fins,

15 subsequent to them being left there?

16 A. Yes, we were able to locate them because they were visible.

17 Q. After they were filed and taken to your department, did you manage

18 to locate them for the purposes of this case?

19 A. I think there was a problem here because what happened on the 4th

20 of the February was that the 5th of February followed, and so we really

21 didn't pay due attention to these two stabiliser fins because on the 5th,

22 we had to go to the Markale scene of the incident because it was much more

23 serious than this one. These two fins were recorded. They were entered

24 into the logbook. Whether they are still in the department, I couldn't

25 say because there were certain changes in the premises because we had an

Page 4851

1 awful lot of this material. And there was some alteration of the

2 premises, renovation, and it is quite possible that these projectiles or

3 these other pieces of material were removed, thrown away, disposed of.

4 Q. Were you able to locate them, though, for the purpose of this

5 case? Just tell us if you were, or if you were not.

6 A. No.

7 Q. Thank you.

8 Now, that scene, the scene of the 4th of February, 1994 shelling

9 in Dobrinja, was it videoed?

10 A. Yes, a video record was made where I can also be seen. As it

11 happens, you can also see the experts, Mirza Sabljica and Zlatko

12 Medjedovic can also be seen on the recording. And you can see the video

13 was made just like the Markale case, there was a photo file, a

14 videorecording, and a sketch.

15 Q. Now, did you bring that video to the ICTY recently?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And that was last week?

18 A. Yes, that's right.

19 Q. Finally, Mr. Besic, I would like to take you back to the tape, the

20 videotape, in respect of the Markale incident on the 5th of February, and

21 I would like to take you very quickly through some aspects of that video.

22 MR. STAMP: If I may, Mr. President, I had started with that

23 earlier, but what was being shown was an excerpt of the video which was

24 taking a little bit too long to get to where I wanted to refer to. At the

25 same time, I have decided to show just the beginning from the original

Page 4852

1 video which is on the exhibit list and has been tendered, just to save

2 some time. We could get quickly to what I want shown.

3 So the video designated P2279A.

4 JUDGE ORIE: That's an excerpt of the other --

5 MR. STAMP: This is the full-length video.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Full-length video.

7 MR. STAMP: Could it be shown, please.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could the technicians assist us in showing the

9 video.

10 [Videotape played]

11 MR. STAMP: Could you stop there, please.

12 Q. What is the scene that is being shown now?

13 A. Here you can see the scene where the projectile landed and the

14 damage to the ground. You can see traces of blood, of body tissue. There

15 are items that have been thrown around. That's what it is.

16 Q. Please proceed with the tape.

17 [Videotape played]

18 MR. STAMP: Would you stop there, please.

19 Q. There is what appears to be a metal garbage dumpster in that

20 frame. Could you describe it, in particular, the damage there to it.

21 A. On this recording you can see the damage to this metal trolley and

22 the damage occurred because of the shrapnel in several parts of it, on the

23 rear side and on the left side as well.

24 Q. And these apparent holes on this metal container would have been

25 caused by the shrapnel?

Page 4853

1 A. Yes, only shrapnel. Nothing else.

2 MR. STAMP: Please proceed with the video.

3 [Videotape played]

4 MR. STAMP: Could you go back slightly.

5 [Videotape played]

6 MR. STAMP: Stop there.

7 Q. There is on this -- in this frame what appears to be an attache

8 case on a stall. Do you know notice anything in particular about that

9 attache case?

10 A. No, there should not be any damage to the briefcase. These are

11 just some of the materials that has been sold at the market, for instance,

12 these rings for the gas and anything that's sold there.

13 MR. STAMP: Please proceed with the tape.

14 [Videotape played]

15 MR. STAMP: Could you stop right here.

16 Q. The stall to the right of the frame, could you describe that,

17 please.

18 A. Well, on this stall, from this recording, you cannot see very well

19 whether there is shrapnel damage. Probably there is a lot of material

20 that's fallen over it during the detonation, so it's hard to say whether

21 this is shrapnel damage or not and I would not like to say, to state

22 things that I'm not sure about.

