Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 7588

 1                           Monday, 1 September 2008

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone.

 7             Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning

 9     everyone in and around the courtroom.  This is case number IT-06-90-T,

10     The Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

12             Mr. Russo, I see that you are apparently ready to call your next

13     witness, Mr. Berikoff.

14             Good morning, sir.

15             Before you give evidence in this court, the Rules of Procedure

16     and Evidence require you to make a solemn declaration that you will speak

17     the truth, the whole truth, and nothing about the truth.

18             The text it now handed out to you by Madam Usher.  May invite you

19     to make that solemn declaration, but could I ask you to stand first.

20             THE WITNESS:  Yes, certainly.  I solemnly declare that I will

21     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Berikoff.

23             Mr. Russo, please proceed.

24             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Good morning, Your

25     Honours.

Page 7589

 1                           WITNESS:  PHILIP ROY BERIKOFF

 2                           Examination by Mr. Russo:

 3        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Berikoff.

 4        A.   Good morning, sir.

 5        Q.   If you would, please, state your full name for the record?

 6        A.   Philip Roy Berikoff.

 7        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, do you recall giving four statements to the ICTY,

 8     the first dated 24 August 1996, the second on 21 May 1997, the third

 9     between 26 and 27 May 1997, and the fourth and final dated

10     11 December 2007?

11        A.   Yes, I do.

12             MR. RUSSO:  And, Your Honour, if I could have the assistance of

13     the court usher, I would like to hand hard copies to the witness.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.

15             MR. RUSSO:

16        Q.   And, Mr. Berikoff, did you have a chance to review all four of

17     those statements prior to coming to court today?

18        A.   Yes, I have.  We did proofing sessions with you the majority of

19     last week.

20        Q.   And in reviewing those statements, can you tell the Court whether

21     they accurately reflect what you told investigators at the time those

22     statements were taken?

23        A.   All four statements reflect accurately what I had to say in the

24     statements, with the exception of the corrections that we made during the

25     proofing sessions.

Page 7590

 1        Q.   Thank you.  I'd like to take you through those corrections.

 2             MR. RUSSO:  And we can just do this briefly with the indulgence

 3     of the court and counsel.  Your Honour, I will simply lead Mr. Berikoff

 4     through those.

 5        Q.   First, as a general matter, Mr. Berikoff, in your statements, you

 6     sometimes use the terms "special police HV," "special police," and

 7     "Croatian special police."  Can you clarify for the Court whether these

 8     terms are intended to refer to the same group of individuals.

 9        A.   Yes, they are.  It was my assumption when I was there that all

10     three worked together because I had seen the various types of military

11     police or special police working together.  Sometimes, they would be

12     wearing grey coveralls and sometimes camouflage uniforms.

13        Q.   Okay.  And how did you distinguish special police from regular HV

14     troops?

15        A.   The special police, when they were conducting special police

16     operations, in my opinion were those wearing grey coveralls.  The ones

17     doing normal military police duties were wearing camouflage uniforms.

18        Q.   Okay.  And can I take it, then, that then when you refer in your

19     statements and attachments to special police, you are referring to

20     individuals wearing grey coveralls?

21        A.   Yes, I am, sir.

22        Q.   And also, in particular, in your statements and in the

23     attachments to them, you attributed the burning and looting that you

24     witnessed in Kistanje on 9 August 1995 to both the HV and the special

25     police.  I believe, however, that you clarified that did you not actually

Page 7591

 1     witness any special police members; that is, those wearing grey coveralls

 2     in the town of Kistanje on 9 August 1995.  Is that correct?

 3        A.   That is correct.

 4        Q.   And I just ask you to please briefly pause after my question, and

 5     I will pause after your answers.

 6             And I would like to take you through some specific references

 7     that you made to the special police for corrections.

 8             MR. RUSSO:  If we could have Exhibit D284 [Realtime transcript

 9     read in error "D248"], which is marked for identification.

10        Q.   And, Mr. Berikoff, this is your third statement which in your

11     witness binder appears at tab 3.  And if we could go to page 19, lines 36

12     through 38; in the B/C/S version, there appears at page 14, lines 26

13     through 29.

14             And there, Mr. Berikoff, I believe you make a reference to the

15     special police, when, in fact, I believe you indicated that that

16     particular incident was the civilian police.  Is that correct?

17        A.   That's correct, sir.

18        Q.   Thank you.

19             If we could then move you to the following page, page 20, and

20     that would be line 6 to 8; and in the B/C/S, that is at page 14.  That

21     would be lines 34 through 47.

22             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honours, my understanding from the registrar is

23     that apparently the B/C/S translation has not been uploaded into e-court.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  On your own list, I see that it says, "B/C/S

25     translation on progress."  That's the list you filed with the -- I don't

Page 7592

 1     know whether it's ready.  I don't know whether it is uploaded.

 2             MR. RUSSO:  Apparently, it has not been uploaded yet at this

 3     point, Your Honour; however, we will ensure that that happens as soon as

 4     possible.  I do have the B/C/S page numbers for the court registrar that

 5     can I provide so that we can correct the record.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  May I take it, then, that the translation is

 7     ready.

 8             MR. RUSSO:  It is ready, Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  It is ready, so if you would please take care that

10     it is uploaded.

11             Mr. Kay.

12             MR. KEHOE:   Pardon me, counsel.  Just by way of correction, on

13     line 5, I think, we were talking about this document as 248.  If you look

14     at the transcript, Judge, I think it is 284.

15             MR. RUSSO:  I think that's correct.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  On your list, it appears as 284.

17             MR. RUSSO:  It is it 284, Your Honour.

18             MR. KEHOE:  Just didn't know if it was.  Okay.

19             MR. RUSSO:

20        Q.   I'm sorry, Mr. Berikoff.  I believe we were at pages 20, lines 6

21     through 8.  And, again, you make a reference to the special police; and,

22     again, I believe that you had indicated that that was actually the

23     civilian police on that occasion as well.  Is that correct?

24        A.   What occasion are we looking at now?  Is this still the Kistanje

25     area, Mr. Russo?

Page 7593

 1        Q.   It is, on page 20.

 2        A.   Yes, it is.  That is correct, Mr. Russo.

 3        Q.   Actually, I apologise.  But the page 20 line 6 to 8 is a

 4     reference to in the immediate days after Operation Storm, where you

 5     indicate that special police were directing traffic while soldiers loaded

 6     vehicles.  I believe you indicated during the proofing session, that it

 7     was civilian police directing traffic.  Is that correct?

 8        A.   As I explained to you last week and to the Defence yesterday that

 9     spoke to me, it was a combination of both.  There was looting going on

10     throughout the sector.  However, in particular, between the road of Knin

11     to Drnis, it was very systematic where there were a number of trucks that

12     were lined up.  There was a police -- civilian-type police standing

13     outside on the road with a checklist, marking off that residence that the

14     looting had taken place and that the material was put on the truck.

15     There would also be houses that were marked with Croatian markings so as

16     not to touch that house, and then they would go on to the next one.

17             So it was a combination of both systematic and not systematic,

18     sir.

19        Q.   Well, thank you for that answer.  However, I wanted to simply

20     clear up which police you were referring to directing traffic on that

21     road.  Your statement at page 20 indicates that it's special police;

22     however, I believe you indicated --

23        A.   I indicated that it was civilian police, sir.

24        Q.   Thank you.  And if we could move to page 24, lines 4 through 7.

25     And here, again, are references to the incident in Kistanje on

Page 7594

 1     9 August 1995.  And on line 4 through 7, you indicate there that Croat

 2     soldiers and special police in coveralls were in the town.

 3             However, I believe, as you already indicated, you did not

 4     actually see special police in Kistanje on 9 August 1995.  Is that

 5     correct?

 6        A.   No, I did not.

 7        Q.   Okay.  And also appearing further down that page, at lines 14

 8     through 17, it makes a similar reference to special police in Kistanje;

 9     as well as at line 32, it makes a reference to special police in

10     Kistanje.  And can you simply confirm that all of those entries are

11     incorrect in so far as they identify special police actually being in

12     Kistanje?

13        A.   That is correct.

14        Q.   Thank you.

15             MR. RUSSO:  If we could have --

16        Q.   You move to your second statement, and that is, I believe, tab 2

17     in your witness binder.  Your second statement, for the registrar, 65 ter

18     3426.

19             MR. RUSSO:  And if we can move to page 3, paragraph 2,

20     subparagraph O; and in the B/C/S, this appears at page 4.

21        Q.   And in there, Mr. Berikoff, in paragraph 2-O, you indicate that

22     on 8 August, Croatian soldiers and special police were looting along the

23     road between Knin and Drnis.  And, again, I'd like you to correct whether

24     it was actually civilian police rather than special police?

25        A.   That's correct.  It was civilian police that were checking off

Page 7595

 1     the houses.

 2        Q.   Okay.  And if we go to page 4 in that statement --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Russo, have I well understood that here "special

 4     police" is replaced by "civilian police," where at the earlier instances

 5     it was just striking "special police."

 6             MR. RUSSO:  That's correct, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Please proceed.

 8             MR. KEHOE:   Excuse me.  Are we talking when -- pardon me, Judge.

 9             By clarification, are we talk back in 284 when counsel was

10     striking the "special police"?  I think that he was including and saying

11     it was civilian police, when we were back on 284.

12             MR. RUSSO:  There were two references in 284 replacing "special

13     police" with "civilian police," and then the references to Kistanje in

14     particular were striking "special police."

15             MR. KEHOE:  Okay.  That's fine.

16             MR. RUSSO:

17        Q.   In your second statement, Mr. Berikoff, at page 4, paragraph 2-Q,

18     and the reference is the same in the B/C/S, you indicate that on

19     10 August 1995, on the road between Knin and Drnis, that looting by HV

20     soldiers continued unabated, while special police looked on or directed

21     traffic.

22             I believe you had also corrected that in that instance again, it

23     was actually civilian police and not special police directing the

24     traffic.  Is that correct?

25        A.   That's correct.

Page 7596

 1        Q.   Thank you.  If we could move back to your third statement.

 2             MR. RUSSO:  That is, again, D284.

 3        Q.   And if we could go to --

 4        A.   What tab is that, Mr. Russo?

 5        Q.   That's tab 3 in your binder.

 6        A.   Thank you.

 7        Q.   So D284, page 14, lines 27 through 28; and the B/C/S, this

 8     appears, for the record, at page 10, lines 46 through 48.

 9             And there, Mr. Berikoff, you give your opinion that the hospital

10     was directly targeted during the artillery attack.  However, I believe,

11     during the proofing session, you indicated that you had changed your

12     opinion regarding that; and, in fact, you do not believe that the

13     hospital was actually a target of the artillery attack.  Is that correct?

14        A.   That's correct.

15        Q.   Staying with that statement, if we could move to page 21 -- 21,

16     at lines 32 to 33; in the B/C/S, this would appear at page 15, line 45.

17             And there, Mr. Berikoff, you indicate that you met with

18     Major Juric on 8 August in the headquarters.  However, I believe that you

19     indicated that that date itself is not correct, and that the date that

20     you actually met with Major Juric was the morning of 7 August?

21        A.   That's correct.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Now with the corrections we have just made,

23     Mr. Berikoff, can you tell court whether all four of your statements

24     taken together are true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?

25        A.   To the best of my knowledge, yes, they are.

Page 7597

 1        Q.   Thank you.  And if you were questioned here today regarding the

 2     matters contained in those statements, would your answers be the same

 3     given the corrections that we've just recorded?

 4        A.   Yes, they would.

 5        Q.   Thank you.

 6             MR. RUSSO:  At this time, Mr. President, Your Honours, I would

 7     move for the admission of the 24 August 1996 statement, which is 65

 8     ter 5389.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, that would be number?

10             THE REGISTRAR:  That would be Exhibit P739, Your Honours.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

12             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.  I would also move admission of statement

13     dated 21 May 1997, which is 65 ter 3426.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  And that would be, Madam Registrar?

15             THE REGISTRAR:  That would be Exhibit P740, Your Honours.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

17             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.  The exhibit, MFI'd as D84 [sic], is the

18     statement 26 to 27 May 1997.  At this point, I would simply --

19             MR. KEHOE:  Excuse me, counsel, it is 284.

20             MR. RUSSO:  My apologies.  I thought I said 284, but apparently I

21     can't seem to get that number correct.  It's 284.  I believe that

22     would --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, it slips out of my mind why it was MFI'd at

24     that time.  Was there any intention to tender it, and were we just to

25     wait until the witness would have appeared and would have given his

Page 7598

 1     attestations?

 2          MR. KEHOE:   I think the latter explanation was a reservation by the

 3     parties until Mr. Berikoff came.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And, then, since you brought up the document

 5     first, would you like to tender it?

 6             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour, we tender it.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we don't have to assign another number.

 8             MR. KEHOE:  Actually, if I may Judge, I want to be tad gracious

 9     about this.  It was actually my colleague, Mr. Mikulicic, that tendered

10     it, so I guess I should offer the floor to him.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic.

12             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, Your Honour, we would like to have that

13     particular number that was MFI'D.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we move to the next one, Mr. Russo.

15             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Finally, the statement

16     dated 11 December 2007, which is 65 ter 5391.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, that would be number?

18             THE REGISTRAR:  That would be Exhibit P741, Your Honours.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

20             Now, as far as the P numbers are concerned, from the written

21     submissions I take it that there are no objections.

22             MR. KEHOE:  No objection, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  P739, P740, and P741 are admitted into evidence.

24             Now, Mr. Mikulicic, Mr. Russo did part of the job seeking the

25     attestations, you tender the documents.

Page 7599

 1             I take it no objections, Mr. Russo.

 2             MR. RUSSO:  That's correct, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Then D284 [Realtime transcript read in error "D248"]

 4     is admitted into evidence.

 5             Please proceed.

 6             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 7             With your permission, I would now like to read a brief summary of

 8     the 92 ter statement.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  The witness knows the purpose of that?

10             MR. RUSSO:  Yes, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

12             MR. MIKULICIC:  Your Honour, I am sorry to interrupt.  For the

13     purposes of correction, it is, again, "D248" in the transcript, instead

14     of "D284."

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Until it is Tuesday, we'll be able to do it

16     correctly, Mr. Mikulicic.

17             Thank you.

18             Mr. Russo, let's try to avoid to refer to that number.

19             Please proceed.

20             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you, Mr. President.

21             Philip Berikoff was the Military Information Officer in

22     Sector South from 17 July until 5 September 1995.  Prior to Operation

23     Storm, he travelled extensively throughout Sector South collecting

24     information on the military situation.  He was present in Knin during the

25     artillery attacks on 4 and 5 August 1995, made several missions into Knin

Page 7600

 1     during the shelling to rescue civilian employees and to offer assistance

 2     to the hospital, and also observed the shelling of Knin from the UN HQ

 3     compound.

 4             After Operation Storm, he managed to leave the UN HQ compound

 5     during the HV blockade and gain access to many areas in Sector South

 6     where he observed many villages on fire and also witnessed HV soldiers,

 7     special police, and civilian police engaged in looting or acts of

 8     destruction.  In particular, he particularly witnessed the destruction of

 9     towns of Kistanje, Cetina, and Donji Lapac by Croatian forces.  He

10     authored several reports describing the level of destruction he witnessed

11     in the towns and villages all over Sector South.

12             That concludes my summary, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Russo.  You may proceed.

14             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.

15        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, I would like to deal first with the attachments to

16     your statements as well as your other exhibits, and then I will move on

17     to ask you a few specific questions.

18             So if you could please refer to your first statement, and that is

19     P739.  And if we could go to page 4 --

20        A.   What tab is that, please, Mr. Russo?

21        Q.   It's the first tab in your binder.

22        A.   Thank you.

23        Q.   Again, page 4; and in the B/C/S, this appears at page 3.

24             And there you reference a document which is attached to that

25     statement and marked "A."

Page 7601

 1             MR. RUSSO:  And if we could have now 65 ter 1829, please.

 2        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, is the document on the screen the document which is

 3     referred to as "A" in your first statement?

 4        A.   Yes, it is.

 5        Q.   And did you personally prepare this document?

 6        A.   Yes, I did.

 7        Q.   And can you tell the Court what the circumstances were which

 8     prompted you to do this?

 9        A.   On the 22nd of November, while I was in -- after I left Knin in

10     early September, I went on to Sarajevo to UNPROFOR Headquarters Forward

11     as the G2 operations officer.  While I was there, I got a request from

12     UNCRO to prepare a report with regard to all of the damage that I had

13     witnessed during my time in Sector South.  I did this based on my various

14     trips that I took while I was in Sector South.  The information was based

15     from previous reports that I had done as well as a daily journal that I

16     kept during my whole time in the former Yugoslavia.

17        Q.   Thank you.  And there's a few entries that I would like to

18     clarify.

19             Paragraph 2-A, states:  "At least 100 houses were probably

20     destroyed during the actual offensive, 4 to 5 August 1995."

21             Mr. Berikoff, does this number reflect the number of houses that

22     you personally observed?

23        A.   Yes, it does.  I had the opportunity shortly after the offensive

24     to go into the town of Knin and see a number of houses that were damaged

25     extensively.  Some were damaged beyond repair.  Therefore, that's why I

Page 7602

 1     say they were destroyed and that was immediately after.  There was

 2     further destruction later.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  And when you use the term "at least 100 houses," can

 4     you give the Court some idea of approximately how many more houses you

 5     believe were damaged during the actually offensive?

 6        A.   There was substantial damage to a number of other houses that I

 7     did not include in my report because I didn't -- they were still

 8     inhabitable, so I didn't include it in the report.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Moving to paragraph 2-E.  This paragraph discusses

10     damage between Knin and Kistanje as well as the damage to Kistanje

11     itself.

12             You stated in that paragraph :  "Croatian (HV special police)

13     were likely responsible for the majority of the destruction."

14             Can you clarify whether the destruction which you attribute in

15     this sentence to the special police is the destruction between Knin and

16     Kistanje or the destruction of Kistanje itself?

17        A.   I would say the -- from my recollection, I would say it is the

18     destruction in Kistanje itself and the immediate vicinity of Kistanje.

