Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 8562

 1                           Friday, 29 October 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness takes the stand]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Good morning, everyone.

 7             Yes, good morning, Mr. Gaynor.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  Good morning, Mr. President.

 9             I just wanted to clarify one procedural point arising out of the

10     witness's evidence yesterday.  I'd just like to ask him if he formally

11     adopts his amalgamated statement as his evidence in that trial, which is

12     a question which I omitted from the presentation yesterday.  I've cleared

13     this with the Defence.

14             JUDGE KWON:  What is it that we admitted as Exhibit P1830?

15             MR. GAYNOR:  If that's the exhibit number for the amalgamated

16     statement --

17             JUDGE KWON:  90198.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, that's the amalgamated statement of the

19     witness.  I simply wanted to ask him if he formally adopts it as his own

20     evidence.  It was simply that one sentence I left out.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Please do that, Mr. Gaynor.

22             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. President.

23                           WITNESS:  DRAGAN MIOKOVIC [Resumed]

24                           [The witness answered through interpreter]

25                           Examination by Mr. Gaynor:  [Continued]

Page 8563

 1        Q.   Witness, yesterday we discussed your amalgamated witness

 2     statement which you had an opportunity to review last week.  Do you

 3     remember that?

 4        A.   Yes, I do.

 5        Q.   I would just like to ask you if adopt that statement as your

 6     evidence, and if you were asked questions on those subjects, that you

 7     would provide the same answers if asked about those subjects today.

 8        A.   Yes, I adopt this statement as mine, and I would have answered

 9     every question posed in that statement in the same manner.

10             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. Miokovic.  Thank you, Mr. President.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Gaynor.

12             Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please continue your cross-examination.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, everyone.

14                           Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic: [Continued]

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Miokovic.

17        A.   Good morning.

18        Q.   Could you please tell us, did your government keep secret from

19     the public incidents that involved massive casualties?

20        A.   With all due respect, I don't understand your question.

21        Q.   Well, here it is:  The incidents that involved massive civilian

22     casualties, were those incidents publicised or was that concealed?

23        A.   Every incident, as you call them, along the line of the police

24     control and command, was reported in the proper manner as the police do.

25     Whenever there were fatalities in these incidents, the department that I

Page 8564

 1     worked at at the time was notified, again by following proper procedure,

 2     and we would, in turn, inform that investigating judge.  What followed

 3     was we would go to visit the site with or without the investigating judge

 4     to carry out on-site investigation, and every piece of information and

 5     detail would subsequently be forwarded to the investigating judge.  This

 6     is all I can tell you with regards to this issue.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  That's one side of the coin, but was that imparted on

 8     the public?  Was that widely covered or was that concealed from the

 9     public?

10        A.   Sarajevo is a small town.  That was particularly the case during

11     the war.  Anything of that nature, i.e., shooting from infantry or

12     artillery weapons that resulted in one or more fatalities, would shortly

13     after that become public without any specific publication.  I'm not aware

14     of a single incident that was in any way whatsoever hidden from the

15     public.

16        Q.   Thank you.  With all due respect, I would kindly ask you to

17     reduce as many answers as possible to a yes or a no answer, and I, in

18     turn, would try to put as many questions to you and possibly without

19     asking an extension of time.

20             Yesterday, you said that you were involved in some hundred

21     incidents' investigations?

22        A.   Yes, roughly speaking.

23        Q.   Thank you.  In another trial, you said a couple of hundred or

24     several hundred.  Which one of these figures is correct?

25        A.   Approximately not fewer than 100.

Page 8565

 1        Q.   Can we now have the findings of yours relating to these

 2     investigations?

 3        A.   I don't know the answer to that question.  Everything I did, as I

 4     said, was done following a proper procedure and was submitted to the High

 5     Court in Sarajevo that existed at the time.  That applied not only to me,

 6     but also to the entire team that worked on investigations.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  That's a good answer.  We'll ask for this from the

 8     OTP and then from the Bosnian Government.  But the fact is that these

 9     documents relating to every single investigation do exist?

10        A.   Absolutely.

11        Q.   Thank you.  How many of these investigations involved massive

12     civilian casualties?  Can you enumerate them?

13        A.   The term "massive civilian casualties," as far as police

14     terminology is concerned, does not exist.  Therefore, I don't know what

15     you mean by "massive civilian casualties."

16        Q.   Thank you.  I'll try to be more precise.  If, on the average,

17     seven or eight casualties took place, everything above that could be

18     called massive.

19        A.   So what is your question?  I'm sorry.

20        Q.   Can you list the incidents that you investigated that involved

21     seven or eight or more civilian casualties?

22        A.   I really cannot give you this information off the top of my head.

23     I don't know.

24        Q.   Out of these hundreds of investigations that you carried out, how

25     many of them involved seven or more casualties?  Can you tell that --

Page 8566

 1     tell us that percentage-wise?

 2        A.   Not more than 10 or 15 per cent.

 3        Q.   Can you give us some specific examples?

 4        A.   No, I cannot remember.

 5        Q.   That would then involve 70 to 100 casualties.  Now, where are the

 6     remaining 10.900 casualties who were involved?

 7        A.   I don't think I am the proper person to be asked that question.

 8        Q.   I wouldn't have asked you this hadn't you, yourself, given the

 9     figure of 11 casualties.

10             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  11.000 casualties.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Dr. Karadzic, I just provided an

12     estimate that was prepared by the Sarajevo CSB, and as I said, to this

13     date a large number of governmental and non-governmental organisations

14     have confirmed this figure to be correct.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Approximately it's contradictio in adiecto.  We're looking for an

17     exact figure.  Do you take it that, on the basis of this, there was

18     250.000 to 300.000 victims and that the total in Bosnia was 97.000?

19        A.   Dr. Karadzic, I don't want to speculate on any figures relating

20     to casualties.  I really don't want to speculate and guess.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

22             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.

23             This witness is not being presented as an expert witness in the

24     field of demographics.  There will be an expert witness in the field of

25     demographics and total fatalities.  Dr. Karadzic can direct his questions

Page 8567

 1     to the appropriate witness, when the appropriate witness arrives.  This

 2     witness simply does not have that knowledge, and this, in my submission,

 3     is a waste of time.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, I agree.