23 MR. STAMP: Please proceed with the tape.

24 [Videotape played]

25 MR. STAMP: Could you stop here, please.

Page 4854

1 Q. That is a sign in B/C/S. What does it say, can you say?

2 A. On all of these stalls, it was usually a piece of paper where it

3 would say what people were exchanging, changing flour, exchanging butter

4 and flour for sugar, oil or something else. So here it says I am buying

5 flour, exchanging oil, cigarettes, salt or beans, goods, cigarettes,

6 clothes, et cetera.

7 MR. STAMP: Proceed, please.

8 [Videotape played]

9 MR. STAMP: Okay. Could you stop there, please.

10 Q. We just saw what appeared to be a leg or a foot. Could you

11 describe that.

12 A. It's a part of the lower leg that they were not able to transport

13 it to the mortuary of the Kosevo Hospital. We found it on the scene of

14 the incident, but it wasn't just a leg. In the videorecording, there was

15 not showing just the leg, but there was also other body parts, there was

16 hair, blood, et cetera.

17 MR. STAMP: Could you please go on.

18 [Videotape played]

19 MR. STAMP: Could you stop here, please.

20 Q. At the bottom of the picture is a map, and at the top there are

21 the cross sticks. Could you say who placed those articles there.

22 A. These items were placed there by Mirza Sabljica and Hamdija Cavcic

23 who were members of the ballistic team and they were both experts.

24 Q. In the middle of the photographic frame where the sticks meet,

25 where is that exactly?

Page 4855

1 A. That is the location, the place, the site where the projectile was

2 found, the place of impact.

3 MR. STAMP: Could you proceed with the running of the video,

4 please.

5 [Videotape played]

6 MR. STAMP: Could you stop there, please.

7 Q. Did you proceed to the hospital and to the morgue to photograph --

8 to video, I beg your pardon, the scenes of the injured and dying in the

9 hospitals and some of the dead persons at the morgue?

10 A. Yes. After we finished the work, after we investigated the scene

11 of the incident, we then joined another team that was already at the

12 morgue in the Kosevo Hospital. They were registering the bodies by

13 numbers and their names and surnames as they were being identified. On

14 this photograph, you can see a characteristic damage to the tissue which

15 can only happen by shrapnel. It cannot be done in any other way, and I am

16 talking about any calibre bullets.

17 Q. And without us going through all of these bodies, the bodies which

18 you filmed, which you videoed, show these types of injuries which you just

19 described?

20 A. On many of them, you can see injuries and the others were covered

21 by the material, by their clothes. There's also in the head --

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I'm sorry,

24 Mr. President. I have a technical problem here. I think that my

25 colleague just said that he wasn't going through all the bodies in

Page 4856

1 question, but my first question would be, is there on this videotape -- I

2 don't know whether we can have an answer to this from my learned

3 colleague?

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, could you please respond, although --

5 MR. STAMP: I'm afraid I'm not sure of the question. Are there

6 bodies on the videotape? Yes, that is what I was proceeding to ask the

7 witness.

8 Q. The videotape which you produced, Witness, went on to depict

9 bodies?

10 JUDGE ORIE: Is that what you would like to know? Because in the

11 English translation --

12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, if we are not going

13 through all the bodies, but if this is all on tape, is there a tape that's

14 going to be tendered as evidence, but neither Defence nor the Chamber will

15 be able to see the -- its total contents? Now, we have to know whether we

16 have seen everything, whether this is only partial, whether there is more

17 on this tape and why we shouldn't look at it all.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.

19 MR. STAMP: I was going to indicate to the Court that to save time

20 we would not go through the hospital scenes and the morgue scenes that are

21 on the tape. But if the Court wants to see it and my friend wants to play

22 it for the Court, he is welcome to do so.

23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] So should we consider that

24 this tape is not going to be tendered?