19        Q.   And we had discussed earlier that you didn't actually see special

20     police in Kistanje.  Nevertheless, can you explain to the Court why you

21     believe the special police had some involvement with the activity in

22     Kistanje?

23        A.   It was my opinion and still is today that the special police were

24     involved in some of the operations around the area of Kistanje, because

25     on numerous occasions, I had met personally with Major Ivan Juric who was

Page 7603

 1     a military police.  However, on numerous occasions when I did run into

 2     him, he was also wearing the grey coveralls of the special police.  It

 3     was, therefore, my assumption that Major Juric controlled a number of the

 4     various military police and special police forces; and, in fact, by him

 5     wearing grey coveralls in that area, I assumed that there must have been

 6     special police in the area as well, sir.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  And to clarify, did you run into Major Juric on the

 8     day that you had also been in Kistanje on the 9th of August?

 9        A.   Yes, I did, sir.  I ran into Major Juric in the area of Macure,

10     which is just north of Kistanje.

11        Q.   And can you tell the Court what he was wearing on that day?

12        A.   Major Juric was driving in a black SUV vehicle, and he was

13     wearing grey coveralls, sir.

14        Q.   Thank you.  If we could now move to paragraph 2-F -- I'm sorry, I

15     apologise.  Let's move to 2-H.

16             And in paragraph 2-H, you discuss the damage to Oklaj, and you

17     state:  "An ARSK unit was garrisoned in the village."

18             I'd like you to please clarify, if you can, when the ARSK unit

19     was garrisoned in that village?

20        A.   Prior -- prior to the offensive, I had --or I was tasked to a

21     helicopter recce, along the Zone of Separation that ran between the Croat

22     side and the Serb side.  When the helicopter picked us up -- myself up at

23     Knin, we were en route to pick up two Canadian officers in Rastovic.  On

24     the way to pick up the officers, approximately eight minutes into the

25     flight, we were fired upon by the ARSK from the vicinity of Oklaj.  They

Page 7604

 1     had fired one missile at us, the helicopter pilot was able to go down to

 2     ground level, and an another missile was fired at us.  We returned back

 3     to the compound.  I put in a protest to General Forand.  General Forand

 4     further put in a protest to the ARSK.  About an hour later, a colonel

 5     from the ARSK came and apologised for the incident.

 6             While we were flying over Oklaj, there were a number of ARSK

 7     vehicles, and, therefore, I assumed it was a stronghold or a garrison of

 8     ARSK soldiers.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  And you just mentioned that you believed it was a

10     stronghold.  Is that why, in paragraph 2-H, you also indicate that you

11     believe the whole village of Oklaj was or could have been a military

12     target?

13        A.   Yes, I do.  There were also occasions when I drove through the

14     town of Oklaj and observed numerous ARSK soldiers prior to the conflict.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Moving to the following paragraph, 2-I, where you

16     discuss damage in the village of Razvode, and you state:  "Many homes

17     were left untouched, suggesting that they were Croatian dwellings."

18             Can you please explain to the Court why you say that the fact

19     that they were not touched suggests that they were Croatian dwellings?

20        A.   Throughout the sector and in particular in the village of

21     Razvode, there were markings on the house, denoting the fact that, in

22     fact, it was a Croatian residence.  Therefore, that residence was left

23     alone.  The Serb residences were destroyed or damaged to an extent that

24     made them uninhabitable.

25        Q.   Thank you.  Let's move now, please, to paragraph 2-L, in which

Page 7605

 1     you discuss damage to the town of Donji Lapac, and there you state:

 2     "Much of the destruction was caused by HV special police troops."

 3             Can you tell the Court whether in Donji Lapac, you actually saw

 4     special police troops?

 5        A.   I went up to Donji Lapac a number of times, in particular,

 6     immediately after the offensive on Knin.  There were still ongoing

 7     fighting throughout the rest of the sector because no offensive stops

 8     immediately on -- on whatever, at 1210 on the 5th of August.  So there

 9     was fighting throughout the rest of the sector.  When I got up to

10     Donji Lapac, we ran into a number of HV soldier plus a number of soldiers

11     that were dressed in grey coveralls.

12        Q.   And can you tell the Court what, if anything, the HV soldiers and

13     the individuals in grey coveralls were doing in the town of Donji Lapac?

14        A.   As I indicated just a couple of seconds ago, there was still

15     ongoing fights so there was a lot of small-arm fire going on.  However,

16     they were also going into the houses doing whatever activity they were

17     doing in the house.  However, upon exit of the house and before the went

18     into the next one, the house would -- would be ablaze, and it became

19     obvious that there was destruction going on.

20        Q.   When you say that there was fighting going on, did you see actual

21     combat between ARSK soldiers and Croatian forces within the town of

22     Donji Lapac?

23        A.   Not -- not right within the town itself.  However, there were

24     sounds throughout the town of small-arms fire; and, as I indicated

25     earlier, the offensive had not stopped.  It had stopped in Knin but not

Page 7606

 1     in areas -- other areas of the sector.  So, in fact, there was still

 2     combat operations going on throughout the sector.

 3        Q.   Thank you.

 4             If we could move to paragraph 2-N, where you discuss damage to

 5     the village of Cetina, and there you sate:  "The destruction was caused

 6     after the offensive by both the occupying HV soldiers and the Croatian

 7     special police."

 8             And can you tell the Court whether you actually sow the special

 9     police troops causing destruction in Cetina.

10        A.   Yes, I did.  In addition to the HV and the special police, there

11     was also a group of, I guess, rag-tag soldiers or possibly those that are

12     belong to a war lord.  They were also conducting looting operations or

13     clean-up operations in the town of Cetina as well.

14        Q.   Thank you.

15             MR. RUSSO:  At this time, Mr. President, I would move for the

16     admission of 65 ter 1829.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit P742, Your Honours.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objections against P742?

20             MR. KEHOE:  No.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Then P742 is admitted into evidence.

22             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.

23        Q.   And moving back to your first statement, Mr. Berikoff.

24             MR. RUSSO:  And I don't believe we need to pull this up.

25        Q.   The first statement at pages -- between pages 4 and 5, you

Page 7607

 1     reference a document attached to that statement marked "B."

 2             MR. RUSSO:  And if we could have 65 ter 450.

 3        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, is the document on the screen the document which

 4     you identify as document "B" in your first statement?

 5        A.   Yes, it is.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  And did you prepare this document?

 7        A.   Yes, I did.

 8        Q.   And can you please tell the Court what the circumstances were

 9     while you prepared it?

10        A.   I was tasked by Major Dussault to prepare a report based on my

11     activities during the time of the immediate aftermath of the offensive.

12     The purpose of the document was that I was being nominated for an award,

13     and I had to annotate those activities that I had done.

14        Q.   Thank you.  I just have one clarification for this document.

15             At paragraph 2-B, you discussed the removal of bodies of several

16     ARSK soldiers and civilians who were killed in a mortar blast at the

17     intersection outside of the UN HQ compound on the morning of 5 August.

18     And in paragraph 2-B, you indicate that the first time you went out to

19     check these bodies you came under mortar fire and were forced to take

20     cover in a drainage ditch.

21             I would like to you clarify whether or not it's correct that you

22     came under mortar fire the first time you went out there?

23        A.   I do not believe we came under mortar fire the first time.  The

24     reason we went out to the intersection was because the intersection had

25     come under mortar fire, and that is how the six people at the

Page 7608

 1     intersection were killed.

 2        Q.   And did you go out to that intersection for a second time?

 3        A.   I was tasked to go out the second time in order to bag -- put the

 4     bodies in body-bags and move them off the road.  There was fear of

 5     decomposition of the bodies and causing disease in the area.

 6        Q.   And when you went to bag these bodies the second time you went

 7     out, did you come under mortar fire at that time?

 8        A.   Yes, we did.  A mortar round went off and came within about 25

 9     metres of our area as we were bagging the bodies.  We were forced to go

10     into a ditch alongside the road.  That was the only round that hit.  Once

11     we decided that there was no more activity, we continued on with our

12     task.

13        Q.   Thank you.

14             MR. RUSSO:  Mr. President, I would move to admit 65 ter 450.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objections?

16             Madam Registrar.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P743, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  P743 is admitted into evidence.

19             Please proceed.

20             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you, Mr. President.

21        Q.   Referring back to your first statement, Mr. Berikoff, at page 5.

22             MR. RUSSO:  And, again, I don't believe there is any reason to

23     pull this up.

24        Q.   You reference a document attached to first statement marked "D".

25             MR. RUSSO:  And if we could 65 ter 1702.

Page 7609

 1             And, Your Honour, I will -- I can explain to the Court why I'm

 2     not pulling up the document referenced "C" in that statement, which is a

 3     journal.  There is a second journal which was submitted with the

 4     following statement which encompasses that earlier journal, and I will

 5     address that at the time.

 6        Q.   So, document 65 ter 1072, Mr. Berikoff, can you take a look at

 7     that and tell us whether the document on the screen is the document you

 8     referred to as document "D" in your first statement?

 9        A.   Yes, it is.

10        Q.   And did you prepare this particular document?

11        A.   No, I did not.  I gave bits and pieces of information.  Captain

12     Rob Williams is the gentleman that prepared the document itself, sir.

13        Q.   And have had you a chance to look through the document for

14     information that you actually provided?

15        A.   Yes, I did.

16        Q.   And is the information which you provided actually reflected in

17     this document?

18        A.   To the best of my recollection, yes, it is.

19        Q.   Thank you.  And there are a few entries which I would like to

20     clarify.

21             MR. RUSSO:  If we go it page 2 of the document, this is it the

22     entry for 4 August, 1010 Bravo.

23        Q.   And there you indicate that you were travelling to the hospital

24     with the SMEDLO.  First, can you tell the Court what SMEDLO stands for?

25        A.   SMEDLO was the Senior Medical Officer in the compound.

Page 7610

 1        Q.   Thank you.  Other references to this particular trip in your

 2     statements indicate that that trip actually occurred at 1300 hours;

 3     however, this document indicates that it occurred at about 10.00 in the

 4     morning.

 5             Can you clarify for the Court whether this trip took place at

 6     10.00 in the morning or at about 1.00 in the afternoon?

 7        A.   To the best of my recollection, I'm uncertain of the exact

 8     timings, but I am certain of the sequence of events that took place

 9     during that day, sir.

10             I believe it was either late, late morning or early afternoon

11     when, in fact, we went to the hospital the first time.

12             MR. RUSSO:  Okay.  And, again, if we can move to page 3 of this

13     document, and look at the entry for 4 August at 1300 Bravo.

14        Q.   And there it indicates that you travelled into Knin for General

15     Forand's press conference.  And, again, other references for this

16     particular trip in your statements indicate that it occurred at 1500

17     hours.

18             And can you clarify, if you're able to, whether the trip with

19     General Forand took place at 1.00 p.m. or at 3.00 p.m. on the 4th?

20        A.   It's the same -- same answer as I previously gave.  I'm certain

21     of the sequence of events; the timings, I'm unconcern.  However, I do

22     know that we did go to the meeting in the afternoon.  Another meeting was

23     scheduled for later on that evening at 1800 hours; however, the ARSK

24     people did not show up for the meeting, sir.

25        Q.   Thank you.  And when you indicated that you're uncertain of the

Page 7611

 1     times, but you are certain of the sequence, can I take that to mean that

 2     you recall the trip with the SMEDLO occurring previous to the trip with

 3     General Forand?

 4        A.   Yes, it was.

 5        Q.   Thank you.

 6             MR. RUSSO:  If we can move to page 4 of the document, at the

 7     entry for 5 August, 05, 0930 Bravo.  There are actually two entries for

 8     that time; however, I would like to focus on the first one.

 9        Q.   And there it indicates that a scared ARSK soldier came to the

10     gate of the UNHCR compound and that he was turned away?

11             First of all, can you tell the Court whether you were the one who

12     turned him away.

13        A.   Yes.  I was the one who turned him away.  He came to the gate

14     along with a number of other refugees; but because he was in uniform, he

15     was carrying a weapon, we were ordered by our senior management that we

16     were not allowed to let combatants into the compound, so I turned him

17     away at that time, sir.

18        Q.   Thank you.  And was this soldier that you turned away one of the

19     soldiers killed in the mortar blast at the intersection?

20        A.   Yes, he was.

21        Q.   Thank you.  The document that we looked at earlier, document 743,

22     indicated that the mortar blast occurred at that intersection at

23     approximately 8.30; however the second entry in this particular document

24     indicates that that blast occurred at 9.30 where you were going out to

25     bag the bodies.

Page 7612

 1             Can you clarify for the Court whether the time in this document,

 2     the second entry for 05, 9.30, is incorrect or what you recall about the

 3     timing of those incidents?

 4        A.   The mortar round -- the impact of the round was approximately

 5     between 8.30 and 9.00.  We were tasked to go out, and it was

 6     approximately 9.30 when I went to the intersection to bag the bodies.

 7     The bodies had laid there for a period of time following the immediate

 8     mortar shell.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  And looking at the second entry for 9.30 Bravo, it

10     indicates that of the six dead bodies at the intersection, where the

11     mortar blast occurred, four were civilians and two were ARSK soldiers.

12     However, I believe your other references indicate that it was the other

13     way around; four soldiers and two civilians.  Is that right?

14        A.   That's correct.  It was, in fact, four soldiers and two

15     civilians.

16        Q.   Thank you.  And that same entry also indicates that only five of

17     the six died from the mortar blast and one had died from a previous

18     gunshot wound.  Can you shed any light on that?

19        A.   There was an elderly gentleman with a woman on a wagon.  He was

20     already dead; whether he was dead from approximate bullet shot or not,

21     I'm not sure.  One of the other soldiers I know was shot previously from

22     a bullet shot.  So, yes, that is correct.

23        Q.   Thank you.

24             MR. RUSSO:  And with those corrections, Mr. President, I believe

25     I would like to admit this exhibit, which is 65 ter 1702.

Page 7613

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objections?

 2             Madam Registrar.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  That would be Exhibit P744, Your Honours.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  P744 is admitted into evidence.

 5             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 6        Q.   Again, your first statement at page 5, Mr. Berikoff, references a

 7     document marked "E."

 8             MR. RUSSO:  And if we could have 65 ter 1832.

 9        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, do you recognise the document on your screen as the

10     document referred to as document "E" in your first statement?

11        A.   Yes, I do.

12        Q.   Did you prepare this document?

13        A.   Yes, I did.

14        Q.   And can you please explain to the Court the basis for the

15     hierarchy that you have laid out in this chart.

16        A.   The basis for the chart or the hierarchy is on information that I

17     had gathered either through my own investigations right within the sector

18     or from information I had received from UNCRO.  Immediately after the

19     offensive, the first group that came in was the 7th Guards Brigade.  They

20     were relieved by the Tigers.  But running into Major Juric on numerous

21     occasions, I put him as the head of the military/special police.  In this

22     one, I have him as special police.  However, on the ones that I have, all

23     of the local police are under his jurisdiction and then the mop-up police

24     or the special police as well.

25             So it was based through -- the information was based on multiple

Page 7614

 1     sources as well as my overall assessment at the time following the

 2     offensive, sir.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Can you clarify for the Court whether the line you

 4     have drawn directly above Major Juric's name, and it appears below the

 5     military structure which is underneath General Cermak, can you clarify

 6     whether that is intended to indicate your belief that Major Juric was

 7     subordinate to General Cermak?

 8        A.   The military police in virtually every military organisation -

 9     and I'm sure the Croatians is the same - runs a parallel chain of

10     command.  One, they answer to higher, and, secondly they answer to their

11     immediate chain of command or their immediate operational commander.  In

12     this case, I had them answering to General Cermak following his, I guess,

13     appointment as the head of the sector or the garrison.

14        Q.   Thank you.

15             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, I would move to admit 65 ter 1832.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objections?

17             MS. HIGGINS:  No objections, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Madam Registrar?

19             THE REGISTRAR:  That would be Exhibit P745, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  P745 is admitted into evidence.

21             Mr. Russo, I'm afraid that I did not fully understand the last

22     answer.  Could you try to elicit some more details from the witness.

23             MR. RUSSO:  I will, Your Honour.

24        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, you've indicated your belief in this parallel chain

25     of command between military police and regular forces.  Do I understand

Page 7615

 1     that chart to mean that you placed Major Juric as -- within and beneath

 2     General Cermak in a reporting chain of command?

 3        A.   Yes, I did, in the sense of General Cermak being the operational

 4     commander in -- in that immediate area.  I am aware, as I said, that

 5     military police or special police also have a parallel chain of command

 6     which goes up to their own organisation, be it in Zagreb or Split or

 7     whether they are other organisation was.  So at the same time that

 8     they're reporting to their immediate operational commander, they're also

 9     reporting the information to a higher authority, sir.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And could you add names to that --

11             THE WITNESS:  I'm not --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  -- parallel structure.

13             THE WITNESS:  No, I'm not, Your Honour.  I am not able to, as I

14     just arrived in country a few weeks prior to.  So, no, I am not, Your

15     Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

17             Please proceed, Mr. Russo.

18             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.

19        Q.   Now, Mr. Berikoff, if could you also tell the Court whether you

20     have any specific information or specific facts to indicate whether

21     Major Juric was, in fact, reporting to General Cermak.

22        A.   I don't have any immediate information on that, sir.

23        Q.   Thank you.  And can I take it, then, that the understanding which

24     you have reflected in this chart is based upon your experience with other

25     military organisations and that you assumed that this is the way it

Page 7616

 1     worked.  Is that fair to say?

 2        A.   Yes, it is.  In addition, prior to me coming to the former

 3     Yugoslavia -- or being destroyed to the former Yugoslavia, I also worked

 4     as a senior intelligence officer on the Yugoslav crisis cell at

 5     nationality defence headquarters, sir.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  I'd like to move now back to your first statement,

 7     and at page 3 you --

 8             MR. RUSSO:  I'm sorry, Your Honour.  Is the Court satisfied with

 9     the additional information provided?

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you.

11             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.

12        Q.   Back at your first statement, Mr. Berikoff, at page 3, which is

13     the same reference in B/C/S, you reference several locations in Knin

14     which are military targets in your indication.  And you assign letters to

15     each of these on an aerial photograph which I believe you submitted along

16     with the first statement; however, it is it not appended as a specific

17     number itself.

18             MR. RUSSO:  I would like to bring that up, please, Madam

19     Registrar.  It's 65 ter 1830.

20             My apologies to the Court for the light contrast between the

21     background colours and the markings; however, I thought it was important

22     to maintain the original.