 5             Mr. Karadzic, I think you exhausted this topic.  Move on to your

 6     next topic.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I was seeking an explanation

 8     to the effect whether I am entitled to dispute everything that is being

 9     said by this witness.  And if he's willing to withdraw this figure of

10     11.000, if is he prepared to do so, then I'm satisfied.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Your right is not disputed.  But it is of my opinion

12     that the witness had given his answer as far as he could, so it's better

13     for you to move on.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, did you carry out investigations irrespective of

16     the victim's ethnicity?

17        A.   Absolutely.

18        Q.   How many investigations did you carry out relating to murders of

19     Serbs?

20        A.   Are you referring to Serb victims who were killed by shelling or

21     some other activity that came from the VRS lines or are you referring to

22     the murders committed during the war but had nothing to do with the

23     activities on the front-line?

24        Q.   Both.

25        A.   As far as the former is concerned, we in the police never kept

Page 8568

 1     record that would show the ethnicity of the victim because we didn't

 2     believe -- or, rather, the legislators didn't believe that was important.

 3             Now, as for your second question, I really cannot remember.  I

 4     really cannot remember not even the identity of the victims that got

 5     killed outside of any shelling or sniping activities.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  Are you trying to say that the generals of your army,

 7     Caco and Juka Prazina and the others, were not killing Serbs around

 8     Sarajevo?

 9        A.   As I said and as I confirmed, throughout the whole time I was in

10     the police, Caco, as you call him, and Juka were never generals.  And if

11     you're asking me whether, during the aggression against

12     Bosnia-Herzegovina and Sarajevo, if there were any murders in Sarajevo

13     simply because they were Serbs, yes, there were such cases.

14        Q.   And who investigated those cases?

15        A.   The Sarajevo CSB, and probably the security services of the Army

16     of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  However, that is something that I don't know

17     anything about.

18        Q.   Did you take part in any of those investigations into the

19     killings of Serbs?

20        A.   The bulk of these cases occurred during the 1992/1993 period,

21     meaning at the very beginning, in the first year of the war.  And I

22     already said that I joined the CSB in December 1993, so I did not.  But I

23     am aware that a certain number of these cases was investigated and that a

24     certain number of those cases was resolved, the perpetrators were

25     prosecuted, and this applies to the wartime period.

Page 8569

 1        Q.   Does this refer to the victims who were thrown into Kazani?  Did

 2     you hear of Kazani?

 3        A.   Absolutely, yes, I have heard of Kazani.

 4        Q.   And this referred to the victims of Kazani?

 5        A.   Yes, absolutely, this applies to the victims of Kazani

 6     -- actually, to the perpetrators of the deeds at Kazani, the crimes of

 7     murder committed at the Kazani locality.

 8        Q.   Do you remember how the situation relating to the Seve was

 9     resolved, and Nedzad Ugljen and Nedzad Herenda and Garaplija?

10             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second, Mr. Miokovic.

11             I'm wondering, Mr. Karadzic, how this is relevant to your case.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Like this:  We have a prominent

13     investigator here who was investigating violent crimes or crimes in

14     Sarajevo, and I'm going to state here -- I'm going to tell the witness

15     here that the Serbian side in Sarajevo has names of 5.000 to 8.000 Serbs

16     who disappeared in the town.  This is a figure ranging between 5.000 to

17     8.000 Serbs, and this is something that was concealed by the Government

18     of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  And this witness was in a position to

19     investigate these particular cases, so I would like to see what he has to

20     say about that.

21             JUDGE KWON:  While that may be important, my question is how that

22     was relevant to your case.  Probably, we allowed you too much time.  I

23     told you to prioritise your questions, and you cannot complain about a

24     shortage of time while asking such irrelevant or marginally relevant

25     issues.  Come to your questions.

Page 8570

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just one more question for you to

 2     see that this relevant.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, would you kindly explain to the Trial Chamber what

 5     the Seve are?

 6        A.   I don't have that information, other than the fact -- or other

 7     than the things that I read about that in the media, and this is for a

 8     very simple reason.  Seve, if they existed in the capacities that were

 9     published in the Bosnia and Herzegovina media, this was a unit that was

10     part of the then Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Bosnia and

11     Herzegovina, and I was never a member of that ministry.  I was a member

12     of the Sarajevo CSB.  So I'm not able to provide any relevant information

13     about that group to you or to the Trial Chamber.

14        Q.   All right.  But if I were to tell you that Seves were the secret

15     armed force of the Secret Police, which organised sniping of citizens in

16     town and the killings of Serbs, and that finally the three of their

17     founders, Nedzad Ugljen, Nedzad Herenda, were killed by that same police,

18     and I don't know what happened to Garaplija.  This is the information

19     that I'm seeking from Bosnia-Herzegovina - you're an investigator - is it

20     correct what I say, that Nedzad Ugljen and Nedzad Garaplija were killed?

21        A.   Well, with all due respect, I think you're getting things mixed

22     up a little bit.  Nedzad Ugljen was killed, Nedzad Garaplija is alive,

23     and the other Nedzad is alive as well.

24        Q.   But they're in prison?

25        A.   No, that's not correct.

Page 8571

 1        Q.   And is it correct that this was an armed formatio of the Secret

 2     Police, of the Secret Service?

 3        A.   I think that I was quite clear; I simply don't know.

 4        Q.   Do you know what --

 5             JUDGE MORRISON:  Dr. Karadzic, first of all, you're exploring

 6     matters that the witness has stated categorically that he can't answer.

 7     And so not only are you wasting your time, you're wasting everybody's

 8     time.

 9             Secondly, when you analyse what you're asking, you're often

10     making a statement which is in the guise of a question.  You simply make

11     an interrogatory remark at the end of a long statement.  That is not

12     proper cross-examination.  What you're doing is making submissions

13     disguised as cross-examination, and the time will come for you to make

14     proper submissions.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, you said that a major obstacle to the

17     investigations into the sniper incidents was created by the fact that the

18     Serbs were using fragmentation ammunition.  Can you please tell us what

19     you meant by that?