25 JUDGE ORIE: As far as I do understand, Mr. Piletta-Zanin,

Page 4857

1 Mr. Stamp indicates that although there's more on that tape, that he'll

2 show us those parts which are relevant for his questioning, and he more or

3 less invited the Defence that if they thought that it would be good for

4 the Defence to show the other parts as well, that of course they could do

5 so either while cross-examining the witness or while examining other

6 witnesses. Is that --

7 MR. STAMP: Quite right, Mr. President.

8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, the

9 question is to find out in relation to this video, is it going to be

10 tendered, and does it contain other information? It is not up to the

11 Defence to do this work. If there is more information on the tape or

12 whether this tape has redacted. We have to find a technical way to do

13 this. We cannot tender something which has not been examined by the other

14 side.

15 JUDGE ORIE: But do I understand, has this tape been provided to

16 the Defence?

17 MR. STAMP: Indeed it has.

18 JUDGE ORIE: In its fullness?

19 MR. STAMP: In its entirety.

20 JUDGE ORIE: So this whole tape is a tape that has been provided

21 to the Defence, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, as far as I understand it. If this is

22 not correct Mr. Piletta-Zanin, please let me know.

23 MR. STAMP: We had intended and had given to the Defence recently

24 and explained to them that it was a redacted copy of this full tape which

25 was just played, and that redacted copy, a part of it was played this

Page 4858

1 morning earlier today. What has been played now is a part of the full tape

2 which is on the exhibit list which the Defence has had. There is more to

3 it. As I said, the Defence is welcome to use it for whatever purposes

4 they think fit.

5 JUDGE ORIE: One of the problems that might arise, Mr. Stamp, is

6 that if you give a redacted part of the videotape for the Defence, of

7 course they will prepare for this redacted part only to be used in the

8 examination of the witness, while when you change your mind and use the

9 whole videotape, this might cause the Defence some problems in their

10 preparation for the cross-examination.

11 MR. STAMP: In the circumstances, I will stop here on this video,

12 and they are in possession of everything there is, in respect of videos

13 taken by the police for this scene. And I will proceed no further with

14 this video.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, is there anything at this

16 moment -- is it clear to you? So the original videotape will be

17 tendered into evidence. You have been provided with a copy, but you might

18 be a bit confused by the way it's used.

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Well, first of all, we would

20 like to know the number of the item that was given to us so that we can

21 check; and also secondly, I have a worry, that is that you will have,

22 Mr. President, in your hands, is that a document that you will have which

23 is more important than what we have actually seen? That is the real

24 question.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just explain. This is the problem we have

Page 4859

1 faced before when a witness was examined on certain parts, for example, of

2 a statement or of a document, we have not always admitted the whole

3 document in evidence since there might be a lot of other information which

4 was not part of the examination of the witness. So perhaps it's a

5 practical solution. Would it be possible to prepare a redacted part of

6 this videotape but with all those parts on it that we've seen? Wouldn't

7 that be the best possible solution, so that we are not having access --

8 uncontrolled access to whatever's on the tape and of which the Defence is

9 not aware that we're going to view it and when it has not been a part of

10 the presentation of the Prosecution's evidence in this courtroom.

11 MR. STAMP: I will ensure that is done as it pleases you,

12 Mr. President.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

14 MR. STAMP: That, if it pleases you, Mr. President and

15 Your Honours, is the examination-in-chief of the witness.


17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Since the Prosecution is so

18 good, I'd like to seek the number of this exhibit, and I haven't been

19 given it. Could my learned friend give us the number of this exhibit,

20 please.

21 JUDGE ORIE: We did give the number, it was 227A. Mr. Stamp gave

22 the number, I think.

23 THE REGISTRAR: There are two tapes. The tape that was played

24 this morning, P2279; and the tape that was played this afternoon, P2279A.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Would it not be wise, Mr. Stamp, to not already to

Page 4860

1 tender them into evidence and prepare the other tape containing all those

2 parts shown to the Court and tender that in evidence?

3 MR. STAMP: Yes, I will have that done.

4 JUDGE ORIE: And what number we will then get, we'll see,

5 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, but it's a tape that does not yet exist.