23        Q.   Nevertheless, Mr. Berikoff, is this the photograph to which you

24     are referring in your first statement when you indicate place names with

25     letters besides them?

Page 7617

 1        A.   Yes, it is.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  And can you explain to the Court what the distinction

 3     is between the locations which are circled in pink and those in blue?

 4        A.   Those areas that are in blue indicate where either residential

 5     areas or where rounds had impacted.  Those that are in pink are those

 6     areas that I considered likely military targets.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  I noticed in your third statement - and we don't need

 8     to pull this up - but the reference is at page 8, line 27 to 36, where

 9     you reference the Knin general supply as a military target.

10             So I would like - if I could have the assistance, please, of the

11     usher - to have you mark in red the location of the Knin general supply,

12     with the understanding that you've identified this as a military target.

13        A.   To the best of my recollection.

14        Q.   Thank you.

15             MR. RUSSO:  With that addition, Your Honour, I would move to

16     admit the aerial photograph of Knin, 65 ter 1830.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objections?

18             Madam Registrar.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit P746, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  P746, that is therefore 65 ter 1830, but

21     additionally marked today by the witness.

22             So, in addition to the markings already made, P746 is admitted

23     into evidence.

24             I'm just looking at this map, Mr. Russo.  You apologised for not

25     being there a lot of contrast.  Is there any copy which would ensure that

Page 7618

 1     I'm not missing one of the earlier markings.  I mean, the last one done

 2     in court is clear, but the other ones I'm a bit afraid that I might miss

 3     some of them.

 4             MR. RUSSO:  If it would please the Court, Your Honour, I would

 5     ask the witness to simply remark all of the ones here today.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Sometimes the work is done by the Defence.  I don't

 7     know whether we could expect a similar thing.

 8             Mr. Kehoe, Mr. Misetic?

 9             MR. KEHOE:  I don't have that directly, Your Honour, on this one.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  I see.  On this one.

11             MR. KEHOE:  It's in the spirit of not overloading Your Honour

12     with military targets and stuff.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  No, I fully understand.  I'm not blaming for you not

14     having done the job which should have been done by the Prosecution.

15             I don't think it is useful to ask the witness to do the job

16     again.  Perhaps there is a way of producing a copy which leaves me not in

17     doubt whether I would miss any one; and then if you agree with the

18     Prosecution that you didn't change anything, then I think it would assist

19     us.

20             MR. RUSSO:  That will be fine, Your Honour.  I will have a

21     computer-enhanced image uploaded for the Court.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

23             Please proceed.

24             MR. RUSSO:

25        Q.   And now if we could please move, Mr. Berikoff, to your third

Page 7619

 1     statement, which is D284.  And at page 2, line 9, which, in the B/C/S

 2     translation, appears at page 2, lines 8 to 9, there you reference a

 3     document attached as "A".

 4             MR. RUSSO:  And if we could now refer to 65 ter 2105.

 5        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, is the document now on the screen the document

 6     which is referred to as document "A" attached to your third statement?

 7        A.   Yes, it is.

 8        Q.   Did you prepare this particular document?

 9        A.   Yes, I did.

10        Q.   Again, can you tell the Court what the circumstances were of its

11     preparation?

12        A.   Once again, it was in conjunction with the award I was nominated

13     for.  As well, I was tasked to do an overall assessment of the activity

14     in the area.

15        Q.   Thank you.  There are a few clarifications to this document that

16     I'd like to take you through.

17             Focussing on paragraph 1-B which discusses the mortar incident at

18     the intersection, There you state:  "When the HV troops entered Knin,

19     there was strict restriction of movement (ROM); however, I was able to

20     travel into Knin on a trip to the hospital.  As we passed the previously

21     bagged bodies, I noticed that the dead soldiers were removed from their

22     bagged and that their bodies had been mutilated."

23             Can you please clarify whether when you saw these soldiers out of

24     the body-bags you were actually en route to a trip to the hospital?

25        A.   That was in the late afternoon of the 5th of August.  A Croat

Page 7620

 1     officer had come to the gate and indicated to us that there were a number

 2     of Serbs that wanted to come into the compound to be placed under UN

 3     protection.  The Croat officer said that if we were to provide the

 4     drivers and the vehicle, they would provide the escort to ensure that we

 5     were able to get to the location where the Serbs were and bring them back

 6     to the compound.

 7             On our way out of the compound, and down the main road going into

 8     Knin before we got to the bridge, we were fired upon or over our heads by

 9     Croat soldiers an ordered to turn around.

10             On the way back to the compound, myself and Captain Rob Williams

11     saw, in fact, it wasn't two bodies, it was just the one soldier where

12     his -- the body-bag was open.  The soldier was out.  The bag and

13     everything was run over by a tank, and the bag and the body was riddled

14     with bullet-holes.

15        Q.   And had that Croat officer who came to the gate told you that

16     these Serbs who wanted refuge were at the hospital?

17        A.   I don't recall the -- the location of where they were.  They were

18     either at the hospital or they were at the middle school or school

19     downtown.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Let's move to paragraph 1-E which discusses your trip

21     into Knin on 8 August and the looting and destruction that you witnessed

22     on that date, including specifically damage done to General Forand's

23     residence.

24             And in that paragraph, you state:  "Either HV troops or Croatian

25     special police were likely responsible as they were all in the area."

Page 7621

 1             I'd like to you clarify, first, whether the damage you're

 2     attributing in Knin to HV or special police is the damage to Knin

 3     generally or just the damage to General Forand's residence?

 4        A.   I would say it is the damage done to Knin in general, not just to

 5     General Forand's place.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  And can you also clarify whether you witnessed

 7     special police - that is, the troops in grey uniforms - looting or

 8     committing acts of destruction in Knin itself.

 9        A.   It was a combination of both.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Finally, moving to paragraph 1-H where you discuss

11     your trip into Civljane on 11 August, and you state you "witnessed HV

12     troops, including the special police, going into numerous residences."

13             Again, I'd like you to clarify for the court whether you actually

14     saw special police - that is, the individuals in grey uniforms - going

15     into the residences in Civljane?

16        A.   In Civljane -- it was actually en route to Civljane.  In Civljane

17     itself, it was military and -- HV military personnel.  They had also

18     taken over the UN compound.

19        Q.   Thank you.

20             MR. RUSS:  With those clarifications, Your Honour, I would move

21     to admit 65 ter 2105.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objections?

23             Madam Registrar.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit P747, Your Honours.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  P747 is admitted into evidence.

Page 7622

 1             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.

 2        Q.   Moving back to your third statement --

 3             MR. RUSSO:  And, again, we don't need to pull this up, Madam

 4     Registrar.

 5        Q.   But at page 3, you reference a document attached as document "D"?

 6             MR. RUSSO:  So, Madam Registrar, if we could have 65 ter 1177.

 7     And for the court's clarification, I'm not calling up B or C, because B

 8     was also attached to the previous statement and is already in evidence; C

 9     are a collection of the letters from Cermak regarding freedom of movement

10     which are also in evidence; and the document which is being pulled up now

11     is the journal.

12             And I had indicated earlier that I didn't call up the previous

13     journal which was attached to the first statement, and I will have the

14     witness explain the distinction between the two journals for the Court.

15        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, can you tell the Court whether the document on the

16     screen is the document referred to as "D" in your third statement.

17        A.   Yes, it is.

18        Q.   And did you prepare this particular document?

19        A.   Yes, I did.

20        Q.   And if you could, please, explain to the Court the circumstances

21     under which you created this particular journal.

22        A.   The journal was prepared -- a handwritten journal was prepared.

23     When I first found out that I was being deployed to the former

24     Yugoslavia, I started my own diary.  The notes in my handwritten journal

25     are basically notes throughout the day.  I had made my entries daily

Page 7623

 1     based on the events of the day and when I had a bit of spare time to

 2     write.

 3             When I got to Sarajevo on or around the 6th of September, I

 4     started to transpose it into an electronic form.  In doing so, I expanded

 5     on some of the areas based on my own recollection of the events that took

 6     place, and it was an ongoing project.  It was notes for myself to be kept

 7     to myself.  It was for no other reason, sir.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  And the journal that you handed to the ICTY

 9     investigator along with your first statement, can you tell Court how that

10     relates to this particular journal?

11        A.   Can you explain in what context, please, Mr. Russo?

12        Q.   Sure.  Attached to your first statement is a journal which

13     date-wise goes from the 30th of July until approximately the 15th of

14     August.  The journal which you've identified as document "D" attached to

15     your third statement goes from 17 July to 6 September.

16             If you can, please, tell the Court what is the difference is

17     between the earlier shorter version and this version?

18        A.   As I indicate a few minutes ago, it was an ongoing project of

19     mine, and I was expanding it as I was remembering things to put into my

20     journal, sir.

21        Q.   Thank you.  And comparing between the journal on the screen which

22     is marked "D" to the earlier electronic version and to your handwritten

23     statement, can you tell Court which of those three you consider to be the

24     most complete and the most accurate version of events?

25        A.   I would consider the latest one, the 17 July to 6 September, to

Page 7624

 1     be the more accurate of all of my journals, sir.

 2        Q.   Thank you.

 3             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, I would move now for the admission of 65

 4     ter 1177.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.

 6             Madam Registrar.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  That would be Exhibit P748, Your Honours.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  P748 is admitted into evidence.

 9             Please proceed.

10             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.

11        Q.   Now, moving back to your third statement, Mr. Berikoff, beginning

12     at page 61, line 5; and in the B/C/S translation, this appears at page

13     43, beginning at line 43.

14             And in that portion of your third statement, Mr. Berikoff, you

15     reference a number of photographs that you supplied to the ICTY

16     investigator; I believe it is 154 photographs.  And in the pages which

17     follow, you identify 41 specific photographs by number and describe each

18     one.

19             MR. RUSSO:  If I could, Madam Registrar, please have 65 ter 5404?

20        Q.   While that is it being pulled up, Mr. Berikoff, let me ask you:

21     Did you have a chance to review an Index of photographs plus the

22     photographs themselves to determine whether or not that Index plus the

23     photographs accurately reflect the specific photographs that you identify

24     and discuss in your third statement?

25        A.   Yes, I did.  However, the photo -- the indexing was done to the

Page 7625

 1     best of my recollection.  It's been 13 years.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  And the document on the screen, is that the

 3     document --

 4             MR. RUSSO:  If we could scroll in a few pages, or perhaps just

 5     one more page.

 6        Q.   Looking at that document, Mr. Berikoff, is this the document that

 7     you reviewed and compared to your second statement --

 8        A.   Yes, it is --

 9        Q.   -- I'm sorry, your third statement?

10        A.   My third statement, yes, it is, sir.

11        Q.   And does this document accurately reflect the photographs which

12     you reference in your third statement?

13        A.   Yes, it does.

14        Q.   Thank you.

15             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, I would move for the admission of 65

16     ter 5404.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.

18             Madam Registrar.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P749, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  P749 is admitted into evidence.

21             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you, Mr. President.

22             Your Honour, I would just like to move through this very quickly.

23             Of the 154 photographs provided by Mr. Berikoff along with his

24     third statement, I've taken the liberty of categorising only a selection

25     of those photographs into four separate categories.  I have sent some

Page 7626

 1     notification of this to the Defence, and I would like to submit each

 2     category of photographs as a separate exhibit.  I thought that might

 3     assist the Court.

 4             And if we could have, then, 65 ter 5399.

 5             And for the Court's information, this is a collection of

 6     photographs which indicate that they are photographs of shelling damage

 7     in residential areas of Knin, and I would move for the admission of 65

 8     ter 5399.

 9             And I would also advise the Court that between the categories,

10     there is some overlap between the previous collection of photographs, but

11     I thought it would be easier reference for the Court to decide by

12     category what it chose to review.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear no objections.

14             Madam Registrar, 65 ter 5399 would be?

15             THE REGISTRAR:  It would be Exhibit P750, Your Honours.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  P750 is admitted into evidence.

17             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.  And just to save a bit of time, rather

18     than calling up all of the collections, 65 ter 5400 is a collection of

19     photographs representing and identified by the witness as photographs of

20     acts of burning or destruction within Knin itself; 65 ter 5401 is a

21     collection of photographs depicting burning and acts of destruction

22     outside of Knin; and 65 ter 5402 are a few photographs of Cetina valley

23     which I thought the Court might appreciate getting at look at.

24             So, if there is no quarrel, I would move for the admission of

25     5400, 5401, and 5402.

Page 7627

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Kuzmanovic.

 2             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Just a question:  Are these all of these

 3     included in 5404?

 4             MR. RUSSO:  They are not all included in 5404, but they are

 5     included in the 154, which Mr. Berikoff gave to the investigator, along

 6     with his third statement.

 7             MR. KUZMANOVIC.  Okay.  Thank you.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Which means that the total, then, will be more

 9     than 41?

10             MR. RUSSO:  That's correct, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  No objections, no quarrels.

12             Madam Registrar, 65 ter 5400 would be?

13             THE REGISTRAR:  It would be Exhibit P751, Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  P751 is admitted into evidence.

15             P5401?

16             THE REGISTRAR:  It would be Exhibit P752.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  That is admitted into evidence.

18             P5402?

19             THE REGISTRAR:  It would be Exhibit P753, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  That is admitted into evidence.

21             Thank you, Madam Registrar.

22             Please proceed, Mr. Russo.

23             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you, Your Honour.

24        Q.   And, Mr. Berikoff, if we could now move to your fourth and final

25     statement, which is P741, and moving to page 3 of that exhibit.  And by

Page 7628

 1     the way, that is tab 4 in your binder.

 2             P741 at page 3, paragraph 7, which is the same citation in the

 3     B/C/S translation, you reference a video which was taken by an individual

 4     named Garth Pritchard.  And I would like you to please to explain to the

 5     Court the circumstances of how that video was taken.

 6        A.   Mr. Garth Pritchard was a journalist for one of the television

 7     companies in Canada.  He had come to take a video of, I guess, the

 8     combination of the Canadian soldiers up in the Benkovac-Rastovic area; as

 9     well, he made a trip down to our area in Knin.

10             I was tasked by either General Leslie or General Forand to take

11     him around to the area.  Myself and Master Bombardier Parlee were his

12     escorts, and we took him to various locations throughout the sector where

13     he televised various areas of destruction.

14        Q.   Thank you.

15             MR. RUSSO:  And, Your Honour, we have portions of this video

16     identified by the witness that - I don't want to play them for the

17     Court - I would just like to submit them on the basis of the supplemental

18     statement and the information provided by Mr. Berikoff.

19             So I would move for the admission of - and, again, we don't need

20     to call them up - 65 ter 5405, this is this video at counter references

21     6 minutes 54 to 14 minutes 35; 65 ter 5406, our counter reference is 2425

22     to 3321; and 65 ter 5407, our counter reference is 3405 and 3802

23     [Realtime transcript read in error "3402".

24             I would simply move for the admission of all three of those

25     portions.

Page 7629

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Russo, could you please check whether what we

 2     have on the transcript at this moment whether that is it correct, because

 3     giving numbers in a quick sequence is at risk of being mis-transcribed,

 4     not because of lack of competence of the transcriber but because of speed

 5     of speech of the person who presents it.

 6             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, there is only one correction to be made,

 7     and that is with respect to 65 ter 5407; and in that instance, the

 8     counter reference is actually 3405 to 3802.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Do I, then, understand that you only

10     want these portions to be admitted into evidence?

11             MR. RUSSO:  That's correct, Your Honour, and we will be

12     submitting those portions and the translations for them.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  No objections, as far as I am aware of at this

14     moment.

15             Madam Registrar.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  65 ter 05405 will be Exhibit P754, Your Honours.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  P754 is admitted into evidence.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  65 ter 05406 will be Exhibit P755.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  P755 is admitted into evidence.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  And 65 ter 05407 will be Exhibit P756, Your

21     Honours.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  P756 is admitted into evidence.

23             Mr. Russo, if you would allow me just to go back to the selection

24     of photographs theme-oriented, so to say.

25             It is my recollection that the witness statements contain an

Page 7630

 1     observation that not for all of the 154 photographs, he has time and

 2     place available.

 3             Now, we have seen this selection of 41, where there is an

 4     indication on this spreadsheet of time and place.  Now, you have made

 5     another selection, of course, which the Chamber was not able to

 6     immediately verify and check.

 7             Now, for all those photographs which appear in these series -

 8     damage in Knin, damage outside Knin, damage in the Cetina valley - are

 9     these photographs of which time and place are always known and

10     documented.

11             MR. RUSSO:  To be clear, Your Honour, the photographs which are

12     specifically referenced in the third statement and which are described do

13     not contain information regarding the date and the time that the

14     photograph was taken.  That kind of specific information is not available

15     for those photographs.  Likewise, with the additional photographs which,

16     as you indicate correctly, are organised by theme.  We have only general

17     time-frame for those photographs and I can ask the witness do discuss

18     that, but we could not have specific dates and times for those.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  I was just asking because it might -- of course, the

20     probative value of the photographs might be influenced by lack of certain

21     information.

22             But since there was no objections, the series are admitted into

23     evidence, but just for the Chamber's information.

24             Then please move on.

25             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.

Page 7631

 1        Q.   Back to your fourth statement, Mr. Berikoff, and this time at

 2     paragraph 8, you reference another video which was taken by

 3     Mr. Pritchard.  Are the circumstances of that video similar to the ones

 4     to the video we just discussed?

 5        A.   Yes, it is.

 6             MR. RUSSO:  Again, Your Honour, I would simply like to admit a

 7     portion of this video, not show it to the Court, and that would be 65 ter

 8     5408, the counter reference for which is 02422.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.

10             Madam Registrar.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit P757, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  P757 is admitted into evidence.

13             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.

14        Q.   And we -- if we could move now to also in your fourth statement,

15     this time at paragraph 6, and you reference two maps which you provided

16     to the ICTY.

17             MR. RUSSO:  The first map, if I could have 65 ter 5393.

18        Q.   Locking at this map, Mr. Berikoff, can you tell the Court whether

19     this is the map which you reference in your fourth statement?

20        A.   This is one of the maps, yes.

21        Q.   Thank you.

22             MR. RUSSO:  And if I could move for the admission of 5393, Your

23     Honour.

24             MR. KEHOE:  No objections.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Since there are no objections, Madam Registrar.

Page 7632

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  That would be Exhibit P758, Your Honours.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  P758 is admitted into evidence.