20        A.   I don't remember saying that this posed an obstacle, but I do

21     recall being asked, in a previous situation, the same question, and I

22     remember stating that, during firing at trams - because in one of the

23     cases that I investigated, this was the case - so-called fragmentation

24     ammunition was used.  I'm not a ballistics experts, so all I know about

25     that is that this would be a fire-arm bullet, a rifle in this case,

Page 8572

 1     which, in contact with a certain surface, would burst into fragments, a

 2     number of fragments, and such a bullet can wound, injure, and kill more

 3     than one person.

 4        Q.   On the fifth page of your latest statement, fourth paragraph from

 5     the top, you say that it was customary for the army of the Bosnian Serbs

 6     to use fragmentation bullets.  Do you know that this ammunition is

 7     banned?

 8        A.   It's banned, Dr. Karadzic, just as the siege of a town with a

 9     population of 400.000 is banned, but it still took place.  I know

10     fragmentation ammunition is banned.  The use of cluster bombs is also

11     banned, but it was still used.

12        Q.   Thank you, thank you, thank you.  Do you know that such

13     ammunition does not exist for a rifle?

14             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat his answer.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Sir, with all due respect --

17             JUDGE KWON:  Both of you were overlapping.  The interpreters

18     couldn't follow.  We stopped with the question whether -- Mr. Miokovic,

19     whether you know that such ammunition does not exist for a rifle.  Can

20     you start from there again?  What was your answer, Mr. Miokovic?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I am not a ballistics

22     expert.  What I do know is that on several occasions -- on plenty of

23     occasions during investigations into sniper fire at trams, in the

24     investigation of such cases, I was told by technicians and ballistics

25     experts, in an official manner at the scene, that in a specific case what

Page 8573

 1     was most probably used was fragmentation ammunition.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Can you please look at your statement on page 5 and allow me that

 4     because your statement is admitted, I must dispute everything or I must

 5     attempt to prove everything.  You did not say that in any conditional

 6     form.  What remains in the statement will be admitted.  Such ammunition

 7     does not exist.  Such an ammunition must have an explosive charge; isn't

 8     that right?

 9        A.   I don't know.

10        Q.   So why did you say something that you don't know?  Did you ever

11     see us having obtained such ammunition?  Did we ever obtain such

12     ammunition?  And can you please tell us, who manufactured such ammunition

13     and such rifles?

14        A.   I was never interested in your procurements.  And the second

15     thing is, I'm saying this once again:  What is stated in my official

16     reports as for technical details among other things, that I put

17     ammunition that was probably used, was something I was informed about by

18     my colleagues, who were experts in that field, who were at the scene.

19        Q.   Thank you.  You said a lot of things off the cuff, Mr. Miokovic,

20     and now I have to cancel that out.  Isn't it correct that you were quite

21     approximate in the positions that you stated?

22             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat his answer.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.

24             Please put a pause between the question and answer.  The

25     interpreters couldn't hear your answer, Mr. Miokovic.

Page 8574

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that this is Dr. Karadzic's

 2     assessment.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 4        Q.   Can we now focus on the incident of the 8th of November, 1994, in

 5     Livanjska Ulica.  You were at that on-scene investigation?  If possible

 6     can you please answer with yes or no, and I'm going to try to put my

 7     questions in that way.

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   The first investigative judge in that incident was

10     Milorad Potparic; is that correct?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Thank you.  At what time did you go to the scene?

13        A.   In order to answer that question, I would kindly like to look at

14     my official report on the screen.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

16             Can we now look at 65 ter 09678.  I think this is probably a P

17     exhibit.  This is 65 ter 09678.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  That's P1704.  Thank you.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it's okay to publish the

20     name.  It's not a problem.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Is this the report from this incident?

23        A.   Yes, it is.

24        Q.   You were informed at a quarter to 4.00.  At what time did you

25     actually go to the scene of the incident?

Page 8575

 1        A.   That is not specified in my report, so I can just estimate that

 2     this was perhaps at around 1610 hours.  I really don't remember exactly

 3     anymore.

 4        Q.   And what about how early it got dark on the 8th of November in

 5     Sarajevo?

 6        A.   I cannot answer that question precisely, but I'm quite sure that,

 7     as far as that is concerned, the conditions were quite sufficient for us

 8     to be able to conduct our investigation on the scene.

 9        Q.   Then at 1640 hours, people from UNPROFOR turned up, military

10     observers in one vehicle and other people from UNPROFOR in another

11     vehicle; is that correct?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And then you had a misunderstanding with them, and you prevented

14     them from accessing the scene and participating in the inquiry?

15        A.   I cannot answer that question with a yes or no, in any case,

16     because the answer, itself, if you wish to have an answer, requires me to

17     elaborate.  I cannot answer with a yes or a no.

18        Q.   All right.  Then after talking with them -- you can look at your

19     statement.  This is page 8, and I think this is in the previous

20     statement, where you say that after 1640 hours, you began your

21     investigation activities.  Is that correct?

22        A.   I don't see that on the screen, Dr. Karadzic.  I really don't

23     know.

24        Q.   This is the third page of your previous statement.  The ERN

25     number --

Page 8576

 1             THE INTERPRETER:  Could Mr. Karadzic please repeat the ERN

 2     number.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  What page, Mr. Karadzic?

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Page -- ERN 0305-9529.  This is the

 5     ERN number of the translation.

 6             MR. GAYNOR:  This statement has been incorporated into the

 7     amalgamated statement, so essentially Mr. Karadzic is referring to page 3

 8     of the amalgamated statement.  It's the same evidence.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it's formulated a little bit

10     differently here, so the previous statement is a bit more precise.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   So you completed your conversation with them at 1640 hours and

13     you started the investigation; is that correct?

14        A.   We began the investigation even before the military observers and

15     the UNPROFOR members came to the scene.  It's been a long time since

16     then, so I'm unable to remember the precise time.

17        Q.   Well, you were asked about this in other cases, but now I'm going

18     to read that paragraph:

19             "I came back to the scene, and one of my people told me that

20     Major Iki" something - from Kenya, probably - "tried to pull out a shell

21     from the ground, but it was so firmly stuck in the ground that it could

22     not be moved.  My men warned him not to do that.  Then we began the

23     investigation."

24             According to this statement, you began the investigation at 1640

25     hours.

Page 8577

 1        A.   I remember very well that event and what I stated.  What I'm

 2     absolutely sure about, and it's very simple to establish that by looking

 3     at the video footage which is part of this official report, is that even

 4     before the UNMOs and the UNPROFOR soldiers came, we began the

 5     investigation.