6 Please proceed.

7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I suppose if I

8 understood properly, this was the end of the examination-in-chief. Is

9 that right? Now, we have a technical problem, Mr. President, because as

10 you know, the principal elements for this particular witness, that is, the

11 elements which have to do with the explosion of this shell, are not

12 available to us, and therefore we should like to ask from your Chamber to

13 allow us to cross-examine this witness in quasi tandem. Mrs. Pilipovic

14 will begin, and I will then round it off, of course, with the permission

15 of the Chamber. Thank you very much in advance.

16 [Trial Chamber confers]

17 JUDGE ORIE: We'll allow you to split up the cross-examination in

18 two parts, yes, and then subsequently you can put questions to the

19 witness.

20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed. Mr. Besic, you'll now be examined by

22 the Defence.

23 Cross-examined by Ms. Pilipovic:

24 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Besic.

25 A. Good afternoon.

Page 4861

1 Q. Can you confirm for us that on the 20th of November, 1997, you

2 gave a statement to the Prosecution's OTP?

3 A. Yes, I did.

4 Q. Can you confirm for us that you signed that statement?

5 A. Yes, I did.

6 Q. Did you then, with your signature, confirm that what you said in

7 the statement is true?

8 A. Yes.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Stamp.

10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

11 MR. STAMP: This is not an objection, just to clarify something

12 for the record. The date indicated here is the 20th, 2-0, of November. I

13 think my learned friend had asked about the 28th, 2-8, of November.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for the clarification.

15 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the 28th. Yes I

16 believe now it is all right. The 28th November.

17 Q. Mr. Besic, did you also on the 21st of September, 2001, also have

18 an interview with the investigators OTP?

19 A. Yes, I did.

20 Q. Did you sign that, too?

21 A. Yes, I did.

22 Q. And confirm that what the statement said accurately reflected your

23 statement to the OTP investigators?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Thank you.

Page 4862

1 Today, and in your statements, you said that you were a policeman,

2 and that you had been working as a senior criminal investigator since

3 1975. Is that correct?

4 A. No, 1975 is not correct. I completed the course in 1989, and I

5 work as an operations criminal investigator until 1997 when I was promoted

6 to a senior crime investigator.

7 Q. So if I understood you right, you completed the course for the

8 criminal investigators in 1989. Is that so?

9 A. Yes. It was a six-month course.

10 Q. Can you tell us, sir, at this course which lasted six months, what

11 was briefly this syllabus of yours in 1989?

12 A. We learned about the theories and practice of criminal

13 investigations and criminal analysis, and it applied to all types of

14 criminal investigations, that is, traffic accidents, murder cases, and

15 even part of the ballistics methodology, but only as far as siting is

16 concerned.

17 Q. In other words, you say that that course in 1989, you were not

18 trained with regard to analysis of shell or mortar cases?

19 A. No, we did not.

20 Q. Today, when asked by my learned friend whether you had

21 investigated cases of sniping and shelling, and you answered that you did

22 and that you investigated great many such incidents.

23 A. That's right.

24 Q. You also told us that it was in 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995,

25 specifically I'm interested in 1992, 1993, and 1994. When you say "great

Page 4863

1 many" what did you mean by that? What is it, "great many"?

2 A. Well, the order of magnitude, I would say there would be one

3 criminal investigator, and we were 15 altogether, I think that each one of

4 us had more -- over 20, maybe 30 on-site investigations, but I cannot give

5 you the exact figure. Be that as it may, more than 20 times, less than 50

6 certainly. So this is great many.

7 Q. When you say 20 and less than 50, do you mean also both the

8 shelling and sniping investigations?

9 A. Shelling investigations more, at least in my case, less -- I had

10 less sniping cases.

11 Q. Can you tell us, in relation to that figure, more than 20, less

12 than 50, how many -- how many of these cases were shelling incidents?

13 A. I would say 90 per cent more, or 80 per cent.

14 THE INTERPRETER: Excuse me. The interpreter apologises. 80

15 per cent more cases.

16 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation].

17 Q. You said to us in 1992 you conducted the investigation of shelling

18 cases and sniping cases. Can you tell us the first investigation in 1992,

19 where and in which place did you do it?

20 A. My first investigation, 1992, is when I was a member of a team

21 which conducted the investigation on Vase Miskina Street where on the 25th

22 of May, if I remember well, three projectiles landed killing about 25

23 persons and many more wounded. I cannot give you the exact number.