 3             MR. RUSSO:  If we could now have 65 ter 5392.

 4        Q.   And, Mr. Berikoff, is the map on the screen the map you reference

 5     in your fourth statement as "PB-2"?

 6        A.   Yes, it is.  It is the northern portion.

 7        Q.   Thank you.

 8             MR. RUSSO:  I would move now for the admission of 65 ter 5392.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.

10             Madam Registrar.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P759, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Admitted into evidence.

13             Mr. Russo, the description on your list is both in both -- no, I

14     see, no.  No.

15             Please proceed.

16             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you.

17             If we could now please have document 65 ter 2995.

18        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, are you familiar with this particular document?

19        A.   I'm familiar with the document, yes, I am.

20        Q.   And can you explain to the Court the -- first of all, did you

21     prepare this document?

22        A.   No, I did not.

23        Q.   Can you explain to the Court, if you know, how it was prepared or

24     who prepared it?

25        A.   A presentation was given to personnel in Knin and Sector South

Page 7633

 1     headquarters.  I'm not sure who prepared it; but based on the text of

 2     the -- of the document itself, it may have been Colonel Tymchuk or

 3     General Leslie.

 4        Q.   And are you familiar enough with the contents of this document to

 5     indicate or explain to the Court whether you believe the information

 6     contained in it to be accurate?

 7        A.   I'm familiar with the contents; but to say that it is accurate or

 8     not would, you have to ask the originator of the document, sir.

 9        Q.   And can you explain to the Court what exactly your involvement

10     was with this particular document?

11        A.   The only involvement I had with this document was to forward it

12     on to General Leslie, or Colonel Leslie at that time.

13        Q.   And why was it that you forwarded it on to General Leslie?

14        A.   I was requested by Leslie.

15        Q.   Thank you.

16             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, based on the fact that the witness

17     simply indicates that this document was apparently drafted by someone

18     within the HQ compound, was the subject of a presentation, and was --

19             MR. KEHOE:  Excuse me.  That is not what he said.  That is not

20     what he said.  He doesn't know where the origination of the document

21     comes.

22             MR. RUSSO:  I think he indicated that he doesn't know who drafted

23     the document, but that it was the subject of a protection, it was

24     requested to be sent -- requested from General Leslie to be sent from

25     UNCRO Sector South --

Page 7634

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's check.  Looking at page 44, line 1, let's

 2     first seek clarification from the witness because there are two different

 3     interpretations of that line.

 4             Mr. Russo, you have heard what Mr. Kehoe says is not in the

 5     testimony, and you apparently take a different interpretation.

 6             Let's ask the witness what the link was between the presentation

 7     and the preparation of this document.

 8             MR. RUSSO:  Yes, Your Honour.

 9        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, you've already indicated that you don't know

10     exactly who drafted it.  Do you know who gave this presentation?

11        A.   No, I do not.  I was not in attendance at the presentation.

12        Q.   How do you know it was a presentation?

13        A.   I had heard, and it is only hearsay, that there was going to be a

14     presentation to various people in the headquarters.

15        Q.   Did you attend that presentation?

16        A.   No, I did not.  I was not present at the presentation.

17        Q.   Do you know who was in attendance at the presentation?

18        A.   I do recall, sir.

19        Q.   And can you tell the Court where you got the document from.

20        A.   I would have received the document from OPs centre at

21     Sector South headquarters, either from Major Balfour or Major Dussault,

22     the operation officers?

23        Q.   And did you retrieve that document on the 22nd of August?

24        A.   I don't recall, sir.  That is the date that is on my memo or my

25     short note to Colonel Leslie.  With that in mind, that it is probably the

Page 7635

 1     same date that I retrieved the document.

 2             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, on that basis, I would move for the

 3     admission, understanding that the probative value, of course, can be

 4     slightly effected since we don't who drafted it.  Nevertheless, this was

 5     a communication of information relevant to this case, submitted from the

 6     HQ Sector South to UNCRO in Zagreb.  On that basis, I would move for its

 7     admission.

 8             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, I just find it astonishing that

 9     we're asking to move a document that doesn't exist and that nobody has

10     into evidence based on a cover letter.  It is mind-boggling to me.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Russo.

12             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, I am not sure what the meaning is that

13     the document doesn't exist.  Clearly, the witness has already testified

14     he got it from at least someone.  He believes it is the OPs centre in the

15     HQ Sector South.  He transmitted it to a higher authority in Zagreb.

16     Clearly, it is a roughly contemporaneous record of what someone in the HQ

17     Sector South had presented to someone else.  The Court can take it for

18     what it is worth; nevertheless, I think it is information that would

19     assist the Court in making its own determination.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe.

21             MR. KEHOE:  If I may, Your Honour, and with all due respect to

22     Captain Berikoff, we can't cross-examine the man on a document that he

23     has no knowledge as to who prepared, how it was prepared, and on what

24     basis the document was prepared.  Merely going in there and pulling

25     something out and sending to Leslie doesn't qualify or authenticate this

Page 7636

 1     document.  If, in fact, this was done by Leslie, why did the Prosecution

 2     not put it to Colonel Leslie when he was here?  Heavens knows he was here

 3     for long enough.

 4             Now, there are comments in here frankly that are extremely

 5     prejudicial.  And, again, with all due respect to Captain Berikoff, I am

 6     sure when I asked about those, he will simply say, "I don't know.  I

 7     don't know where this document came from, I don't have a source for it,

 8     and I don't know where those comments come from."

 9             It is simply not sufficient to say that somebody, at some

10     someplace, at sometime drafted a document.  Mr. Berikoff happened to grab

11     it and then sends it up to UNCRO headquarters in Zagreb and that thereby

12     authenticates it.  If this is an witness that did it, the OTP should go

13     found out who did it, so he or she can come back in and defend the

14     contents of it.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Russo.

16             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, I certainly agree with Mr. Kehoe.  He is

17     not able to cross-examine this particular witness on the content of the

18     document; nevertheless, that goes to the weight to be accorded to the

19     Court.  It is clearly a statement which, as I indicated, is roughly

20     contemporaneous with the events which it purports to relate to.  It is

21     something some one in the UN HQ compound said about what happened.  On

22     that basis, they could use it to cross-examine other witnesses to see if

23     the agree with it or do not agree with it.  We have no information that

24     it was drafted by Colonel Leslie.  And if we had, we certainly would have

25     submitted it through him.  We simply don't know who drafted, but we do

Page 7637

 1     know that it was sent by Mr. Berikoff to Colonel Leslie upon Colonel

 2     Leslie' request.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you have information that it was not drafted by

 4     Colonel Leslie?

 5             MR. RUSSO:  No, Your Honour.  We don't have information one way

 6     or the other.  However, I can tell the Court that this was -- I believe

 7     came to us attached to General Leslie's statements; although, I don't

 8     believe he indicated to us that he was able to authenticate the content

 9     of it, which is why it was not offered through him.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, if he is not able to authenticate, then you

11     have information that he was the author, isn't it?

12             MR. RUSSO:  I believe that's a circumstance which I could safely

13     assume, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  So, then, the answer to my last question could have

15     been shorter; it could have been "yes."

16             MR. RUSSO:  Yes.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

18             Mr. Kehoe.

19             MR. KEHOE:  Just, frankly, it is a document.  Who knows when it

20     was created?  I mean, it doesn't have a particular date on it.  And with

21     all due respect to my learned friend across the well, I mean, the OTP has

22     at least some preliminary burden to tell not only the Chamber but to the

23     Defence who is responsible for this, so that we can have a meaningful

24     dialogue.  Again, with all due respect, Captain, he doesn't know, so it

25     is not going to a meaningful dialogue, and the OTP just throws this

Page 7638

 1     document across the transom.  Then they say, well, like it or not, here

 2     it is.  I think that that is not a pursuit of facts that are detailed

 3     here, and I will tell you, Your Honour, that there are some very

 4     prejudicial comments in this document that need to be addressed.  And it

 5     is simply not asking the OTP after 13 years of investigation to find out

 6     who authored this document.  There has to be a limited circle of people.

 7                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber -- Mr. Russo, I heard you saying

 9     something when I had my earphones off.  I don't know what you said.

10             MR. RUSSO:  I had just one brief response, but if the Court has

11     already made up its mind, then --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, we have not made up our mind as a matter of

13     fact.  But if it is a brief comment, then I make take it that the Defence

14     has a brief comment as well?

15             MR. RUSSO:  Yes, Your Honour.

16             I agree with Mr. Kehoe that there is limited circle of people who

17     could have authored this document, which is why I believe there is some

18     probative value to be attached to it; however, we simply don't know who

19     among that circle of people it was who drafted it.  Nevertheless, the

20     circumstances in which it came to the OTP, which I now can address, for

21     example, to someone showing up at a crime scene, finding a journal on the

22     floor of a crime scene, they can authenticate what is in the journalism.

23     Nevertheless, the fact that it was found at the crime scene nevertheless

24     makes it evidence that the Court should see.

25             This document is no different.  We don't know who authored it,

Page 7639

 1     how accurate it is; nevertheless, we do know that it came out of the one

 2     location from which the UN was reporting the most contemporaneous

 3     information regarding events in this case.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I now see all three.  I think, I saw Ms. Higgins

 5     first.

 6             MR. KEHOE:  [Overlapping speakers] ... sorry.  I just didn't

 7     see --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, there was a whole queue behind you.

 9             Ms. Higgins.

10             MS. HIGGINS:  Your Honour, very briefly, on behalf of Mr. Cermak,

11     we joint the objection to this document on several bases.  Primarily, the

12     first being the rule has been incorrectly stated by Mr. Russo.  If this

13     Chamber is to descend to the levels of allowing documentation to come in

14     mainly and purely on the basis that it would assist this Court, then we

15     would start to apply rules which are not within the rule books

16     themselves.

17             And it would reduce the levels of admissibility to levels of

18     incomprehensibility.  This witness cannot speak on any level or to any

19     degree through no fault of his own to this document.  And I fail to see

20     the basis despite the valiant attempts arguably by Mr. Russo upon which

21     this document could come before this Court.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

23             Mr. Kuzmanovic.

24             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, I have nothing to add to that.

25     Thank you.

Page 7640

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Kehoe.

 2             MR. KEHOE:  One last comment, Judge.  I find this most recent

 3     analysis by Mr. Russo simply astonishing that --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  You mean that he considers UN circles to be the

 5     crime scene; is that it?

 6             MR. KEHOE:  I find it happening upon a report.  Let us

 7     extrapolate this out and look at it in the general criminal sector with

 8     police departments.  It happens to be some report that is unsigned,

 9     undated, and it happens to have evidence that is involved in a --or could

10     be conceivably involved in some criminal matter.  And without any

11     description of the author or naming of the author as to where this

12     information comes from, the Prosecution has submitted that this -- that

13     this document should be admitted into evidence with none of the attendant

14     information to check on authenticity.

15             If that is the standard of documents under which documents should

16     come in, I have to join in the comments made by Ms. Higgins that there is

17     no standard, and that is basically what Mr. Russo has put before this

18     Court.  There is it simply no standard.  They found it, it's around,

19     somebody wrote it, we don't know who, we don't know when, but it comes

20     in.  Oh, by the way, Defence, you can't cross-examine anybody on the

21     content.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Russo, Mr. Kuzmanovic, Ms. Higgins, and

23     Mr. Kehoe, the Chamber will consider the admission into evidence of the

24     document.

25             And, therefore, it will be marked for identification for the time

Page 7641

 1     being.

 2             Madam Registrar.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be P760, marked for identification,

 4     Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 6             Please proceed.

 7             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, I don't if the Court is of a mind for a

 8     recess at that point.  I don't know --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  As a matter of fact, the debate was so

10     interesting that I forgot to look at the clock, with my apologies for all

11     those suffering from it.

12             We will have a break, and we will resume at ten minutes past

13     11.00.

14                           --- Recess taken at 10.43 a.m.

15                           --- On resuming at 11.14 a.m.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Russo, please proceed.

17             MR. RUSSO:  Thank you, Mr. President.

18        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, I'd now like to ask you some questions regarding

19     some specific events that you witnessed during and after Operation Storm.

20             Can you tell Court whether you took a trip to Knin hospital on

21     4 August?

22        A.   Yes, I did.

23        Q.   Can you tell the Court what the circumstances of that trip were.

24        A.   The first trip I took to the Knin hospital was with the SMEDLO,

25     the Senior Medical Officer.  We went down to see if, in fact, we could

Page 7642

 1     offer assistance to any of the wounded people in the hospital or with the

 2     medical staff.

 3             When we got to the hospital, we were turned around and our help

 4     was refused.

 5        Q.   You indicated that -- well, let me ask first:  On that trip to

 6     the hospital, did you see any ARSK tanks positioned at or near the

 7     hospital?

 8        A.   I am not aware of any military position near the hospital at that

 9     time.  No, I did not see any.

10        Q.   Did you, in fact, see an ARSK tank anywhere inside the town of

11     Knin on any of the trips you made either on 4th or 5th of August?

12        A.   In Knin itself, no, I did not.

13        Q.   You indicated that on the first trip -- in your last answer, on

14     the first trip that you took to the hospital, can you tell the Court how

15     many times you went to the hospital on the 4th and the 5th?

16        A.   I believe, on the 4th, I went to the hospital twice, or may I

17     refer it my notes, please?

18        Q.   Sure.  And while you're doing that, can you please just let the

19     Court know what exactly it is what you're referring to when you check it.

20        A.   Okay.  I'm referring to the daily journal marked 17 July until

21     6 September, and I'm looking at the entry for the 4th of August, which is

22     a Friday.

23             MR. RUSSO:  And just for the Court's benefit, that's Exhibit

24     P748.

25        A.   Okay.  That was the one trip when we went to the hospital, like I

Page 7643

 1     said, to offer assistance.  I believe I made a couple of trips that day.

 2     With -- with me on the trip were a number of people, including, as I

 3     said, the Senior Medical Officer; as well, I believe the Jordanian Chief

 4     of Staff.  And I'm not certain if General Leslie was with us at that time

 5     or not.  He may, in fact, have been, because I know he came with us on

 6     one occasion to the hospital where he went inside and I stood in the

 7     parking lot.

 8             Following departure from the hospital, I was tasked to go to the

 9     Jordanian Chief of Staff's residence to pick up his luggage.  When -- on

10     our way to the Chief of Staff's residence, we were fired upon by an ARSK

11     soldier who had a hand-held rocket launcher.  He fired at the -- at our

12     APC and missed.

13             I know that General Leslie was not with us at that time, but I do

14     know that one occasion -- I believe it was on the 4th.  On the 5th, I'm

15     not aware of him going to the hospital to go inside.

16        Q.   Thank you.  And did you go to the hospital on the 5th of August?

17        A.   No.  I did not go to the hospital on the 5th of August.  In the

18     morning, I was preoccupied with the casualties and -- and the deceased at

19     the intersection.  At 12.10 on the 5th, the Croat Puma Brigade, or

20     members of, had come to the gate with their tanks and stopped us from any

21     movement outside the compound.  If, in fact, any carriers or any

22     personnel went downtown on the 5th in the morning, it was without my

23     knowledge because I was tasked to do numerous other things.  So I was not

24     aware of other vehicles.  However, after 12.00 that day, nothing left the

25     compound.

Page 7644

 1        Q.   Can you please refer to your third statement at page 14?

 2        A.   What tab is that, please, Mr. Russo?

 3        Q.   That is tab 3, I believe, in your binder.

 4             MR. RUSSO:  And this is, again, for reference, Exhibit D284, at

 5     page 14.

 6        Q.   Beginning at about line 7, you're discussing a Serb doctor, and I

 7     believe that this, what you're talking about here, occurred on the 5th of

 8     August.  You indicated that a Serb doctor from the day before approached

 9     the gate.  He is asking for help at the hospital.

10             And later on, on the following paragraph, beginning at line 18,

11     it says:  "En route to the hospital, there was still a number of dead on

12     the street, probably in the vicinity of 20 to 30 people; and once we got

13     back to the hospital, there were still a number of dead and wounded,

14     approximately the same that were seen the day before."

15             Then it says:  "Though the bodies had not been removed from the

16     previous day.  We noticed at that time that hospital had, indeed, been

17     hit by artillery.  A number of the windows in the hospital were, in fact,

18     broken.  There were shell marks on the wall; as well,  there were craters

19     in the field surrounding the hospital."

20             Looking at that portion of your third statement, which seems to

21     reflect that you were at the hospital on the 5th, can you clarify whether

22     or not having read that you have a memory of going to the hospital on the

23     5th?

24        A.   Mr. Russo, I do not recall the 5th -- of going to the hospital on

25     the 5th.  My recollection of the 5th is that I was -- I was busy at the

Page 7645

 1     intersection with the casualties.

 2             MR. KEHOE:  Excuse me, Your Honour.  This is not contained in the

 3     supplemental information sheet.  I would like to know when the

 4     Prosecution came into possession of this information.

 5             MR. RUSSO:  It's in the third statement, which is Exhibit D284,

 6     page 14, line 18.

 7             MR. KEHOE:  No.  I'm talking about the information that the

 8     witness did not go to the hospital, when that information came to the

 9     possession of the Prosecution.

10             MR. RUSSO:  I believe I asked just asked him a few questions ago,

11     and he said he didn't have a memory of going to the hospital on the 5th.

12             I can just take a look at that.

13             MR. KEHOE:  My answer --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Just a moment.  I think, Mr. Russo, what Mr. Kehoe

15     would like it know is whether at any earlier moment you became aware that

16     the testimony of the witness might be that he did not go to the hospital

17     on the 5th of August.

18             Is that, Mr. Kehoe, what you were looking for?

19             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour.

20             MR. RUSSO:  I'm sorry.  I misunderstood the question.  I spoke to

21     the witness yesterday evening after he met with members of the Defence,

22     at which time he indicated to me he was unsure at what time or whether he

23     went to the hospital on the 4th or the 5th, and I believe I thought it

24     was a matter that needed calculation for the Court.

25             I apologise if that was not communicated to the Defence; however,

Page 7646

 1     I think it is it pretty clear from what the witness said in court today

 2     that he doesn't have a specific recollection of whether he went to the

 3     hospital on the 5th.  That's why I thought I would take him to this

 4     portion of his statement and find out if could address that.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe.