 6        Q.   And you came to the scene after 4.00; is that correct?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   And you finished at 1655 hours?

 9        A.   Yes, that's what it says in my statements, but I repeat, once

10     again, that I cannot, after such a long time, confirm the exact timeline.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Can you please tell me whether you invited them to

12     participate, or did you prevent them from attending and participating in

13     the investigation, themselves?

14        A.   Two military observers first came to the scene, and they were

15     immediately told -- it was explained to them what this was all about very

16     quickly.  After them, the two combat vehicles, as far as I can remember,

17     came to the scene which were usually used by members of the French

18     UNPROFOR battalion.  One soldier, in full combat kit, came out of the

19     vehicle, together with an interpreter, and he set off towards the scene

20     of the incident.  I note that in this event, one little girl was killed

21     on the spot.  A number of persons were wounded, some of whom died later.

22     There was a certain number of people there, citizens.  I mean, simply,

23     the atmosphere there at the scene was very tense because of everything

24     that had happened and because of the fact that throughout that whole

25     time, the shelling of the town was going on.

Page 8578

 1             This French soldier who started to move towards the location was

 2     a little bit unusual.  I stepped in front of him and asked him, through

 3     his interpreter, what does he want, why was he going there.  This was not

 4     the usual way in which UNPROFOR soldiers that worked on investigations

 5     together with us behaved.  He said that he just came to see the scene,

 6     and I warned him that the atmosphere was what it was and that there is no

 7     problem, that they can do the investigation together with us, but we

 8     would need to follow the usual procedures.  He called somebody on the

 9     radio, spoke with them, and immediately -- actually, before that, he said

10     that they were very quickly going to come to the scene.  Then he got into

11     his vehicle, and then he left.

12             Immediately after he -- after those soldiers left, the scene --

13     the military observers also left the scene who were informed about all

14     the relevant information that we had had up until that time at the

15     location.

16        Q.   Thank you.  You acted as the leader of the on-site investigation

17     team; correct?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   In other words, had this gentleman behaved differently, you would

20     allow them to attend the on-site investigation; correct?

21        A.   His intention was never to attend the on-site investigation.

22     That's not why he was there.  Was that the reason why he had come there,

23     he would have done it, but his reasons were elsewhere.

24        Q.   What were his reasons, Mr. Miokovic?

25        A.   Well, he just said, I came to see what was going on.  I told him

Page 8579

 1     what was going on.  Then he exchanged a few words with someone, and he

 2     said, Very soon our team will come as well.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  A few moments ago, you said that his conduct was the

 4     reason why you prevented him from attending the scene, the crime scene.

 5     Was the conduct, his conduct, the reason -- and you said it wasn't fair.

 6     Was that the reason why you didn't let him attend the scene?

 7        A.   Well, I didn't say "his conduct," I said "his body language."

 8     For instance, the way he carried his rifle, I assessed and I was quite

 9     certain that he was not a member of an investigation team.  His bearing

10     was military, and in the situation in which I found myself, I judged that

11     such a conduct of his could be -- could jeopardise both him and his men,

12     as well as the investigation itself.

13        Q.   Thank you.  Now, had he not been armed, your position would have

14     been different; correct?

15        A.   They were always armed.  But it's one thing to have your rifle on

16     your shoulder and the other thing is to have it -- to hold it in your

17     hands almost cocked.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Is it correct that before that incident, you had

19     taken the position - when I say "you," I mean investigators - that

20     UNPROFOR should not be allowed to attend the on-site investigations and

21     that they should not be allowed to conduct an investigation before you

22     had a chance to do it?

23        A.   Yes, that's correct.

24        Q.   Who convened the meeting where this position was taken?

25        A.   I cannot recall who it was, exactly.  It was probably some -- an

Page 8580

 1     authorised person.  But that meeting was convened at our prompting, the

 2     investigators' prompting, the investigator in the Violent Crimes

 3     Department of the Sarajevo CSB, the persons who normally conducted this

 4     type of on-site investigation.

 5        Q.   On page 2 of your amalgamated statement, you say that it was

 6     standard practice within the centre for investigative procedures --

 7             [In English] "It had been a practice for UNPROFOR, who were more

 8     mobile and better organised up until then, to get to the scene before us.

 9     Then they then took the trace, such as shell fragments, which were then

10     vital to our investigation.  After taking the traces of evidence, they

11     would issue a report that we were not able to challenge."

12             [Interpretation] Was it possible to check and repeat every

13     on-site investigation?  And I mean reconstruct it.

14        A.   What type of investigation do you mean?

15        Q.   Well, on-site investigations.

16        A.   Well, every on-site investigation that was conducted was properly

17     documented.  What do you mean, was it possible to check them?

18        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, what was it that prompted you on this occasion to

19     issue an order to the effect that no one should be allowed to attend the

20     scene, and especially so where UNPROFOR members were concerned?  What

21     kind of experiences that you previously had prompted you to do that?

22        A.   Well, Bosnia and Herzegovina at the time --

23        Q.   Let's leave Bosnia and Herzegovina aside.  What was it that

24     prompted you not to allow UNPROFOR to attend on-site investigations that

25     you conducted, that you -- what were the -- what was your past experience

Page 8581

 1     with them that prompted you to take such a decision?

 2        A.   Well, the main task --

 3        Q.   Would you please refrain from giving us lectures here.  Just tell

 4     us why you -- what prompted you and what made you take such conclusions.

 5        A.   Your Honours, these are very serious questions, and the way they

 6     are being put to me, I'm not capable to answer them.  This is a very

 7     serious question.  However, I cannot answer in just one or two sentences.

 8             JUDGE MORRISON:  Dr. Karadzic, you're the author of your own

 9     misfortune.  You asked for yes-and-no answers, and then you ask questions

10     which patently cannot be answered simply yes or no.  And you are also

11     tending to engage in argument with the witness, which is not -- again,

12     not a proper form of cross-examination.  You've got to think about these

13     things more carefully.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor.