24 Q. Sir, Mr. Besic, can you tell us, so that was your first

25 investigation. What kind of experience did you have in investigating

Page 4864

1 shelling incidents prior to that particular investigation?

2 A. At school we had no training of that nature, which means that in

3 the time of peace, there was no opportunity for us to go to a scene of

4 such an incident, so that my experience related to shelling, or my

5 colleagues' experience, of course, equaled zero.

6 Q. Can you tell us, when you went out to the first site of shelling

7 and you told us it happened in 1992, what -- which operations did you

8 undertake within your expertise, or specifically, what was your duty when

9 you arrived on the scene that 25th of May, 1992?

10 A. As a member of the team, I assisted my colleagues who were in

11 charge of it. I was present there, and I helped them, that is, we tried

12 to collect evidence, or rather the shrapnels around bodies, doing

13 sketches, photographs, preparing the photo documentation, and as you

14 remember, also the videorecording of that incident.

15 Q. Can you answer this: In 1992, how many more investigations did

16 you participate in, I mean of shelling incidents?

17 A. I cannot tell you the exact number. I don't know. How could I?

18 I cannot tell you that it was 20 or 50. I simply do not know the exact

19 number.

20 Q. Mr. Besic, can you answer this: How many investigations did you

21 perform of incidents caused by mortars and those caused by artillery

22 shells?

23 A. Well, since we found ourselves in a war, we were learning very

24 quickly so that we learned how to tell apart projectiles fired from rifle

25 barrels and those from smooth barrels. The difference between -- the

Page 4865

1 difference between a 120 mortar and 82 projectile whereas where you have

2 a rifle barrel, then the projectile rotates and it leaves a completely

3 different trace in concrete, in the pavement. The shrapnel bursts in a

4 completely different manner and scatters differently. And to give you the

5 exact number how many were artillery incidents and how many were mortar

6 incidents, I could hardly tell you that.

7 Q. Sir, so far you told us that you had no training in investigations

8 of shelling or mortar incidents?

9 A. No, I did not have any such training.

10 Q. Can you answer, then, where did you personally conduct the

11 investigation of the effects of a mortar shell?

12 A. I can't recall that.

13 Q. Since you answered that you were -- that you attended many

14 investigations between not less than 20 and less than 50, in 1992, 1993,

15 1994, and you said in 1995, too, can you, then, explain what is the

16 difference between a crater made by a mortar shell and the one made by an

17 artillery shell? What is the difference?

18 A. Well, depends on the ground, whether the ground is soft or hard,

19 because there is a difference between the projectile landing on grass or

20 concrete or asphalt or whatever. As you can see from our videorecording,

21 this projectile was wedged, lodged, within the asphalt itself.

22 Q. Can you tell us what are the investigations that you performed,

23 and in which the projectiles landed wedged into the asphalt?

24 A. I can't hear. Oh, yes. Well, specifically, these two cases that

25 we covered here. Both the projectile at Dobrinja and at Markale, both of

Page 4866

1 them landed, that is, were wedged, were lodged in the ground, that is

2 asphalt.

3 Q. Are you referring to photographs or to the video?

4 A. I am referring both to the videorecording and photographs

5 referring to these two cases.

6 Q. Can you tell us, that is, do you know, if a mortar shell

7 immediately prior to hitting the ground, does it fly at a supersonic

8 speed or a slower speed?

9 A. I wouldn't be able to tell you that. But one can hear it. It is

10 important. If you hear it, it means that it's on its way. If you don't,

11 then it's under you. But you hear it.

12 Q. Can you answer this: How does one determine the direction from

13 which the shell came when you conducted an investigation?

14 A. Well, since we did not learn this at school, because we were not

15 in that situation, we had an opportunity to observe UN members determining

16 the direction from which the projectile had come. And it was on the basis

17 of the work they did. We simply observed them, and then learned very fast

18 how to determine this. And it is this system which we saw in Markale

19 case, that is, when you put together two -- you put together the rear part

20 of the damaged part in the asphalt or the site of the fall, and then you

21 place one stick or a ruler at a 90-degree angle, and that is how we can

22 determine the direction from which the projectile arrived.