 6             MR. KEHOE:  Well, we're certainly entitled to that disclosure

 7     about that.  We got three single-spaced pages of disclosures, and that

 8     very important detail has not been provided by the Office of the

 9     Prosecutor.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I don't know what time and what date that was

11     disclosed to you.

12             But, Mr. Russo, if you found this information, even late

13     yesterday evening, I think we're all working day and night, so,

14     therefore, you should have disclosed this to the Defence.

15             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, I apologise.  It was my understanding

16     from the witness that it was during his conversation with the Defence

17     that he became uncertain, and that this was communicated to him by the

18     Defence that he was uncertain.

19             I apologise.  I didn't send it either the Cermak Defence or

20     Markac Defence, but it was my understanding that at least the Gotovina

21     Defence had notice of his confusion regarding that.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But you're awareness and you're being informed

23     about it in a conversation with the witness is something different than

24     the Defence finding out about these matters.  It's your witness.

25             MR. RUSSO:  I understand, Your Honour.

Page 7647

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Russo, please proceed.

 2             MR. RUSSO:

 3        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, can you explain to the Court why in your third

 4     statement, on page 14, you discuss a trip to the hospital and

 5     observations that were made on a trip to the hospital on the 5th of

 6     August?

 7        A.   No, I can't explain the 5th of August.  I do know that, on one

 8     occasion, General Leslie did come with us to the hospital.  When we got

 9     to the hospital he went inside the hospital; I stayed in the parking lot.

10     I do not recall, and I'm uncertain, if it is the trip with the SMEDLO or

11     another trip.  I do know, and I'm certain, that he came with us on one

12     trip where he went into the hospital, and then he came out and he

13     indicated how many wounded and dead he saw inside the hospital.  That is

14     why I put the information in my very first handwritten journal that I

15     did.  It was information given by General Leslie at the time.

16             I know for a fact that when I left the hospital en route to the

17     Jordanian Chief of Staff's residence to pick up his luggage from his

18     residence, General Leslie was not with us at that time.  I don't know if

19     he had gone back to the hospital on his own at that time or if he had

20     stayed on.  But I do know that there was one occasion when I was

21     personally there when Leslie went inside the hospital, sir.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Let's move now to your fourth statement, and that is

23     Exhibit P741.

24        A.   I take it that's tab 4, Mr. Russo?

25        Q.   That is correct.  And turning to page 2, paragraph 2 of that

Page 7648

 1     statement, you describe your -- or you discuss your change of opinion

 2     regarding the indiscriminate nature of the shelling.

 3             And I would like you, please, to explain to the Court why it ask

 4     that you changed your opinion.

 5        A.   Following the offensive, I had a chance to reassess and take a

 6     look at the overall picture, because by this time I had numerous

 7     opportunities of driving through the town of Knin and in the -- and in

 8     the other -- outlying outskirts Knin itself.

 9             In my opinion, there were a number of areas that could have been

10     considered military targets, be they strategic infrastructure-type

11     targets or just military installations where there may have been troops.

12             The opinion that I -- or the assessment that I came up upon was

13     done immediately after as I had a chance to re-think things over.

14             During the offensive itself, it seemed that it was indiscriminate

15     because there were a large number of shells, there were a large number of

16     rocket barrages, mortar fire, and everything.  So it seemed like

17     everything was coming in on Knin.  But having reassessed it after, in

18     fact, it is my opinion that there were, in fact, military targets, and it

19     may not have been as indiscriminate as originally thought.

20             There was a lot of collateral damage, and was the amount of

21     shelling and rocket fire unnecessary?  In my opinion, the answer is yes.

22     And the reason I say that is because most of the ARSK had left the town,

23     the civilians had evacuated the town, and those check-points that were

24     located throughout the town were with minimal manning.

25             So, I came of the opinion that, okay, was it indiscriminate?  No.

Page 7649

 1     Was it unnecessary with the amount of fire that they put into the city of

 2     Knin?  My opinion was yes.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  And I would like to be clear about when exactly it

 4     was that your opinion changed.

 5             In your third statement, you indicate that you believed it was

 6     indiscriminate; however, there was a gap of almost 11 years between that

 7     statement and your following statement, which is your fourth statement,

 8     in which you indicate that your opinion has changed.

 9             At what time after your third statement did you come to a change

10     of opinion?

11        A.   There was a number of times when I revisited in my mind the

12     situation in Sector South and had -- and over -- and looked over my maps

13     or the aerial photo and stuff like that and the photos that I took and

14     looked at the various types of damage that existed, and that is when I

15     formulated my own assessment that it was not indiscriminate, as other

16     people had indicated?

17        Q.   And you indicated that you realized that there were military

18     targets in the area.  Are there -- did you realize that there were any

19     military targets in addition to those which were identified by you on the

20     map and in your statements?

21        A.   Prior to the offensive on -- on Knin, no, I was not aware of

22     other military targets, because I had just arrived in country a few weeks

23     prior to, and I did not have the opportunity to drive up and down the

24     streets of Knin.  My task, when I first got there, was to go outside of

25     Knin and see what forces on either -- either side that I would encounter.

Page 7650

 1     So it was not my task to go up and down the streets of Knin and see what

 2     military installations were there.

 3             I knew the main military installations on the main road, the main

 4     barracks, et cetera; and from looking at the aerial photo and just what

 5     was in the vicinity targets, such as the railhead, the factory,

 6     et cetera, those are also military targets, sir.

 7        Q.   And the two you've just identified, the rail yard and the

 8     factory, I believe you have already indicated in your statements and

 9     exhibits that those are military targets.

10             What I'm attempting to discover is whether the change of your

11     opinion after your third statement is based on any new information or any

12     information which is different from the information you had in your

13     possession at the time you made your third statement.

14        A.   No, it was not.  It was still just based on the information that

15     I had from my original -- original statement of what was in the vicinity,

16     such as the Ministry of Defence, the barracks, et cetera; and when you

17     look at those, as well as the POL station and everything, those were

18     strategic targets, and that was what made me think that the overall town

19     of Knin was, in fact -- or, in fact, did have numerous military targets

20     that could have made it a military target.

21        Q.   Are any of the facts upon which you base your in opinion --or let

22     me just ask it this way:  Are the facts upon which you're basing your new

23     opinion in any way different than the facts upon which you based your

24     original opinion that the shelling was indiscriminate?

25        A.   No there they're not, it's just that I changed my opinion from

Page 7651

 1     indiscriminate to unnecessary.  The shelling still continued, there was

 2     collateral damage; however, there were military targets.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Now if we could please refer to your journal, which

 4     is Exhibit P748; and in your tab, this appears at tab 6.

 5             MR. RUSSO:  And in P748, if we could go to page 15, which is the

 6     entry for 31 August 1995.

 7        Q.   And in that entry for 31 August 1995, you state:  "Colonel

 8     Leslie, now UNCRO COS, called Lieutenant-Colonel Tymchuk and asked if I

 9     would be willing to do him a favour, even though it was illegal (no photo

10     taking allowed) and possibly very dangerous."

11             Can you explain to the Court what exactly was "illegal" about the

12     favour Colonel Leslie asked you to do on that date?

13        A.   The terminology of "illegal," in my opinion, it was not an

14     illegal order given by the general at the time.  The order was fine and I

15     would have done it, and I had no problem in obeying that order.  What was

16     illegal was the taking of photos or the order not to take photos given to

17     us by both the Sers prior to the offensive and then the Croats after the

18     offensive took place.  That was the illegal portion of it.  It was not

19     the order that was given to me by General Leslie through Colonel Tymchuk.

20        Q.   Okay.  I think I'm a bit confused by your answer.

21             You say that what was illegal was the taking of photos or the

22     ordering not to take photos given to us by the Serbs.

23             That seems to be a bit different than your entry.  Your entry

24     saying that the favour that General Leslie asked to you do was illegal?

25        A.   That is not true.  That is not an accurate statement because

Page 7652

 1     the -- the order was not illegal.  It -- what was illegal was, in the

 2     opinion of the Croats, was taking photos.  It was not the order that

 3     General Leslie gave.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  And can I understand that to mean that you believed

 5     it was illegal to take photos?

 6        A.   If you use the terminology "illegal" in the sense of disobeying

 7     the Croats, the answer was, yes, on that one, it was illegal.  But was it

 8     illegal to take photos?  Was it an illegal order by the General?  The

 9     answer was no.  I was responding to a direct order from a colonel at the

10     time.

11        Q.   And staying in that same entry, pardon me, you indicate that

12     Colonel Leslie asked to you look for evidence that the HV/HVO had

13     committed war crimes by indiscriminately shelling the city, and you

14     stated:  "Master Bombardier Parlee and I found the evidence that Colonel

15     Leslie was looking for big time."

16             Can you tell the Court what "big time" evidence was that you

17     found?

18        A.   The "big time" refers to the number of buildings or craters,

19     shrapnel, in various cars, buildings, windows, broken windows, et cetera.

20     That is what I meant by "big time."

21             To me, seeing destruction, as was throughout the sector, was a

22     lot, so that is why I put "big time."

23             Once again, I will go back to my personal journal and say those

24     were my own personal notes; and to me, it looked big time at that time.

25        Q.   Thank you.  Let's move back to your first statement at page 4.

Page 7653

 1     First statement is it P739; that is the first one in your tab.

 2             So P739, at page 4, and it's the third paragraph from the bottom,

 3     in which you discuss acts of deliberate destruction witnessed by you in

 4     several areas around Sector South.

 5             In the last sentence of that paragraph, you state:  "Major Juric

 6     tried to explain it in the same way as Cermak; however, he was also

 7     telling Captain Hill and myself that they had to make sure that the

 8     Chetniks would not return."

 9             Also, in the following paragraph, you stated:  "Major Juric told

10     me and Captain Hill during one of our meetings following Operation Storm

11     that it was his responsibility to clean up the area and to ensure that

12     the Chetniks would not be able to come back to the area."

13             Can you tell the Court whether Major Juric ever indicated to you

14     exactly who he considered Chetniks to be?

15        A.   It wasn't only Major Juric, but Major Juric in particular

16     indicated that the Chetniks were the Serbs.  He did not distinguish

17     between Serbs civilians or Serb soldiers or Serb children or anything.  A

18     Chetnik was a Serb, in general.

19        Q.   Thank you.  And when -- what exactly was Major Juric explaining

20     when he said that they had no make sure the Chetniks would not return?

21     What was it he was attempting to go explain to you?

22        A.   I remember the incident quite well.  It was up in the area of

23     Macure, when Kistanje was ablaze.  He -- he had stopped us and asked what

24     we were doing in the area.  We said we were just looking at what was

25     happening throughout the sector, trying to ascertain what activities were

Page 7654

 1     still ongoing.  We told Major Juric that we noticed there was a number of

 2     buildings that were on fire or destroyed after the offensive itself.

 3             That is when Major Juric indicated to us that we -- that the

 4     purpose of the operation was to clear the area of any -- "Chetniks" in

 5     the area had to be cleared out because they did not want them to come

 6     back and reoccupy areas of the Krajina.

 7        Q.   Thank you.

 8             MR. RUSSO:  I have no further questions, Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask one clarifying question?

10             You used during your last answer the word "reoccupy."  Did you

11     mean reoccupy in a military sense or in the sense of, again, living in

12     that area.

13             THE WITNESS:  It was a combination of both, Your Honour, both the

14     civilians reoccupying the residence or the military coming back into

15     their former positions.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Berikoff.

17             Mr. Kehoe.

18             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  It will be you who is the first to cross-examines

20     Mr. Berikoff.

21             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour, if I just gather my information.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

23             Mr. Berikoff, you will now be cross-examined by Mr. Kehoe who is

24     counsel for Mr. Gotovina.

25             THE WITNESS:  Yes, Your Honour.

Page 7655

 1                           Cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe:

 2        Q.   Good morning, Captain.

 3        A.   Good morning, Mr. Kehoe.

 4        Q.   Consistent with our conversation yesterday, we will go through a

 5     series of matters, and pardon me if I just go through some things and

 6     jump around a little bit, but we will cover some matters that were

 7     covered on direct, as well as covering some matters that are just contain

 8     the in your statement but were not addressed.  Okay?

 9        A.   Yes, sir.

10        Q.   And, again, if you're not clear about any question, Captain,

11     please stop me and just ask?

12        A.   If I may just ask one thing, Mr. Kehoe, may I be referred to as

13     Mr. Berikoff.  My military days are long gone.

14        Q.   Absolutely, Mr. Berikoff.

15        A.   Thank you.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  May I invite both speakers not to speak too quickly

17     and also to make a short break between question and answer and answer and

18     question.

19             THE WITNESS:  Yes, Your Honour.

20             MR. KEHOE:

21        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, prior to coming to the former Yugoslavia, even

22     coming into Zagreb, you told us on direct examination that you were part

23     of the Yugoslav crisis cell back in the nationality defence headquarters

24     in Ottawa.  Is that right?

25        A.   Yes, it is.

Page 7656

 1        Q.   And how long did you do that?

 2        A.   From April 1991 until April 1994.

 3        Q.   So you were followed -- I'm sorry.  So you were following the

 4     sequence of events in Yugoslavia even prior to your arrival?

 5        A.   Yes, I was, sir.

 6        Q.   Now let's go directly to your arrival, and if I could go to 748,

 7     your daily journal.

 8        A.   What date is that?

 9        Q.   The 21st of July, 1995.

10        A.   Yes, sir.

11        Q.   Now, let me just cover a couple of matters that -- it will be the

12     21st of July, the 22nd of July.  And if I could just reference those, and

13     then I did ask you a few questions about it.

14             In the 21st of July, you note that you are flying over the area

15     coming into Knin, and you note about halfway down that a lot of places

16     are destroyed.

17             Do you see that, sir, about one, two --

18        A.   Yes, I do.

19        Q.   And this is the -- this area was the area that was controlled by

20     the Serbs at the time, right?

21        A.   Yes, it was.

22        Q.   If we go down to the 22nd of July, about midway through, you

23     note:  "As I drive through the villages, it is it hard to imagine what

24     these people have done to each other supposedly in the name of religion.

25     One village will be destroyed and deserted, while the village next to it

Page 7657

 1     doesn't get touched."

 2        A.   Yes, I see that.

 3        Q.   Now, again, sir, this was -- these were Croatian villages that

 4     had been destroyed by the Serbs after 1991.  Isn't that right?

 5        A.   That is correct.

 6        Q.   And a little bit more description.  I mean, tell us the level of

 7     that damage, sir, the damage that was done by the Serbs against the

 8     Croats.

 9        A.   A lot of the damage done was very similar to the damage that was

10     done following the -- or during and following the offensive during

11     Operation Storm.  There were villages that were completely destroyed,

12     there were villages that were partially destroyed, but the type of damage

13     was very similar -- similar that took place during Operation Storm, sir.

14        Q.   So, even prior to Storm, you and the other UN personnel saw that

15     all these Croatian villages had been destroyed.

16        A.   Yes.  It was very obvious that the destruction had taken place

17     some time prior to August of 1995.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe, when you're talking about Croatian

19     villages, could you please always make clear whether we're talking about

20     villages in Croatia, which are Croatian villages --

21             MR. KEHOE:  Yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  -- and villages which are predominantly inhabited by

23     those of Croatian ethnic origin, so that we have a clear designation

24     between what is a Croatian village.

25             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, sir.

Page 7658

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And, perhaps, we could ask Mr. Berikoff the

 2     last questions about the damage to the villages, the question always was

 3     about Croatian villages.

 4             In your answers, when you confirmed what was put to you by

 5     Mr. Kehoe, did you include that the damage was done to villages of a

 6     predominantly Croatian population, or were you just talking about

 7     villages you saw in Croatia.

 8             THE WITNESS:  Your Honour, it was villages both on Croatian -- in

 9     Croatia proper and, once again, Croatian dominantly populated villages in

10     the Krajina.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you.

12             MR. KEHOE:

13        Q.   Now, you noted that these -- this was the similar type damage

14     that you saw after Operation Storm.

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Do you know when you -- prior to Operation Storm if the United

17     Nations was making any efforts with the RSK authorities to determine who

18     did all this burning of Croat houses?

19        A.   I had heard rumours of that, but I'm not aware of anything in

20     particular, sir.

21        Q.   Your were aware that a large number of Croatian civilians had

22     been driven out.

23        A.   Yes, I am.

24        Q.   Now, when you got to Sector South, would you agree that -- that

25     the whole area of the Krajina was very tense?

Page 7659

 1        A.   Without a doubt.  There were indications and rumours and

 2     conflicting stories of a possible Croatian offensive to retake the

 3     Krajina.  There were ongoing negotiations about the status of the

 4     Krajina.  And the days varied from -- well, we may have an offensive

 5     starting tomorrow, we may have an offensive in ten days, a week,

 6     whatever.  So, yes, it was a very stressful situation throughout.  Even

 7     prior to my deployment, even while I was in Canada at the nationality

 8     defence headquarters, I was still aware of the possibility of an upcoming

 9     offensive against the Krajina.

10        Q.   Now, in your diary -- I'm just -- there was also a problem with

11     the Krajina Serbs conducting criminal activities against the United

12     Nations as well.  Isn't that right?

13        A.   Yes.  There were a number of instances when United Nations

14     vehicles were hijacked.  In one instance prior to my arrival, one of the

15     UN personnel was shot during -- shot and killed during a hijacking; and

16     yes, this was done by the local Serbs.

17             MR. KEHOE:  And, by way of clarity, Your Honour, this is -- I

18     believe Mr. Berikoff is on the bottom of page 2 on to page 3 of P748.

19        Q.   Now, in addition to that, sir, if I may, and just trying to get

20     your statements together.

21             When you got there, sir, there was also a significant degree of

22     restriction of movement, wasn't there?

23        A.   Yes, there was.  Throughout the whole -- whole area, we were

24     restricted at a number of check-points of being able to go any further.

25        Q.   And the restrictions were by the ARSK, weren't they?

Page 7660

 1        A.   Yes, they were.

 2        Q.   And that began towards the latter part of July of 1995, didn't

 3     it?

 4        A.   Yes, it did, that I'm aware of.  It may have happened before, but

 5     definitely when I was there.

 6        Q.   So when you got there, Mr. Berikoff, the ARSK, at least in your

 7     experience, began to refuse your entry into certain areas.  Isn't that

 8     right?

 9        A.   Yes, they did, or they let us in after we waited a certain amount

10     of time; or if we were able to pay them certain items such as Coca-Cola

11     or cigarettes, then they would let us through.  So the answer is yes.