15             MR. GAYNOR:  No, that's quite all right.  I was simply saying

16     that Mr. Karadzic claimed that the witness was giving us lectures.  The

17     witness has not been giving us lectures at all.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Not at all.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, I accept the Trial Chamber's -- I will accept the

21     Trial Chamber's instructions.  I will try to be more specific, and,

22     please, would you also be more specific in your answers.

23             Now, was this conclusion or this position taken at someone's

24     initiative at this meeting of all police investigators in Sarajevo?

25        A.   It was a conclusion or a position taken exclusively on the basis

Page 8582

 1     of the needs of our service, because it was our responsibility under the

 2     law to collect all relevant material evidence.  Now, in practice, there

 3     were frequent instances where UNPROFOR, precisely for the reasons that

 4     you quoted that I mentioned in my statement, actually reaches the site

 5     before us, collects all that evidence, and then, once we arrive there in

 6     order to conduct an on-site investigation, there was no more trace

 7     evidence there.  And I would like to stress here, again, we at the CSB,

 8     the Sarajevo CSB, did not attend UNPROFOR on-site investigations.  It was

 9     our legal obligation to document each incident, and it was the free -- it

10     was at the UNPROFOR's will to actually assess whether they want to check

11     it or not.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Mr. Miokovic, now, you say in your statement that

13     UNPROFOR would issue a report that then you could not contest; in other

14     words, you were bothered by their investigative practices.  Now, could

15     you please tell us what it was that bothered you?  What practices or what

16     techniques did the UNPROFOR implement that you object to, that led you to

17     act as you did?  Could you give us some example?

18        A.   Well, I really can't.  I don't know.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In other words, in practice, there

21     were instances where UNPROFOR, either publicly or addressing themselves

22     to the officials of Bosnia and Herzegovina, would put forth some

23     statements that had to do with one of the incidents, either shelling or

24     sniping, and where their findings were not consistent with what our

25     findings were.  In order to avoid misunderstandings and to come to the --

Page 8583

 1     I can't really say "absolute truth," but to try to establish the truth to

 2     the best of our abilities about a certain incident, the only thing that

 3     we insisted on was to be able to conduct an on-site investigation in a

 4     fair manner and in keeping with the usual practices within our

 5     profession, and that is why we demanded that no investigation be

 6     conducted until our investigative team came to the scene.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, did the investigation in Livanjska Street -- was it

 9     a representative sample of your service's way of conducting an

10     investigation?

11        A.   Well, I don't think this is a representative sample for a simple

12     reason:  The circumstances in which we conducted this on-site

13     investigation were really impossible, even for Sarajevo, but we did try

14     to follow the procedure that was the standard procedure.

15        Q.   Well, what would your objections be to this on-site

16     investigation, or, rather, to this report?  What is it that is missing

17     from it, regardless of what the reasons were?  Or, rather, what is

18     missing from this on-site investigation?

19        A.   Well, I can't really see that there's anything missing in this

20     official report.

21        Q.   In other words, it is a representative sample.  If we are able to

22     explore this one thoroughly, then that would be tantamount to having

23     explored all the other ones?

24        A.   Well, I can't really say that.  I can't say that in wartime

25     conditions you could say that there is a representative sample.

Page 8584

 1        Q.   Thank you.  Now, did the investigating judge authorise you to be

 2     the team leader, and did he issue a written statement to that effect?

 3        A.   Written decisions are not normally issued, and that's not

 4     something that is normal procedure, but he did authorise me to conduct

 5     this on-site investigation.

 6        Q.   In doing so, did he know that you did not -- that you do not have

 7     a college -- university degree?

 8        A.   Well, I doubt it.

 9        Q.   In other words, he thought that you do have -- did have a college

10     degree?

11        A.   Well, Your Honour, I was not an illegal police employee.  I had

12     been a police officer for many years up until then, and I believe that

13     Mr. Potparic perhaps didn't even know whom he was talking to, I mean,

14     personally.  He was the investigating judge, and I was the police officer

15     at the scene, and he was the person issuing orders that I had to follow.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Yesterday, on page 16, lines 2 and 3 -- well, let me

17     ask you this before:  What was the purpose of conducting the

18     Livanjska Street investigation?

19        A.   I don't understand your question.

20        Q.   Well, was it conducted in order to bring the perpetrators to

21     court?

22        A.   Well, it was our deep conviction -- or at least it was our deep

23     desire to see all and each and every one of our on-site investigation

24     reports reviewed before a court.

25        Q.   In other words, your answer is, yes, you conducted this

Page 8585

 1     investigation in the effort to have the perpetrators brought to justice?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Yesterday, on page 16, on top, you said that

 4     investigating judges always attended on-site investigations, that was the

 5     case then, whereas today it would be the prosecutor, and then there would

 6     also be a police officer conducting an investigation who would have a

 7     university degree?

 8        A.   Well, either you did not understand what I said or you're

 9     misquoting here.  You should make a difference between an investigation

10     and a forensic on-site investigation.  A forensic on-site investigation

11     is only a portion of the overall investigation.

12        Q.   Well, was this on-site investigation irrelevant?

13        A.   No, of course not.  It was very important.  In this case, it was

14     even crucial.

15             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection, Mr. President.

16             I think Mr. Karadzic has, in fact, misquoted the evidence.  And

17     just for the record, I want to quote the question and answer.

18             The question was:

19             "When we talk about the crime of murder, is it important for the

20     Court that the investigation was conducted by an investigating judge?

21             "A.  At that time, that was an investigating judge.  Nowadays,

22     it's a prosecutor."

23             And he goes on with his answer.

24             The reason I raise it now is because this is not the first time

25     Mr. Karadzic has blatantly misquoted the evidence -- the prior evidence

Page 8586

 1     of a witness during cross-examination.  Thank you.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  I'm telling you, Mr. Karadzic, for the third time,

 3     come to your specific questions about this case.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Very well.

 5        Q.   Witness, on page 3, you go on to say that it was standard

 6     procedure to determine the direction from which the shell came; correct?

 7        A.   That was established by my colleagues, ballistics expert, who

 8     attended the crime scene together with the forensic technicians, of

 9     course.

10        Q.   What method was used to establish that?

11        A.   I'm not a ballistics expert, and I don't know what method was

12     used to establish that, in general, let alone in this particular case.