23 Q. Since you mentioned the angle, can you tell us which is the

24 maximum impact angle of a mine?

25 A. Well, I can't tell you, I'm not an ballistic experts.

Page 4867

1 Q. You don't know, you mean.

2 A. [No audible response]

3 Q. The witness shrugs. Can you tell us how can one establish the

4 type and calibre of the projectile in situ?

5 A. Well, it is very easy to distinguish a mortar, projectile --

6 one from the 10-millimetre from the one of 82 or even those smaller ones,

7 even though of the latter we heard less. But 82 and 120-millimetre ones

8 yes, we learned how to tell them apart.

9 Q. Can you tell us what is the difference, how different are they, in

10 what is this difference reflected?

11 A. In the size of the tail and its flaps. The 120, of course, has a

12 larger one, the 82 has a smaller one, and the 80 has even a smaller -- 60

13 calibre because there are simply three different calibres, 120, 82, and

14 60.

15 Q. Do you know what kind of shell can be fired from a mortar, 120 and

16 82 millimetres?

17 A. I don't understand your question.

18 Q. What type of a shell can one fire from a mortar of 82 and 120

19 millimetres?

20 A. What type of shell? I wouldn't know.

21 Q. Can you tell us how do the shrapnel scatter after the explosion?

22 Can you tell us?

23 A. Well, from the investigation, it mostly depends on the angle of

24 the impact and the damage on the ground, that is, in the asphalt, and the

25 damage is much bigger in the direction from which the projectile came. So

Page 4868

1 if it comes -- no, I don't really how to demonstrate this to you. When it

2 falls at an angle, that is, its inferior part, when it falls at an angle,

3 you have considerable damage in the asphalt or in the ground, and the

4 shrapnel, a large part of the shrapnel, will scatter outward.

5 Q. You told us about shrapnel. Do you know what is the maximum

6 range, the lethal range? What is the maximum lethal range of the

7 shrapnel?

8 A. No, I wouldn't know that, believe me.

9 Q. You spoke today about an incident -- about the incident at Markale

10 on the 5th of February, 1994?

11 A. That's right.

12 Q. Can you tell us when were you notified of the explosion at

13 Markale?

14 A. About 30 or 40 minutes after the shell landed. We were notified

15 and told to get the team ready because you know going out for an

16 investigation, you have to go together with the Prosecutor and the

17 magistrate so you have to find the magistrate and the Prosecutor and the

18 whole investigation team was ready and we went together to the scene of

19 the explosion some 30 or 40 minutes after it had happened.

20 Q. You say that both the investigating magistrate and the public

21 Prosecutor went with you to the scene?

22 A. Yes, that's right.

23 Q. Can you tell us, then, which investigating magistrate conducted

24 the investigation that day?

25 A. I wouldn't be able to tell you now. I mean, the name really

Page 4869

1 escapes me.

2 Q. You do not know or you don't want to say?

3 A. I think that you can find his full name in these records.

4 Q. Did you go out to do any investigations with the same magistrate

5 before?

6 A. No, that was the first time that we went out to the scene

7 together.

8 Q. Can you tell us who is it that notified you and what were you

9 exactly told when that incident happened?

10 A. The notification came from the central office, that is, it was the

11 operations duty officer who was informed about that, and he was in charge

12 of putting the team together.

13 Q. Can you tell us when did you get the news about the incident, at

14 what time?

15 A. Oh, dear, it could have been around 1300, 13 -- quarter past 1300,

16 perhaps 10 to 1.00, that is 12.50.

17 Q. How far is the Markale market from the place where you received

18 the call?

19 A. The Markale market is between 800 to a kilometre away from the

20 police administration of the Sarajevo canton that was known at the time as

21 the CSB, Security Services Centre.

22 Q. Can you tell us, what was the weather that day in Sarajevo?

23 A. As far as I can remember, it could have been cloudy. It was

24 wintertime, so it would be cloudy and cold.