12        Q.   In the areas they were moving in to, were they moving troops and

13     other mechanized vehicles?

14        A.   It was usually in areas where there was military activity, yes.

15        Q.   And where would that have been?

16        A.   I don't recall exactly; however, I do know that it was on the way

17     to -- from Knin down south towards Drnis in that area.  I don't recall

18     the exact areas.  We also went to other areas where we were restricted at

19     various check-points throughout the whole sector, sir.

20        Q.   But to follow up on what you said before, you learned during this

21     period of time that these restrictions were taking place because they

22     were moving troops and mechanized vehicles.

23        A.   In a lot of the cases, it was because of troop or vehicle

24     movement.  Whether it was mechanized or not, sir, I'm not sure, but it

25     was vehicle movement.

Page 7661

 1        Q.   Now you note for news your diary, again, at -- if I may, on the

 2     1st of August, that you were supposed to take a helicopter recce along

 3     the zone of separation to visit CanBat 1's area of responsibility.  Do

 4     you recall that?

 5        A.   Yes, I do.  And it was it wasn't only the CanBat's 1's area of

 6     responsibility, it was the whole zone of separation, sir.

 7        Q.   Tell us, and tell the Chamber, what you were intending to do with

 8     the recce.

 9        A.   Basically, what the reconnaissance would do would give --

10     provides us with information about troop movement, troop locations,

11     et cetera, on both sides of the warring factions.

12        Q.   And when you tried to take this reconnaissance flight on the

13     1st of August, the ARSK refused, didn't they?

14        A.   Yes, they did.

15        Q.   And did they give you a reason why they refused?

16        A.   No, they did not.

17        Q.   Now, you attempted to take that reconnaissance flight again the

18     next day, didn't you?

19        A.   Yes, I did.

20        Q.   And that would have been 2 August of 1995?

21        A.   Yes, it was.

22        Q.   And did you, in fact, take that reconnaissance mission?

23        A.   It was either the 2nd or --

24        Q.   Or did you take it thereafter?

25        A.   It was on the 2nd of August, as you indicated.  That's when the

Page 7662

 1     pilot picked me up at the UN compound on our helipad.  We departed at

 2     8.00.  At 8.08, I believe, is when we got fired upon by the ARSK from the

 3     area of Oklaj.

 4        Q.   So they refused permission on the 1st; you got fired upon; and

 5     going back to your diary, on the 3rd, your reconnaissance mission - and

 6     I'm talking about your diary, P748, on the 3rd of August - your

 7     reconnaissance mission on that day was, once again, refused by the ARSK?

 8        A.   Yes, it was.  Because after the incident and after the apology

 9     from the ARSK colonel, we had put in another request for permission to

10     fly again the next day; however, that mission was cancelled completely.

11        Q.   Now, did the -- did you learn during this period of time when you

12     were being denied this movement, Mr. Berikoff, that the ARSK was

13     preparing an offensive against the HV?

14        A.   No, I did not.  We were denied numerous attempts of doing many

15     things by the ARSK in the early days.

16        Q.   Such as what else, sir?

17        A.   Such as entry into areas along some of my travels.  My task, when

18     I was there, was to gain information.  So on numerous occasions, I would

19     drive to various locations throughout the sector and was denied entry

20     into various areas, not necessarily just military.  If there was a

21     civilian police check-point, I would be turned around and told I could

22     not go into the area.  No reason was given; however, there were numerous

23     incidents when we were turned, and permission was not given for us to go

24     on.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe.

Page 7663

 1             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  I earlier did not know whether it was important

 3     enough to take the witness back to page 68, lines 16 and following; but

 4     in view of your line of questioning, I think it might have gained some

 5     importance.

 6             Mr. Berikoff, you were asked about the restrictions of movement,

 7     and one of the questions put to you:  "And that began towards the latter

 8     part of July of 1995, didn't it?"

 9             You said:  "Yes, it did, that I'm aware of.  It may have happened

10     before, but definitely when I was there."

11             Then the next question was:  "So when you got there,

12     Mr. Berikoff, the ARSK, at least in your experience, began to refuse your

13     entry into certain areas; isn't that right?"

14             And you said:  "Yes, they did."

15             Now, the whole of the context leaves some doubt as to whether

16     what you noticed upon arrival was something that began - that is, that

17     they began to restrict freedom of movement - or whether you say, I

18     experienced that there was freedom of movement, and I do not know whether

19     it began at that time or before I arrived.

20             Could you please clarify this.

21             THE WITNESS:  Yes, I could, Your Honour.

22             There was restriction of movement and even before I got there.

23     The restriction of movement was in effect.  There were hijackings, there

24     was everything, so there restrictions of movement imposed by ARSK, as

25     well as some restriction of movement imposed by the UN command within

Page 7664

 1     Sector South itself, sir.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 3             Mr. Kehoe, the first answer of the witness already hinted quite

 4     clearly at whether it began at the time he arrived that that might not

 5     have been the case.  You more or less ignored that answer.  In

 6     introducing the next question, when saying that:  "When you got there,

 7     they began to refuse."  Apart from the -- well, of course, in your

 8     experience, but I noticed that.  But if you haven't been there before,

 9     you can't have any experience.

10             And from the explanation of the witness now, it appears that he

11     had knowledge of what happened before he arrived, and he noticed that

12     when he was there, that there was restriction of movement.  And in the

13     beginning, I think it would have assisted the Chamber better if would you

14     not have, again, used that word "began to refuse."

15             Please proceed.

16             THE WITNESS:  If I may, Your Honour, I think using the words

17     "ongoing restriction of movement" might explain it easier.  I was ongoing

18     when I got there.  I was aware that there was restriction of movement

19     prior to my arrival; and when I got there, the restriction of movement

20     was ongoing, sir.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  You experienced that it was there.

22             THE WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Kehoe.

24             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour.

25        Q.   If we could be a little bit more precise on that, Mr. Berikoff,

Page 7665

 1     and I can turn your attention to P740, paragraph 2-A.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps, I might explain to Mr. Berikoff who might

 3     not be familiar with the Dutch testing system of --

 4             THE WITNESS:  Yes, I am.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  -- our alarm sirens.  That is what happened every

 6     Monday, first of the month at 12.00.

 7             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour.  As everyone in the courtroom

 8     blithely ignores.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

10             MR. KEHOE:  Hopefully, nothing will happen --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  I don't know if -- -

12             MR. KEHOE:  [Overlapping speakers] ... at noontime.

13        Q.   If I can direct your attention to that document.

14             MR. KEHOE:  It is P740, if we can bring that up on the screen,

15     paragraph 2-A.

16        Q.   Perhaps I should have clarified this for you prior to my

17     questioning.

18             It notes that:  "Prior to Operation Storm on 27 July, while

19     returning from Primosten to Knin, ARSK soldiers stopped everybody at

20     their check-points.  There was no UN vehicle movement allowed into areas

21     that we had previously been permitted."

22        A.   That's correct.

23        Q.   Okay.  And the stoppage of going into these areas was being done

24     by the ARSK, was it not?

25        A.   Yes, it was.

Page 7666

 1        Q.   And they were stopping you - not you - they were stopping UN

 2     personnel from going into areas that UN personnel had previously gone to.

 3        A.   Yes, they had.

 4        Q.   And you began to -- well, you put this in your -- your statement,

 5     so I take it that that was an indicator to you that things were changing?

 6        A.   Yes, they were.  They were changing substantially, in that there

 7     was very different types of activity throughout area, in particular with

 8     the ARSK either through the -- through the means of call-up or whatever.

 9     We were stopped on numerous occasions and not allowed to go into areas as

10     indicated in my report, sir.

11        Q.   Now, in addition to that, sir, there was also some

12     dissatisfaction with the ARSK personally, as you reflect in paragraph 2-C

13     of this document, that the ARSK, in fact, put you on a hit list.

14             Do you see that?

15        A.   Yes, I do.

16        Q.   And I think you explain it in a little bit more detail in your

17     diary, P748, which is the entry for the 30th of July, if you can go to

18     that, sir.

19             MR. KEHOE:  If we can go to P748, next page.  It's the 30th.

20        Q.   Towards the bottom of that entry on the 30th, it notes the area

21     about the hit list and the black market ring.

22             Tell us a little bit about that what was going on?

23        A.   Myself and Captain Dangerfield and his driver Sergeant Green made

24     numerous visits to the observation post or OP up in Strmica.  During one

25     of our visits, the Kenyan platoon commander informed us that he had been

Page 7667

 1     told by a Serb police officer that, in fact, Captain Dangerfield and I

 2     were placed on a hit list.  There was a contract out on both of us

 3     because there -- they accused of us passing information back to our UN

 4     headquarters regarding troop movement, et cetera.

 5             There was further -- he further stated to us that we were

 6     interfering with an ongoing trade agreement between the local ARSK and

 7     the observation post personnel themselves.  And by us being there, we

 8     were infringing on their, I guess, extra circular activities.

 9        Q.   And what was this trade agreement between the UN personnel and

10     the ARSK?

11        A.   The ARSK allegedly were providing food rations, et cetera, and

12     female company for the exchange of fuel.

13        Q.   So it was an exchange of prostitutes going to the UN in exchange

14     for fuel?

15        A.   That is one of the things that we were told, yes.

16        Q.   And because you revealed that with Captain Dangerfield, you were

17     put on this hit list?

18        A.   Yes.  Well, both Captain Dangerfield and I were told of this at

19     the same time.  I did not reveal it to Captain Dangerfield; he and I were

20     there.

21        Q.   Now, in addition to these other issues, there was also a degree

22     of tension that arose because of the fact there was a general

23     mobilisation at the latter part of July, isn't it?

24        A.   Yes, it is.  There was tension throughout the area, yes.

25        Q.   And you became -- the gap in time, Mr. Berikoff, is to allow the

Page 7668

 1     translators to catch up.

 2        A.   No problem, sir.

 3        Q.   And you, yourself, began do travel to areas that were up near

 4     Bosnia, for instance, and Bosansko Grahovo that were the subject of that

 5     ongoing military activity for which this mobilisation was to support.

 6     Suspect; isn't that so?

 7        A.   Yes, it is.

 8        Q.   Now what did you observe coming back and forth, going in and

 9     outside of the Bosansko Grahovo area?

10        A.   We observed a lot of military movement between the Krajina and up

11     into the Bosansko Grahovo area, as well as military movement coming back:

12     Types of vehicles included tank -- track vehicles, including tanks.

13     There soft-skinned vehicles, ammunition carriers, troops, there were also

14     ambulances taking casualties down the hill into the Serb area.

15        Q.   And when you say "tanks," sir, what are you talking about and in

16     what numbers?

17        A.   I can't be specific, but it was -- a number of tanks were going

18     back and forth.  Whether it was the same tanks or whether it was

19     additional tanks, I cannot answer that, sir.

20        Q.   Just to put this in a time-frame, let us turn our attention which

21     is 744, which is your time-line with Mr. Williams, and it notes the date

22     of this Knin radio call as the 27th of July.

23             Do you see that, sir?  It's on the first page of P744, your

24     Sector South --

25        A.   Yes, I do, sir.

Page 7669

 1        Q.   Is that about right?

 2        A.   That's about right, sir.

 3        Q.   Now, you were also aware, sir, that -- that the president of the

 4     Republic of Serbian Krajina, Mr. Martic, noted that there was a state of

 5     war in the entire area of the RSK.  Isn't that right?

 6        A.   That is correct.

 7        Q.   Now, sir, when you got to Sector South headquarters, General

 8     Forand sent you down to find out what was going on, sent you to find out

 9     what happen being in the area, didn't he?

10        A.   Yes, he did.  When we got there, there was a bare map on the

11     wall.  He told me, he said, "Phil, I need information.  I don't have

12     anything on any of the warring factions."  And he gave me a set of keys

13     to an SUV, and it was my task to go out daily and virtually push the

14     envelope to -- as far as I can, to see if I would encounter any troops on

15     either side of -- either warring faction, sir.

16        Q.   And pursuant to that, Mr. Berikoff, he sent you up to Strmica on

17     the 30th of July.

18        A.   Yes, he did.  There was a great deal of activity, artillery

19     shelling, et cetera, up in the Bosansko Grahovo area.  He sent myself --

20     myself, and I believe Captain Williams came with me, up there to spend

21     the evening.  I'm not sure if it was Williams or Dangerfield, but we

22     spent the evening up in the Strmica area observing and just sort of

23     listening to the amount of artillery that was going on, on the other side

24     of the -- on the Bosnian side of the border.

25        Q.   Now, did you hear the artillery fire going back and forth?

Page 7670

 1        A.   Back and forth, yes.  It was -- there was extensive artillery

 2     fire that evening.

 3        Q.   And if I can turn your attention back to your diary, P748, for

 4     the entry of the 30th of July, 1995.  Do you have that, sir?

 5        A.   Yes, I do, sir.

 6        Q.   I'm just waiting for it to come back up on the screen.  The next

 7     day.

 8             MR. KEHOE:  It should be the next page, page -- there we go.  The

 9     30th of July.

10        Q.   If you read that for us, about four lines down, it begins with

11     the sentence:  "It was very interesting ..."

12             Do you see that, Mr. Berikoff?

13        A.   Yes, sir.

14        Q.   "It was very interesting, and I was able to see all kinds of

15     equipment on the way.  This includes BMPs, M-12 anti-tank guns, M-84

16     tanks, and a lot of other pieces of kit I don't recognise."

17        A.   That's true.

18        Q.   What is that stuff?

19        A.   The M-12, it is an anti-tank gun.  It fires armour-piercing

20     shells.  The M-84 is a more modern Yugoslav-type tank.  That are those

21     two, and the BMP is an armoured personnel carrier, sir.

22        Q.   Now, I think we missed the entry for what the M-12 is.  What is

23     the M-12?

24        A.   It is an anti-tank gun.  It fires armour-piercing rounds or high

25     explosives, sir.

Page 7671

 1        Q.   You not there that, two lines down, there are -- many RSK are

 2     around the area?

 3        A.   Yes, there was.  There was an ARSK camp down about an a thousand

 4     metres from the Kenyan outpost.

 5        Q.   And say there are many RSK around.  How many did you observe?

 6        A.   I observed at least a company strength in that area at various

 7     times.  There was always sentries on duty, there was different types of

 8     vehicles in the compound, et cetera.

 9        Q.   Now, these tanks and BMPs and other items, did you notice them on

10     the move?

11             MR. RUSSO:  I'm sorry.  I apologise.  I don't mean to cut counsel

12     off.

13             Your Honour, I believe at page 79, here at line -- I'm sorry.  It

14     has just been corrected.  It was first "canyon" outpost.  It has been

15     corrected now to "Kenyan" outpost.  I just wanted to make sure that

16     correction was been made at line 3.  It has been.  Thank you.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

18             MR. KEHOE:

19        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, did you notice these vehicles on the move?

20        A.   At what time?

21        Q.   You indicated you were up there on the 30th of July?

22        A.   Yes, we did.  In fact, on numerous occasions that we were in the

23     area of Strmica, there was vehicle movement from that compound up over

24     the border into the Bosansko Grahovo area.  I assume that it was in the

25     Bosansko Grahovo area.  But, yes, there was vehicle movement quite often.

Page 7672

 1        Q.   And where was the ARSK moving this equipment from?

 2        A.   I don't know exactly where the ARSK was moving the equipment

 3     from, but some of it, I assume, would have come from the compound or

 4     garrison a thousand metres from where the Kenyan observation post was.

 5        Q.   Were you familiar, Mr. Berikoff, with the ARSK ammunition depot

 6     at Golubic?

 7        A.   Yes, I am familiar with it.

 8        Q.   Tell us about it.

 9        A.   I am not familiar -- I know it was there.  That is my familiarity

10     with it.  I don't what was there.

11        Q.   And how do you know it was there?

12        A.   Because it was information that I was given, that's all, prior to

13     my arrival in the Knin area.

14        Q.   Now, with this mobilisation that you learned and with --

15             With this mobilisation that you were aware of and with the

16     vehicle movement and number of troops up in Strmica, was it your belief

17     at that time, Mr. Berikoff, that that the ARSK was moving their personnel

18     towards the front line?

19        A.   At the time, it was my impression that ARSK members were going

20     across the border to assist with the operation in the Bosansko Grahovo

21     area.

22        Q.   Well, just trying to be a bit more specific here, Mr. Berikoff,

23     were they moving their troops towards what was a front line area with

24     the HV?

25        A.   I would have to say yes.

Page 7673

 1        Q.   Now, just going back to your -- your supplemental sheet that you

 2     provided -- that was provided us, while you were up in Strmica, you did

 3     not observe any shelling of HV of residential areas, did you?

 4        A.   No.  I did not observe direct evidence of shelling in the Strmica

 5     area; however, there were indications of buildings destroyed and they

 6     were recent -- it was recent destruction, rather than -- than

 7     pre-offensive.

 8        Q.   And this recent destruction, did it appear to be part of this

 9     artillery barrage that was going back and forth?

10        A.   It could have been; however, I did not witness any shelling into

11     the Strmica area.

12        Q.   Staying with this issue, if we can go back, you noted that were

13     there on the 30th of July.  If I can go back to your P744 which is your

14     chronology that did you with Captain Williams, and if we can go to the

15     second page of that document, we go to the entry for the 31st of July.

16             Excuse me.  It notes on the 31st of July :  "118 artillery

17     shells, 30 HV, 30 HVO; 88 ARSK were fired or impacted between the warring

18     factions?"

19             Is that right, WFS?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   "ARSK appears to be reacting to the offense of Bosansko -- in

22     Bosansko Grahovo by redeploying forces."

23             Going down to the entry for the 2nd, there is another entry for

24     artillery fire:  "Between 10.30 and 13.58, HV, HVO fired 34 artillery

25     rounds in the area of Strmica, between ..." --

Page 7674

 1        A.   "Towards an unknown position in BiH."

 2        Q.   "0430 to 0530, RSK fired 50 artillery rounds from the general

 3     area of Strmica to ward an unknown position in BiH."

 4             Suffice it say, Mr. Berikoff, there was a lot of activity going

 5     on --

 6        A.   Yes, there was.

 7        Q.   Let me just finish.  I'm just waiting for the --

 8        A.   All right.

 9        Q.   Suffice it to say, Mr. Berikoff, there was a lot of activity

10     going on -- military activity going on between the ARSK and the HV, HVO

11     towards the latter part of July and the early part of August; wasn't

12     there?