13        Q.   In this particular case, did your conclusion differ again from

14     UNPROFOR's?

15        A.   In my previous answer, I tried to explain how the whole thing

16     proceeded vis-a-vis UNPROFOR in this particular case.  So speaking of the

17     8th of November, after the on-site investigation was carried out, as far

18     as I know, UNPROFOR did not have any information about this incident

19     other than what we had forwarded to them.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Now I would like to refer you to the first page of

21     your on-site investigation report, where you mention six individuals who

22     participated in this investigation under your leadership.  Which of these

23     individuals is a ballistics expert?

24        A.   Mirza Sabljica.

25        Q.   Did he submit a report in which he determined the direction of

Page 8587

 1     the shell?

 2        A.   Are you referring to what he did on the spot?

 3        Q.   Generally speaking, did you compile your report based on that?

 4        A.   Again, with all due respect, are we talking about this official

 5     report that I see in front of me on the screen?

 6        Q.   Yes, yes, the first one you submitted on the 8th of November.

 7     You submitted it the very same day.

 8        A.   Now I understand what you mean.

 9             The procedure is as follows --

10        Q.   Can you please -- do not try to educate us on that.  Did you

11     submit this report on the very same day, at the request of the Presidency

12     of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

13             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection, Mr. President.

14             Mr. Karadzic --

15             JUDGE KWON:  It is not a proper statement.  Once you ask the

16     question, let the witness -- the witness is entitled to answer in what

17     form he wants to answer.

18             That's what you wanted to say, Mr. Gaynor?

19             MR. GAYNOR:  That's quite right, Mr. President.  Thank you.

20             JUDGE KWON:  And often you overlap.  On your part, put a pause

21     between the answer and the question.

22             And we'll come to the question of -- you referred to

23     Mr. Sabljica's report, and you come to the question abruptly as to the

24     date of his submission of statement.  What was your question,

25     Mr. Karadzic?

Page 8588

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Miokovic was asked about --

 2     actually, he asked which report I was referring to.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   But I'm asking you:  Is it true or not that you, on the same day,

 5     at the request of the Presidency, submitted your report?

 6        A.   With all due respect, you are again mixing up things.  What you

 7     see on the screen is my official report.  It was my duty -- it was

 8     incumbent upon me that as soon as I get back to my office from any

 9     on-site investigation, to draft this official report containing all this

10     information that you can see here, including the technical details that

11     were provided to me by the ballistic expert and the criminal

12     investigation technicians as preliminary information.  This official

13     report is only one integral part of the case file that, after the

14     ballistics expert and forensic technicians do their work, was submitted

15     to the judge.  This official report of mine was never submitted to the

16     Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, nor was it compiled with that

17     purpose in mind.

18        Q.   In -- I'm sorry, I have to -- in your statement, you said that at

19     2000 hours on that same day, the UNPROFOR spokesman - that's

20     paragraph 3 - said at the press conference that the Bosnian police had

21     not allowed them to carry out an investigation.

22        A.   To be present during the investigation, that's correct.

23        Q.   To conduct an investigation.

24        A.   That's correct.

25        Q.   Then on the same page, you said that you had ordered the

Page 8589

 1     investigation to be finalised by 1730, but that the next shell came at

 2     5.20?

 3        A.   I don't understand your question.  Can you please be more

 4     specific?  What do you want me to answer?

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Witness, do you have your statement in front of

 6     you?  Do we have a B/C/S version of this?

 7             MR. GAYNOR:  No, the amalgamated statement is just in English.

 8     There should be a B/C/S version of the original statement.  I'll try to

 9     find that now.

10             JUDGE KWON:  If you'd like to put your question, Mr. Karadzic,

11     give an exact citation and put the question accordingly.

12             What your statement says is like this, Mr. Miokovic.  For your

13     information, I will read it out:

14             "On that same day, on a press conference held by UNPROFOR at

15     8.00 p.m. that evening, a spokesman said to the journalist that Bosnian

16     police had not allowed them to carry out an investigation.  On that same

17     evening, our minister of interior passed an order to prepare the report

18     because it was requested by the presidency of the state, and I did."

19             So that's what you said in your statement, and Mr. Karadzic asked

20     about -- asked whether it was done by the request of the Presidency.

21     That was the question.  Can you answer the question again?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

23             This official report, which is in front of me at the moment, is a

24     single document.  When, at 2000 hours, the UNPROFOR announced everything

25     that was said, I was informed by my superiors everything that you already

Page 8590

 1     quoted.  The minister was interested to know what happened with our

 2     communication with UNPROFOR and whether it was true that UNPROFOR did not

 3     attend the investigation.  Of course, I sent a separate report on those

 4     questions to the minister.  He, or the Presidency, were not interested at

 5     all in the data that is in the document in front of me.  I prepared this

 6     document, and I described how things happened, and I passed this on to

 7     the minister through proper channels.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Miokovic.

 9             Don't argue with the witness.  Put your questions one by one.

10             Please continue.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   Is it true that you ordered the investigation to be finalised by

13     5.30, and that at 5.25 another shell fell?

14        A.   After UNPROFOR departed, I waited for about 10 minutes after the

15     completion of our investigation, expecting them to come and for me to

16     give them information that they would require.  Since they failed to

17     appear, and the shelling was in progress, I issued an order for all the

18     relevant clues and evidence to be collected from the spot and that we

19     remove ourselves from the scene.  What I can assert with full

20     responsibility, at 5.25, when, at about 20 or 50 metres from the

21     investigation site, another shell fell, my investigation team was not on

22     the spot.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Is it true that the reason why you conducted this

24     investigation in such a hasty manner, the reason that you cited was that

25     there were shells falling in the general area?

Page 8591

 1        A.   Yes, I did say that we conducted our investigation under such

 2     circumstances.

 3        Q.   But the next shell fell only at 5.25; is that correct?

 4        A.   I'm not sure that the term "only" is an appropriate one when you

 5     speak about shells.  Had my team been there on the spot when the shell

 6     fell only at 2.25 [as interpreted], I cannot imagine what the

 7     consequences would be, but I believe that both I and my team would be in

 8     direct danger.

 9        Q.   Are we then to take it that while you were on the spot after

10     5.00, no shells fell in your vicinity?