25 Q. How long did it take you, since you told us that your workplace

Page 4870

1 was about 800 to 1.000 metres away, how long did it take to you get to the

2 site?

3 A. Well, not much, because the investigating team had its vehicles,

4 so that we got there fast enough.

5 Q. Apart from the investigating magistrate and the public Prosecutor

6 who were with you, who else was on the team? I will help you. I will

7 remind you. You told us that you had Mr. Mirza Sabljica with you, and

8 late Hamdija Cavcic.

9 THE INTERPRETER: Witness confirms.

10 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. Who else was on the team with you and who else joined in this

12 investigation?

13 A. It was the following: The operations officer, responded for valid

14 crimes, then a genocide expert, operations officer from the Stari Grad

15 police station who guarded that post, and they were also the

16 representatives of the anti-sabotage service, and also our chiefs, our

17 superiors, who supervised our work.

18 Q. And if I ask you to write down all those names, the names of all

19 those who were with you, would you be able to remember the names of those

20 people who were with you?

21 A. Well, my colleagues -- I mean, these who were members of this

22 criminal investigation team, yes, yes, I could do that. But as for the

23 other operations people, no, I don't think I would be able to do that.

24 Q. Did you, all of you, did you go to the scene of the incident in

25 one go, or did you go severally?

Page 4871

1 A. Well, we all met at the scene, because of course we could not fit

2 into one or two vehicles, and we didn't have enough vehicles so that those

3 who were in the same building with us went together with us and those

4 operations officers from the Stari Grad Police Station followed.

5 Q. In relation to the team which you have just listed to us, and you

6 told us who was there, can you tell us who was the first one to arrive on

7 the scene?

8 A. We, the employees from the Security Services Centre, that is the

9 criminal technique and the operations people from there, were the first to

10 arrive there, but we couldn't start working until the investigating

11 magistrate arrived. He arrived some five minutes later. That is, you're

12 not supposed to do anything there until the investigating magistrate

13 arrives.

14 Q. Now, before you arrived there, these criminal investigators and

15 analysts, was there anyone else there present, I mean, on the part of the

16 police in that part where the incident had happened? Was there a police

17 team there?

18 A. Yeah, the scene was guarded by the Stari Grad Police Station.

19 There were no civilians or military. There were only police workers,

20 police workers from Stari Grad Police Station.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, if you could find a suitable moment to

22 interrupt the cross-examination, this would be the moment? Yes.

23 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may we just have the

24 witness confirm this.

25 Q. So you arrived there at a quarter past 1.00?

Page 4872

1 A. Well, thereabouts, yes.

2 Q. And when you arrived to the scene, there were no civilians there,

3 is that it?

4 A. No, there were not. Only the policemen. Only uniformed policemen

5 who were guarding the site, and this was within the jurisdiction of the

6 Stari Grad Police Station, and they were the only ones who were there.

7 Q. Thank you very much.

8 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, I will

9 discontinue now and will resume tomorrow. Thank you very much.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much, Ms. Pilipovic.

11 Before we adjourn, let me just ask one question to

12 Mr. Piletta-Zanin. I tried to get more information about the problems you

13 faced with getting Visa for your experts. Am I well informed that you

14 still have to give some details on your expert before they can handle your

15 Visa application?

16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I was told at the end of

17 last week that Mr. Christian Rohde's department wanted to get his

18 curriculum vitae or curricula vitae, plural of the experts. I submitted

19 this information but I couldn't get those documents meanwhile, but I am

20 quite sure that this week we shall get it. And as soon as we get it, we

21 shall of course transmit it. There is no doubt about that, Mr. President.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So the application at this moment, we are

23 waiting -- not we, but the OLAD is still waiting for the information to be

24 provided in order to --

25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, but this is a request

Page 4873

1 which was transmitted to us by OLAD only at the end of last week.


3 Mr. Besic, this is the end of your examination for today, the

4 cross-examination. We will resume tomorrow morning at 9.00, so not 9.30,

5 in this same courtroom. We're adjourned until then.

6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at

7 4.00 p.m., to be reconvened on

8 Tuesday, the 5th day of March, 2000,

9 at 9.00 a.m.