13        A.   Yes, there was, and I'm not denying that.  There was a lot of

14     activity up in the Strmica area.

15        Q.   And, sir, please understand I'm not challenging what you're

16     saying, just clarifying a few issues here.

17        A.   Yes, sir.

18        Q.   Now, during this period of time, and I direct your attention to

19     your supplemental information sheet, you told the Prosecutor that you

20     personally observed "people leaving Knin prior to Operation Storm and

21     recalls that it was a significant number of people that left."

22             If I can turn your attention to your 21 May 1997 statement at

23     paragraph 2-B, that's P270 -- excuse me, P740.

24             You note as of the -- on "B":  "On 29 July, many of the UN

25     civilian employees did not show up for work.  We later found out that

Page 7675

 1     they had started to evacuate from the area because they were afraid of a

 2     Croat offensive in the Krajina at a near future" -- excuse me, "in the

 3     very near future."

 4             So based on your observations, Mr. Berikoff, the departure of

 5     civilians or the evacuation of civilians took place some five, six days

 6     before Operation Storm even took place.  Isn't that right?

 7        A.   Yes, it does.  Because as I indicated earlier, we weren't certain

 8     of when a possible offensive would start.  We were given information

 9     anything from one day to ten days.  I'm sure the civilian population

10     would have had the same type of information.  On that day in particular,

11     we were placed on Orange Alert because of additional information through

12     various means that we received.  So it's -- it is quite possible that,

13     yes, they did, sir.

14        Q.   So based -- if I may -- based on your observations, Mr. Berikoff,

15     as early as the 29th of July, civilians were leaving on their own?

16        A.   Yes, they were.

17        Q.   Now, let me address some of your observations concerning the

18     actual military situation in the Krajina as -- and Knin, as well as the

19     shelling.

20             Now, the first is that -- and you said this in direct

21     examination --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe, are we moving to another subject?

23             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, we are, Judge.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Then perhaps, looking at the clock, it would be

25     better to have a break now and resume at a quarter to 1.00.

Page 7676

 1             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour.

 2                           --- Recess taken at 12.25 p.m.

 3                           --- On resuming at 12.48 p.m.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe, please proceed.

 5             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you.

 6        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, I was go to go on to a new topic now that deals

 7     with actual shelling of Knin on the 4th of August.

 8             I think you told us that on direct that you did changed your

 9     opinion on the indiscriminate nature of the shelling.  Did I hear you

10     correctly that that change of opinion took place sometime in 1997 or

11     1998?

12        A.   That's correct.  It was -- in addition, it was on my mind

13     immediately after the offensive and over a period of time, yes, it did,

14     sir.

15        Q.   Before we talk about Knin directly, Mr. Berikoff, I want to draw

16     a little bit on your experience in the military, and especially the JNA

17     and Warsaw Pact nations' methodologies.

18             You are familiar with those based or your experience, are you

19     not, sir?

20        A.   Yes, I am.

21        Q.   And you do know that within the JNA, the structure of the

22     military is very much a top-down type of enterprise, where the lower

23     level soldiers and units don't do anything without an order from the top.

24     Isn't that right?

25        A.   That's correct.  It very similar to the -- as in all former

Page 7677

 1     Warsaw Pact counties, the chain of command, the structure was very

 2     similar.

 3        Q.   And that's quite different than the approach taken by NATO

 4     countries, isn't it?

 5        A.   Yes, it is.

 6        Q.   In what sense?

 7        A.   In the sense that in NATO countries, everybody from the top down,

 8     for instance, can read a map.  Everybody knows what the operation is,

 9     what the objective of an operation is normally, and the sequence of

10     events that will follow, following an operation.

11        Q.   Would you agree with me that among the NATO philosophy that if

12     there is a destruction of communication and command and control

13     operations at a high level, that lower level entities or elements can

14     essentially think for themselves?

15        A.   In most cases, I would have to agree with you.  There are those

16     instances where information may not have been passed down; but, yes, in

17     general terms, I would totally agree with you.

18        Q.   Now, you knew that Operation Storm was -- had taken place not

19     only in Sector South but also the in Sector North?

20        A.   That's correct.

21        Q.   So it was a broad range of -- or broad area of geography, was it

22     not?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   Now, as a military person, Mr. Berikoff, if you were to disrupt

25     the structure of the ARSK, you would strike at their headquarters and

Page 7678

 1     their communication networks, wouldn't you?

 2        A.   In particular the communication, yes.  However, with regard to

 3     communications, the one thing that the former Warsaw pact countries did

 4     have which was very, very good in comparison to NATO-type countries was

 5     the redundancy of communications.  So there may have been a redundancy of

 6     communications.

 7        Q.   But, in any event, if you were planning the operation, you would,

 8     first and foremost, attempt to destroy a headquarters and the

 9     communications because that would affect the operations, not only in

10     Sector South in Knin but throughout the Krajina.  Isn't that right?

11        A.   I would have to agree with you.

12             MR. RUSSO:  I'm sorry.  I don't mean to interrupt.  It is just

13     unclear to me if he is being asked if he would do that or if he is being

14     asked, if you were a Warsaw member nation, would do you that -- or former

15     Warsaw Pact nation, would you do that.  I'm not clear.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  I understood the question to be what the witness

17     would do if he would.

18             MR. KEHOE:  That's correct.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  That's how it was phrased, Mr. Russo.

20             Please proceed.

21             MR. KEHOE:

22        Q.   By the way, what was the "redundancy of communications" mean?

23        A.   It means that they have extra capabilities that they would not

24     lose communications at any given time; that if one communications system

25     was destroyed or made inoperable, there was another system that would

Page 7679

 1     take over.

 2        Q.   So a wise military commander that wanted to destroy the

 3     communication network would, in fact, attempt to target all communication

 4     networks because of this redundancy issue.  Isn't that right?

 5        A.   That would be the ideal situation, yes.

 6        Q.   And that would come in conjunction with attempting to take out

 7     the headquarters?

 8        A.   Yes, it would, normally.

 9        Q.   Now let me direct your attention to D117, and this is a NATO

10     glossary of terms.

11             MR. KEHOE:  And if we could move to the second page of that, and

12     if we could move towards the bottom of that page and blow up the centre

13     column last entry.

14        Q.   And we're talking about NATO'S discussion of the centre of

15     gravity, characteristics, capabilities, or localities, from which a

16     nation and alliance on military force or other grouping derives its

17     freedom of action, physical strength, or will to fight.

18             Now, Mr. Berikoff, that is Knin, isn't it?

19        A.   At that point in time, the answer is yes.  It was their main or

20     one of their main headquarters, it had a garrison, it had other barracks,

21     et cetera.  So, yes, it would be.

22        Q.   And, again, if you were a military commander, you would do

23     everything in your power to talk out - you mentioned the communication,

24     the headquarters - but anything that was supporting that structure as

25     well, wouldn't you.

Page 7680

 1        A.   If you knew where the locations were, yes.

 2        Q.   Now, if I may -- oops.

 3             When you were in -- well, let me direct your attention to page 9

 4     of D284.

 5             MR. KEHOE:  And if we can go page 9 of to 284, line 32.

 6        Q.   You note in this that:  "In my opinion, the type of ammunition

 7     that was used for the offensive against Knin was ... a high explosive

 8     variety mainly used for destruction of buildings and facilities."

 9             So you would agree, Mr. Berikoff, that as a commanding officer,

10     if you were to take out these buildings which housed communication

11     facilities, you would use weaponry such as that used by the HV, that was

12     designed for the destruction of buildings and facilities, wouldn't you?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   So, in the destruction of the buildings and facilities, based on

15     your statement herein, the HV used the right type of ammunition, didn't

16     they?

17        A.   Yes, they did.  For the targets intended, if that was their

18     intention, yes.

19        Q.   Now, your issue is the number of shells involved, and that's your

20     question, is it not?

21        A.   Yes, it is.

22        Q.   And the information concerning the number of shells, you received

23     that information from Colonel -- excuse me.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  There seems to be some kind of interference which

25     has now stopped again.

Page 7681

 1             MR. KEHOE:  I'm sorry, Judge.  Am I okay to go?

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 3             MR. KEHOE:

 4        Q.   Now the number of shells is information you received from Colonel

 5     Leslie, isn't that right?

 6        A.   It was both Colonel Leslie and Master Bombardier Parlee who were

 7     both artillery personnel and had knowledge of how to count the rounds.

 8     As a military officer, I also had the basic knowledge of artillery

 9     shelling from flash-to-bang counting.

10        Q.   Since your time in the former Yugoslavia, and I include both your

11     time in Knin and Sarajevo, have you spoken to Colonel Leslie?

12        A.   No, I have not, sir, at all.

13        Q.   Did you learn either directly or indirectly that he has stated

14     that these shell counts were not accurate?

15        A.   No.  I am not aware what General Leslie has said.

16        Q.   Now, we note the level of shelling that was going on.  And if I

17     could just take you through some of the items that you have presented to

18     us to just discuss a little bit, the shelling and number of shells that

19     you maintain was improper given the fact that the -- you say the ARSK had

20     vacated the area.  Is that right?

21        A.   That's right, sir.

22        Q.   That issue, of course, has nothing to do with taking out the

23     communications network, does it?

24        A.   No, it would not.

25        Q.   Now, if we can go to P744, which, again, is your chronology with

Page 7682

 1     Captain Williams.

 2        A.   I wouldn't say that is my chronology with Captain Williams, sir.

 3     I would say I had input in some of the information that was given.  He.

 4     Captain Williams, received information from a variety and a multitude of

 5     sources to put that document together.  I only provided bits and pieces.

 6        Q.   I understand.  But let us, nonetheless, go through some of those

 7     entries, and let's turn to page 3 of this document.  We're talking about

 8     the evening of the 4th of August.  Now, if you look at the entry for

 9     1715, which is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, down on the 4th, there were reporting that

10     start:  "Much of the reporting ..."

11             This comes from the ARSK:  "Much of the reporting speaks of

12     repelling the HV."

13             Now, throughout the 4th, there was significant fighting going on

14     with the HV and the -- and the ARSK, wasn't there?

15        A.   I would not disagree with that, because if the intention of the

16     Croats was to take the Krajina, there would be fighting throughout the

17     Krajina, not just in Knin.

18        Q.   And you noted for us during the course of your direct examination

19     that you had spent quite a bit of time with Captain Dangerfield?

20        A.   Yes, I did.

21        Q.   And Captain Dangerfield was another British officer attached to

22     UN Sector South.

23        A.   Yes, he was.  He was a liaison officer from Gornji Vakuf in

24     Bosnia.

25        Q.   Let us turn to his report, which is P698, if we may.  What I'd

Page 7683

 1     like to do, Mr. Berikoff, is go through a few of these excerpts here, as

 2     opposed to go through one by one, and allow you to speak about them just

 3     a bit.

 4             And this is a brief overview from Sector South on the 4th of

 5     August at 0500 to 2200 on the August [sic], and Captain Dangerfield gives

 6     some information about the shelling.

 7             He notes in paragraph 2:  "It was a long time before the HVO,"

 8     excuse me, "HV/HVO made any headway on the ground.  In the early

 9     afternoon, the picture began to develop as soon as we saw five main areas

10     of attack."

11             And he discusses those particular areas in paragraph 3, and

12     notes:  "By mid afternoon, five main axis of attack had developed."

13             MR. KEHOE:  If we could turn to the next page.

14        Q.   This is his assessment for the 5th of August :  "Saturday,

15     05 August, should see another -- should see another initial heavy

16     artillery barrage of HV objectives.  G2 assessment ..."

17             That is you, is it not?

18        A.   No, it's not.  That is probably the G2 from UNCRO or the G2 from

19     Gornji Vakuf who he answered to.  Captain Dangerfield didn't not respond

20     to UNCRO headquarters; he normally responded to the operational side or

21     to Gornji Vakuf, sir.

22        Q.   Fair enough.  "G2 assessment is that Knin may fall dark,

23     05 August.  In order to do, I believe that the HV will require a more

24     successful day than today."

25             Now, Mr. Berikoff, was it your assessment, consistent with

Page 7684

 1     Mr. Dangerfield, that the ARSK was putting up a pretty good fight against

 2     the HV throughout the 4th?

 3        A.   In certain areas of the sector, yes, there was, heavy fighting to

 4     medium amount of fighting, but, yes, there was fighting throughout the

 5     sector, sir.

 6        Q.   So the answer to my question that the ARSK was putting up a

 7     pretty significant fight, the answer is yes.

 8        A.   The answer is yes, at times they were, yes.

 9        Q.   Continuing on.  "Troops approaching from the south face stiff

10     opposition.  SLO recces, last week, saw consider use of road use by ARSK

11     track vehicles."

12             Now, were you aware of these ARSK track vehicles moving into

13     areas in the southern part of the sector?

14        A.   In the southern part of the sector, yes.  Not so much that it was

15     track vehicles; however, there was military movement.  As I said to you

16     earlier on, we -- there was a further restriction of movement down in the

17     area from Drnis to Knin.  So there was military movement.  Whether it was

18     track movement, I'm not sure, sir.

19        Q.   Did you talk -- I'm sorry.  Did you talk to Mr. Dangerfield

20     about -- I'm sorry.

21             Did you talk to Captain Dangerfield about these track vehicles,

22     ARSK track vehicles, moving in the south part of the sector?

23        A.   I don't recall specifically talking to Captain Dangerfield

24     regarding the tank vehicles.  A lot of the information that

25     Captain Dangerfield received was through the operations who got reports

Page 7685

 1     from all the various parts of the sector.  So, although I spoke regularly

 2     with certain topics to Captain Dangerfield, I don't recall specifically

 3     talking about the track vehicles.  We did speak about military movement,

 4     movement of personnel, movement of BMPs.  If you call a BMP a track

 5     vehicle versus a tank, then the answer is, yes, to that, sir.

 6        Q.   Captain Dangerfield is the officer that you were travelling

 7     around the sector with quite frequently prior to Operation Storm, is he

 8     not?

 9        A.   Yes, he is.  And, again, on a few occasions following the

10     operation as well, I was with Captain Dangerfield; but prior to, yes.

11        Q.   Going down to the next paragraph, 11:  "In the west, HV advances

12     face problems of indirect major routes, and at times difficult terrain in

13     approaches towards Knin.  With reports being unclear on the successes of

14     these axis of advance and the distance still required to cover, it is

15     unlikely that Knin will come under direct fire from them."

16        A.   What's the question, Mr. Kehoe?

17        Q.   Just a moment.

18        A.   Oh, okay.

19        Q.   Now, both the terrain and -- was it both the terrain and the

20     existence of a significant force of the ARSK in the west that the UN

21     believed that the -- that the HV was not going to be able to make it down

22     into Knin, or, certainly, as this item notes, that Knin was not going to

23     come under direct fire from them?

24             Go ahead.

25        A.   That's quite possible because there were ARSK strongholds in

Page 7686

 1     Oklaj and areas.  So there may have been areas where there were buildup

 2     of ARSK troops.  The terrain, as Captain Dangerfield indicates, was not

 3     conducive to a wide area of movement by armoured vehicles, so they would

 4     be restricted.  There were also a lot of land-mines throughout the

 5     sector.  That would restrict movement.  So, yes, his assessment is

 6     correct.

 7             MR. KEHOE:  If we can turn to the next page, paragraph 12.

 8        Q.   Paragraph 12:  "While Knin may come under heavy artillery attack

 9     again, the considerable presence of the ARSK forces in the area will

10     require more time before they come under direct fire from HV tanks."

11             If we can just go down to paragraph 15, we'll deal with this

12     together.

13              "The request for aid to evacuate women and children, leaving

14     behind ARSK troops only, shows signs of a disturbing final showdown.

15     With the advancing HV/HVO troops looking at Knin as their final

16     objective, and ARSK troops remaining, Milan Martic will have to surrender

17     or face a bloody last stand in the capital of Krajina."

18             Now, before I ask you something about this, I'd like to show you

19     something else, which is a transcript of a radio intercept.  And it is

20     D106 of ARSK General Mrksic on the evening of the 4th of August, 1995, at

21     2130 hours.

22             About midway down in this Radio Belgrade conversation with

23     General Mrksic, it reads:

24             "Q.  Does that mean our lines have been penetrated?

25             "A.  No.  We are maintaining contact.  Our forces withdrew to the

Page 7687

 1     positions for direct defence of Knin.  The other range units are still

 2     successfully holding their positions."

 3             MR. KEHOE:  If we can stroll down that page just a bit.

 4        Q.   About three-fifths of the way down, it says, "If the VRS ..."

 5             Do you see that?

 6        A.   Yes, I do.

 7        Q.   "If the VRS, army of Republika Srpska, succeeds in putting the

 8     pressure on the forces attacking in the direction of Grahovo-Knin, we

 9     shall then stabilize the defence and switch to a counterattack."

10             Lastly, if I could just read to you, this was an audio

11     presentation, Mr. Berikoff, by Colonel Leslie on the evening of the

12     4th of August, at 2340, CET:  "In your judgement ..." --

13             MR. KEHOE:  By the way, this is D123.  Thank you, counsel.

14        Q.   The reporter asks:  "In your judgement, are the Croats on the

15     point of taking the town?"

16             Leslie:  "Taking Knin, no.  We had no reports of Croatians being

17     within direct fire range of Knin, and there's still a lot of Serbs in

18     Knin and in the surrounding hills.  So there we go."

19             Now, Mr. Berikoff, at this particular point, the assessment of

20     the UN is that the ARSK is going to retreat into Knin, and, as

21     Captain Dangerfield said, either surrender or face a bloody last stand.

22     Isn't that right?

23        A.   I wouldn't totally agree with Captain Dangerfield's assessment.

24     In my journal, I had indicated that there were ARSK forces; and, in all

25     likelihood, they had moved up to defence lines to protect the city of

Page 7688

 1     Knin.  I wouldn't go as far as when he said there was strong opposition.

 2     It was in certain areas where there was opposition, but not throughout

 3     the sector.  But, generally, I would agree with his assessment, but not

 4     totally, Mr. Kehoe.

 5        Q.   Well, you're familiar, Mr. Berikoff, of street fighting in and

 6     around a city, aren't you?