11        A.   No, not in this micro-area.

12        Q.   Do you say that the initial finding of the French UNPROFOR of the

13     9th of November, 1994, specified that the shell was fired from the

14     position of BH Army?

15        A.   I only attended this investigation, and I say "attended" because

16     the investigating judge was there at the time.  What I do remember is

17     that the ballistic experts from the CSB and the republican ministry

18     conducted their separate investigations, whereas members of the French

19     Battalion did their investigations.  Their findings concerning the origin

20     of fire of the shell were identical.  However, there was a dilemma

21     whether the shell had been fired from the positions of BH Army or the

22     Republika Srpska Army, and UNPROFOR's argument was that the charge of the

23     shell was insufficient for it to arrive at the spot had it been fired by

24     the VRS.  In order to corroborate that, they provided information from

25     Finnish tables, I believe, to which our ballistic expert provided them

Page 8592

 1     with another table that had been used by the Yugoslav People's Army, and

 2     that there was some discrepancy in the charges.  The Finnish tables did

 3     not take into account the charges that existed in the shells used by the

 4     former JNA.

 5        Q.   We'll come to that later.  Is it true that on the 9th this case

 6     was taken over by another investigating judge?

 7        A.   Another investigating judge became involved primarily in order to

 8     conduct an investigation on the second and third shells that fell on the

 9     8th, the one at 5.25 and 5.30.  Because members of the UNPROFOR were

10     already there, wishing to investigate the first shell that fell at 5.30,

11     but I'm not sure about the times any longer, then the investigating judge

12     instructed our team to join in into this reconstruction.

13        Q.   Thank you.  So the investigating judge for the first shell was a

14     Serb, Milorad Potparic, whereas the investigating judge for the other two

15     shells was a Muslim; is that correct?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Thank you.  Let me quote the words of Mr. Sabljica, who is stated

18     as a ballistic expert in your report.  It's document 20874, 65 ter,

19     page 3.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit 1735, Your Honours.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Could you please focus on paragraph 7, where it reads:

23             "I saw these were Finnish mortar tables.  He explained that they

24     used the maximum charge for their calculations.  When comparing it to our

25     tables, we saw that the maximum tables of the Finnish tables correspond

Page 8593

 1     with the second or the third charge indicated in our tables, in which we

 2     have six possible charges.  Then we showed them our tables, which were

 3     original JNA documents, which indicate --"

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the accused please indicate the second

 5     part that he's reading from.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know what kind of answer

 7     you're expecting me to give.

 8             Your Honours, I honestly don't understand.  I absolutely don't

 9     understand what I am being asked, and I cannot answer this question.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's not recorded in the

11     transcript --

12             JUDGE KWON:  Just put a pause.  Your question was not noted by

13     the interpreter, so that we couldn't understand what your question was.

14     What was your question?

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Do you agree that this is what Mr. Sabljica stated in this

17     statement?  Is that correct?

18             JUDGE KWON:  How can he know what Mr. Sabljica stated or not?

19     What is your question?  This is Mr. Sabljica's statement, and what is

20     your question?

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With all due respect,

22     Your Excellency, Mr. Miokovic was a team leader.  He was responsible for

23     this investigation in every respect.  Sabljica was his co-worker.  He,

24     himself, mentioned the Finnish tables.

25             JUDGE KWON:  What is your question, Mr. Karadzic, to the witness?

Page 8594

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, the third and particularly the second charge,

 3     according to the JNA tables, indicate that the shell had been fired from

 4     the territory of BH Army, and that was something that you took an issue

 5     with?

 6        A.   Your Honours, at the time when this on-site investigation was

 7     carried out, I was not the team leader.  The investigating judge, Izet

 8     Bazdarevic, was the team leader.  Never had I in any way whatsoever got

 9     myself directly involved in any technical discussions conducted by

10     experts.  I still don't know what is the difference between the second

11     and the third charge of mortar shells, neither according to the Finnish

12     or to the tables of the former Yugoslav People's Army.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now have 1D02264.  1D02264.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  This is Exhibit D738, Your Honours.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now have page 9.

16             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   Is that the report, the technical report; is that correct?  Are

18     you familiar with this map and this diagram, this drawing?

19        A.   This is the first time that I'm seeing this.

20        Q.   Can you see that, according to their tables, a shell has eight

21     charges and not four, as stated by your ballistics expert?

22        A.   Your Honours, with all due respect, I really don't want to go

23     into the merits of the technical portion of the report, because I'm not

24     qualified to do that.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, you are simply wasting your time.  We

Page 8595

 1     heard the witness's answer, that he was not in the position to answer

 2     these technical questions.

 3             Was that your point, Mr. Gaynor?

 4             MR. GAYNOR:  That's correct, Mr. President, yes.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  The Chamber is concerned about your way of putting

 6     your questions, in particular today.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, like this, Your Excellency:

 8     This witness said that the conflict -- or the misunderstanding between

 9     them and the UNPROFOR investigation team was in the Finnish tables, and

10     that is not correct.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   The dispute was about the point of firing, isn't that right, that

13     the UNPROFOR concluded that this was fired from the territory under the

14     control of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina?  Yes or no.  That was

15     their conclusion.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Was that a question, Mr. Karadzic?

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That was the question.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Was the dispute, or, rather, the misunderstanding between your

20     team and the UNPROFOR team relating to the place of firing, and they

21     claim that this was fired from the territory that was under the control

22     of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

23        A.   Until the decision was made to use one set of tables or the

24     other.  But, still, this was a conversation between the technical part of

25     the team.  I listened to this conversation, but did not take part in any

Page 8596

 1     element of that conversation, so I don't know what the official

 2     conclusion of UNPROFOR is on this matter.

 3        Q.   You don't know whether they accepted your suggestions or not.  Do

 4     you know that what you're talking about, this difference in the tables,

 5     is not true and that they actually used Yugoslav tables; do you know

 6     that?

 7        A.   No, I don't know that.

 8        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, do you know that they made a comparison of the

 9     values of the tables, and that you did not convince them that it was what

10     you were saying; that they stayed by their own findings?

11        A.   I've already said that, and I'm repeating it again.  Thus, even

12     now, when you and I are talking, I don't know what the definitive

13     conclusion of UNPROFOR was in this matter.