 7        A.   Yes, I am.  It is one of the most complicated and difficult

 8     operations to conduct.

 9        Q.   And it is very costly when it comes to personnel, too, isn't it?

10        A.   Yes, it is.  One person can stop a whole platoon or company,

11     possibly.

12        Q.   Well, do you agree that on the evening of the 4th, consistent

13     with Colonel Leslie's comments, that Knin was not on the verge of

14     falling?

15        A.   Not at that time, no.  However, there were no troops right in the

16     town itself either or very minimal.  But was it on the verge of falling

17     that evening?  The answer is no to your question.

18        Q.   Now, as we --

19             MR KEHOE:  Am I okay, Judge?  I'm just trying to make sure that

20     I'm not getting ahead of the translators, Judge.

21        Q.   As we move into the 5th, the UN observed a series of troop and

22     mechanized elements moving in the Sector South area towards Knin, didn't

23     they?

24        A.   Yes, they did, as indicated by Captain Dangerfield in his report.

25     I generally agree with that portion.

Page 7689

 1        Q.   Well, let me show you a sitrep, specifically D124.  This is a

 2     sitrep, an UNMO sitrep, on the 5th of August at 1900.

 3             MR. KEHOE:  If we can go that page, number 3, "CanBat."

 4        Q.   This is it at 0535.  It notes:  "RSK movement of tanks and

 5     vehicles," and it notes in the following paragraph that the vehicles seen

 6     headed towards Knin.  As we move back down that page, you can see the

 7     second-to-last note saying that they're headed towards Knin.  If go

 8     towards the next page, it likewise notes in the first two entries that

 9     they are headed towards Knin.

10             MR. KEHOE:  If I can bring up on the screen 65 ter 1634.

11        Q.   This sitrep, Mr. Berikoff, of CanBat at 0800 Zulu on 5 August.

12             MR.  KEHOE:  If we can go to the second page.

13        Q.   This is began a CanBat update.

14             MR. KEHOE:  If we go down towards the --

15        Q.   As you can see, it is talking about ARSK elements.  And 4, at

16     0530 vehicles heading towards Knin, six T-54s and six T-34s and one BRDM.

17             MR. KEHOE:  If we can offer this up into evidence at this time,

18     65 ter 1634.

19             MR. RUSSO:  No objection, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit D727, Your Honours.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  D727 is admitted into evidence.

23             Please proceed.

24             MR. KEHOE:  Thank you, Your Honour.

25        Q.   Staying with P744, that's, again, the chronology with

Page 7690

 1     Mr. Williams -- excuse me, on page 3.

 2             At 6.10 a.m. on the 5th, it notes:  "Eight ARSK tanks, one BOV."

 3             What is a BOV, sir.

 4        A.   It's a -- APC is an armoured personnel carrier.

 5        Q.   "One BOV, one truck, heading from the south to north through

 6     Knin."

 7             So if can we can just set the stage for these questions,

 8     Mr. Berikoff, we have a significant amount of fighting going on through

 9     the 4th; the lines haven't been penetrated; General Mrksic says that they

10     are preparing a defence of Knin; troop personnel and mechanised units are

11     heading towards Knin; you, in fact, see or UN observes tanks moving

12     through Knin in the earlier morning hours of the 5th.

13             Under those circumstances, is it reasonable for a commander to

14     believe that there's going to be ongoing fighting in Knin throughout

15     the 5th?

16        A.   Not necessarily.  Knin -- the troop ARSK troops that moved out of

17     Knin went to the forward deployment area.  So would there be fighting in

18     Knin?  Quite possibly not.  In the area of Knin?  Yes.  Up in the forward

19     line?  Yes, quite possible.

20        Q.   You note here that there are tanks moving through Knin?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Okay.  And is it reasonable for a commander to fire on those

23     tanks as they move through Knin?

24        A.   If they were observed and the opportunity arose, yes, it would

25     be.

Page 7691

 1        Q.   And if, in fact, a defence is going to take place, as General

 2     Mrksic outlined, is it reasonable for a commander to continue to fire on

 3     headquarters and communication facilities that were going to be used to

 4     support that defence of Knin?

 5             MR. RUSSO:  I'm sorry, Your Honour.  I don't mean to interrupt

 6     the flow, and I'm certainly not objecting to the line of questioning.  I

 7     just want to be clear.  This has come up several times, the Defence has

 8     made a motion about fact witnesses offering opinions regarding this.  I'm

 9     not suggesting that you shouldn't be doing it, but I just want to be

10     clear that we're now putting hypothetical information to a fact witness

11     and soliciting an opinion about whether or not it is reasonable for a

12     commander to act in one set or another.

13             I want to be to clear that if that is okay with the Defence, I

14     just want to make sure that we're not still subject to the objection that

15     made regarding this line of questioning to fact witnesses.

16             MR. KEHOE:  If I may respond.

17             The Prosecution asked this witness about his assessment of

18     shelling and whether or not it was excessively shelled, and that entails

19     both the 4th as well as the 5th.  That is an opinion that has been

20     brought out by Mr. Russo.

21             We are attempting to meet that opinion with the sequence of facts

22     for Mr. Berikoff to take into consideration as to whether or not a

23     reasonable commander can continue to fire when a commanding officer says

24     that there's going to a defence of Knin, and that there has been

25     continuous fighting throughout that day, and, at least the assessment of

Page 7692

 1     Mr. Dangerfield is, that there was a significant possibility of a bloody

 2     last stand in Knin.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Russo, you did not raise an objection, so there

 4     we have a non-objection and we have an explanation.

 5             It seems to me that having heard quite a bit of evidence on that,

 6     it is not uncommon for both parties to elicit, especially in the field of

 7     military matters, to seek testimony which is not of a purely factual

 8     nature and even includes wise commanders, as I meanwhile understand.

 9             Let's move on.

10             Mr. Kehoe.

11             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour.

12        Q.   Moving back to that question, Mr. Berikoff.

13        A.   Can you please repeat the question, Mr. Kehoe.

14        Q.   Under the circumstances of the 5th of August, when General Mrksic

15     maintains that there is going to be a defence of Knin to take place,

16     General Leslie says that Croat lines have not been penetrated, and that

17     there is ARSK movement towards Knin, and there's no evidence that the

18     communication network is - I meant the Serb lines haven't been

19     penetrated - no evidence that the communication network per General

20     Mrksic has been taken out, is it reasonable for a commander to again

21     engage in artillery attack to take those elements out?

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Russo.

23             MR. RUSSO:  Your Honour, I just want to be clear that

24     Mr. Berikoff is being asked to assume the accuracy of the facts upon

25     which he is now being asked to offer an opinion.  He has been shown

Page 7693

 1     evidence.  There is no indication -- well, he certainly has not been

 2     asked whether he is aware of this evidence, whether he agrees with it in

 3     particular, but I just want it be clear that the question is asking him

 4     to assume the accuracy of the information.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  That's, of course, always the problem with questions

 6     about opinion, that on what is the opinion based.

 7             Again, I repeat, that this is it not uncommon in the examination

 8     of both parties; and by highlighting it, Mr. Russo, you may have

 9     emphasised also that, of course, questions of fact do more assist the

10     Chamber than to elicit too much opinion.

11             At the same time, although it should be kept to a minimum --

12             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, sir.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  -- some assessment of what is useful, wise,

14     effective, I'm afraid that we can't get totally rid of it, although the

15     Chamber certainly would encourage you to get rid of it as much as

16     possible.

17             Please proceed.

18             MR. KEHOE:  Thank you, Your Honour.

19        Q.   Mr. Berikoff, do you recall my question?

20        A.   Even if the assessment and the reports are accurate, I think it

21     is a commander's responsibility to take into consideration the

22     possibility of collateral damage that may be caused by any firing upon

23     any mean, whether they're travelling through a town or whether they were

24     deployed into the area of the town itself.

25             But, yes, if there is an opportunity to take out the troops while

Page 7694

 1     they're in movement, I would say yes, taking into considerations all or

 2     facts and based on the accuracy and inaccuracy of the report itself.

 3        Q.   And your answer would include efforts to take out any

 4     communication facilities?

 5        A.   I would have to an I agree that one of the goals and objectives

 6     is the infrastructure of the organisation.

 7        Q.   By the way, Mr. Berikoff, were you aware that on the evening of

 8     the 4th of August, that General Mrksic put troops and artillery on the

 9     hill outside of Knin known as Bulina Strana?  Were you aware of that?

10        A.   No, I am not, sir.

11        Q.   Okay.  Now, let us talk a little bit about some of your items

12     that you put into evidence and some of the charts that you put into

13     evidence.  You did talk in your -- I believe your 2007 statement, which

14     is P741, at paragraph 2.

15             MR. KEHOE:  If could you pull that up for us, please.

16        Q.   In the middle part of that page, you talk about -- you see the

17     shelling damage in this area?

18        A.   Yes, I do.

19        Q.   It's extensive, and it came from both convention artillery and

20     multi-barrel rocket launchers.

21             Again, at paragraph 4 -- I'm sorry.  Again paragraph 4, you note

22     that:  "There were multi-barrel rocket launcher impacts in residential

23     areas between the hospital and downtown Knin, which is not in the

24     vicinity of any military targets."

25             Now, Mr. Berikoff, I think in our conversation yesterday you said

Page 7695

 1     that you didn't hear any shelling after 12.00 on the 5th.  Is that right?

 2        A.   That's correct.

 3        Q.   And that was shortly before the HV units came to your gate, the

 4     Sector South gate.  Isn't that right?

 5        A.   That's correct.

 6        Q.   Now, you do know that both the ARSK and the HV had multi-barrel

 7     rocket launcher systems.  Isn't that right?

 8        A.   Yes, they did.  It's a weapon similar to both sides.

 9        Q.   Now, the shelling that you heard in and around Knin on -- didn't

10     happen after noon, you just said.

11             MR. KEHOE:  And if we can go to P744, and if we can go to the

12     entry for 10.00 on page 4 of that document.

13        Q.   At 10.00 on the 5th, it notes:  "10.00 on 5 August, HV reportedly

14     entered the city."

15             If I can just address you to an item that the Prosecution has put

16     into evidence.  Which is the statement of a Mira Grubor, P54, she notes

17     that:  "Around 10.30 on Saturday morning, some shooting was heard at the

18     entrance of the hospital.  I saw a group of Croatian soldiers."

19             So if the HV came into town on the 10th and you didn't hear

20     shelling in Knin after noon -- I'm sorry. If the HV came into town on

21     1000 hours on the 5th, or thereabouts, and you didn't hear shelling after

22     noontime, there was shelling going on in Knin when the HV was moving in,

23     wasn't there?

24        A.   That's quite possible.

25        Q.   Now, you were aware that the ARSK was moving through the area and

Page 7696

 1     going back up into Strmica on the 5th.  Isn't that right?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   And you were -- are aware, as a military person, of an army

 4     protecting its rear by putting elements in their rear, to fire on to any

 5     oncoming soldiers, any oncoming enemy.  Isn't that right?

 6        A.   As a rear echelon, yes, that's true.

 7        Q.   And often -- often, a rear echelon will use mortars because

 8     they're so mobile.  Isn't that right?

 9        A.   The use of mortars is normally as an area weapon vice [sic] a

10     direct impact area; but if, in fact, they are firing upon troop movement

11     and stuff, they will use mortars.

12        Q.   Let me direct your attention to the aerial that you talked about;

13     and, if I may, it was aerial map that you had put up.

14             MR. KEHOE:  I believe it is it P746.

15        Q.   Bear with me, Mr. Berikoff, because I know this is difficult to

16     see.  Let us take, for instance, the area up by the hospital, and you see

17     that circled with blue.  I can't see the letter; it may be C?  Is it?

18        A.   I know the area you're talking about, sir.

19             MR. RUSSO:  I believe it is a "Q."

20             MR. KEHOE:  Oh, Mr. Misetic, says it is "F" ; you say it is "Q."

21             JUDGE ORIE:  We are talking about the blue circled area, which is

22     just underneath the word "hospital" on the map.

23             MR. KEHOE:  That's right.  That area, Judge.

24        Q.   Now, you know that the hospital had not been shelled.  Is that

25     right?

Page 7697

 1        A.   It's my impression that -- or my further assessment was the

 2     hospital itself was not targeted.  If any damage was done, it was

 3     probably done through collateral damage.

 4        Q.   And you do know that, as we look at this photograph, the Dinara

 5     mountains are off to the -- where?  Would it be the east of the city?

 6        A.   East of the city, yes.

 7        Q.   And the HV came down those hills.

 8        A.   That was one of the axis, yes.

 9        Q.   And, as a retreating force, you know, Mr. Berikoff, that it would

10     have been perfectly reasonable for the ARSK to fire on the HV troops as

11     they moved into Knin.  Isn't that right?

12        A.   It would have been logical, but I don't recall if they did or

13     not, sir.

14        Q.   Well, you don't recall because, on the 5th, you were still back

15     in Sector South headquarters and didn't have the opportunity to go out

16     and see what was going on, right?

17        A.   That's correct.  I was busy tasked doing other things on the

18     morning of the 5th; and then once the HV came to the gate, movement was

19     restricted.

20        Q.   And when you told us, Mr. Berikoff, that you saw evidence of

21     shells in that location, and I'm talking about that area in blue right

22     below the hospital, you have no idea when that took place, do you?

23        A.   The actual impacts, no.  However, during the actual offensive on

24     the 4th and the artillery was coming in, there were artillery impacts and

25     rocket impacts throughout the field.  So if some landed by the hospital,

Page 7698

 1     they may have been that.  But, yes, you're correct, some of it may have

 2     been caused by other forces.

 3        Q.   And you have no idea when you went back to that field which was

 4     caused by the HV and which was caused by the ARSK?

 5        A.   I have to agree with you, sir.

 6        Q.   In fact, let us turn our attention to P60.

 7             P60 is a joint statement by two UNMOs, Tor Munkelien and Kari

 8     Anttila?

 9             MR. KEHOE:  If we can go to the third page.

10        Q.   This is a discussion where on the 17th - you can read it

11     Mr. Berikoff - Mr. Munkelien and Mr. Anttila retrieved a piece of an

12     M-63, 128-millimetre MRL, which had been fired from approximately 20

13     degrees north by northeast.

14             I will let you finish with that, sir.

15        A.   No problem.  I have read the document.

16        Q.   And if we can go to D88, taking the degrees of impact, sir, from

17     north by north-east, as you can see from this map, and the angle.  And

18     they did a crater analysis upon this.  As reflected in that report, it

19     was fired from the direction 20 degrees north by north-east into an area

20     of Strmica.

21             Now, you know, sir, that Strmica was controlled on the 4th and

22     the 5th and thereafter by the ARSK, wasn't it?

23        A.   Are you saying on the 4th and 5th, it was still under ARSK

24     control?

25        Q.   Yes, sir.

Page 7699

 1        A.   Yes, it was.

 2        Q.   And it remained in ARSK control until approximately when?

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Berikoff, it is visible that you're consulting

 4     your notes.  Would you please always indicate when you are doing that.

 5             THE WITNESS:  Yes, Your Honour, sorry.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 7             MR. KEHOE:

 8        Q.   If I can help you, Mr. Berikoff, and if you just go to the

 9     entries for the 13th and 14th of August.

10        A.   When we went up to Strmica on those days, in fact, it was upped

11     HV control.  Whether it was ARSK prior to those day, I'm not sure.

12     Immediately, on the 4th and 5th, I assume that it still would have been

13     under ARSK control.

14        Q.   Now, in fact, if we go back to P744, and go to the entry on page

15     4 of this document, for 1500, it's noted here that -- do you see that?

16             "ARSK soldiers of unknown strength were seen occupying defensive

17     positions in the general area of Strmica."

18        A.   Yes, that's on the 5th, then I have no problem with that.

19        Q.   Okay.  Now, if we can go back to this aerial.

20             MR. KEHOE:  That was P746.

21        Q.   And, Mr. Berikoff, focussing on these blue areas that you have

22     designated, where you saw evidence of artillery fire, as you sit here,

23     sir, the artillery damage that you looked at, given what you've just

24     seen, you have no idea which army, the HV or the ARSK, shot the actual

25     shell that you observed.  Isn't that right?

Page 7700

 1        A.   No, I don't, and I don't think there is many people would unless

 2     they physically did the firing themselves, sir.

 3        Q.   Well, let's take that question.

 4             MR. KEHOE:  Excuse me.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  I see there is a collective looking at the clock by

 6     the Gotovina Defence.

 7             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour.  I'm sorry.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, you don't have to apologise for looking

 9     at the clock.

10             MR. KEHOE:  It's kind of like, you know --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  If you would have one concluding question, I would

12     allow you; but if you enter a new area, then I think it would be wiser

13     to --

14             MR. KEHOE:  I don't want to mislead you, Judge.  I have a few

15     concluding questions in this area, so --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We'll adjourn soon.

17             But, Mr. Berikoff, first of all, I would like to instruct you

18     that you should not speak with anyone about your testimony, whether it is

19     the testimony you've given today or the testimony still to be given

20     tomorrow or day after tomorrow.  I will explore that with the Defence on

21     how much time will still be needed.

22             Mr. Kehoe, could you give us any indication as far as time is

23     concerned.

24             MR. KEHOE:  [Microphone not activated] ... finish sometime in the

25     second session tomorrow at the latest.

Page 7701

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Other Defence counsel.

 2             Ms. Higgins.

 3             MS. HIGGINS:  Your Honour, I have approximately two hours, no

 4     more, and I hope to be significantly less.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kuzmanovic.

 6             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, obviously, depending on what is

 7     covered before me, an hour and a half, at the most, probably less given

 8     the ground that will be covered, which I assume will be the same as I

 9     have.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So there is a fair chance, if I also looks at

11     Mr. Russo who might have some questions as well, the Bench may have some

12     questions --

13             MR. RUSSO:  Yes.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  -- we will not finish by tomorrow, Mr. Berikoff.  I

15     do not know what you expected, but it is it unlikely that we will not

16     finish tomorrow.

17             THE WITNESS:  I have been given a heads up on that it may go into

18     Thursday, so I am prepared for that, sir.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  At the same time, from the submissions, it

20     might well be that we can conclude your testimony on Wednesday.

21             We adjourn until tomorrow, Tuesday, the 2nd of September, 9.00,

22     Courtroom III.

23                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.50 p.m.,

24                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 2nd day of

25                           September, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.