14        Q.   Well, Mr. Miokovic, this is what it says on page 4 in your --

15     that you -- after the investigation, you went to the premises, and that

16     you looked over the findings, that you established -- you said that they

17     had used Finnish tables, that they showed you something else, and that

18     you saw their report here in 2007 in court.  Is that correct?

19        A.   I would like to have on the screen all of the things that you

20     have just mentioned so that I can remind myself.

21        Q.   Page 14 of your statement.  In response to a question:

22             [In English] "I remember that the UNPROFOR carried out some

23     measurements there, and that they conducted an on-site investigation.  I

24     also know that it was a common practice then in such situation."

25             [Interpretation] Then you go on to say that:

Page 8597

 1             [In English] "All these named parameters coincided.  With regard

 2     of the position of UNPROFOR in relation to local police, I am referring

 3     exclusively to the city of Sarajevo.  Mind you, UNPROFOR was not obliged

 4     to officially inform police of their findings.  Yesterday or the day

 5     before yesterday - correct me if I'm wrong - I saw UNPROFOR's official

 6     report about this on-site investigation about these two mortar shells for

 7     the first time."

 8             [Interpretation] So it's not new to you now.  You said a little

 9     bit earlier that you'd never seen it, you don't know what their

10     conclusion was, but at the trial of General Milosevic, you did see that

11     report, and you did see that there is a difference there from your

12     report.

13        A.   I would ask you again, if possible, for me to have what you have

14     allegedly now quoted and what have you in front of you.  I stand by every

15     word in every proceedings that I have been in, but in this way I cannot

16     answer that.

17        Q.   Well, the problem is that there is no amalgamated statement of

18     yours in the Serbian.

19             But this is page 14, so I would like the Prosecution to help

20     their witness.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Why don't you bring that up, Exhibit P1830, page 14.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] From line 23 to 35.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Miokovic, do you read English?  Is it okay?  So

24     shall I read it so you can hear the interpretation or you can read your

25     statement in English?

Page 8598

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is sufficient, Your Honours.

 2     I just need a little bit of time to read it.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What is written here stands, with

 5     the proviso that from this context, I'm really unable to tell what I

 6     meant when I said "UNPROFOR report," whether that was what was published

 7     in the media, because at this point I really don't recall that I saw an

 8     official report of UNPROFOR on this event.  I don't remember reading it

 9     carefully and checking it.  And in the end, for me, professionally, in

10     this situation the position of UNPROFOR was not a decisive matter, as far

11     as I was concerned.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Did they have smaller professional capacities than your team?

14        A.   I doubt that.  Quite the contrary, I believe that they did have

15     the capacity and, I assume, also the personnel that was capable of

16     performing the job properly.

17        Q.   And their conclusion was that the shell came in from the

18     territory under the control of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina; is

19     that correct?

20        A.   I don't see that conclusion of theirs, Dr. Karadzic.  I really

21     don't see it.  I don't know whether they officially confirmed, wrote, and

22     signed what you have just said.

23        Q.   So what was the disagreement between UNPROFOR and your team,

24     then?

25             MR. GAYNOR:  Mr. President, if Dr. Karadzic is going to keep

Page 8599

 1     referring to this report, it's already in evidence at D738.  The

 2     conclusion of the UNPROFOR team is at the third page of that report.  And

 3     in my submission, it's already in evidence, Your Honours have it, they

 4     have the Bosnian reports as well, and they have all the relevant evidence

 5     relating to this incident, and Your Honours can consider that at the

 6     opportune moment.  This cross-examination is going well beyond this

 7     witness's participation in the investigation.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  I agree.

 9             It's time to take a break for 20 minutes, and we'll move on to

10     another topic.

11                           [The witness stands down]

12                           --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.

13                           --- On resuming at 10.56 a.m.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, for

16     allowing me to address you.

17             I have to state that this case is a blatant case of all the

18     things that happened in Sarajevo.  What happened here is that they

19     changed the direction of the first shell and did not allow UNPROFOR to

20     investigate the case.  They moved the direction or the axis of the

21     direction from which the shell had come.  They did not have time to do

22     the same with the second shell, and the UNPROFOR then concluded that it

23     had come from the Muslim side.  So that's number 1.  They had not allowed

24     UNPROFOR to attend the site on the first day, and then they tried to say

25     that the Kenyan member of the UNPROFOR had tried to manipulate this.

Page 8600

 1             Now, I would like to have an additional 10 minutes to show how

 2     this all happened there and how it was done, and all the things that are

 3     being imputed to me, which is why I'm sitting here as the accused.

 4     That's very simple.  He has to know this because he was the person who

 5     took the photographs away.  If he's not a ballistics expert, okay, but

 6     these things he must be aware of because he was the one who did these

 7     things.

 8             And I do admit that I'm not being very efficient today, but this

 9     is because of the witness, who is refusing to answer properly or

10     directly.

11             JUDGE MORRISON:  Well, Dr. Karadzic, it would be a brave man who

12     said that he was efficient every day.

13             We realise very much the direction in which you wish to go in

14     this.  You will understand that we've all been in this business for many

15     years.  It isn't the relevance of the central thrust of your

16     cross-examination that's the problem.  It's been the way in which it was

17     conducted.

18             If you have a direct point to make to the witness concerning the

19     issues that you've just raised in the last few minutes, then put them

20     directly to the witness, as direct questions, and see what the response

21     is.

22             We're not trying to stop you cross-examining.  What we're trying

23     to do is make it more focused, and that's really for two reasons:  First,

24     to make it more time efficient, and, secondly, to make sure that you get

25     out of the cross-examination that which you need to get out of it.  That

Page 8601

 1     mustn't be seen, as it were, as any bias towards you.  But we well

 2     recognise that you are not a professional lawyer and the Prosecution

 3     lawyers are professional lawyers, and so, to a degree, there is latitude

 4     being given to you to take that into account.  But it can only be to a

 5     degree.  There cannot be an unreservedly open account in respect of

 6     either time or methodology.

 7             It may be, and this is something -- I'm speaking entirely for

 8     myself now, this is not something that the Trial Chamber has discussed in

 9     the absence -- in our short absence recently, but I'm just speaking for

10     myself.  It's something I'm thinking aloud, in essence.  It may be that

11     without, in any sense, giving up your right to self-representation, that

12     there are some witnesses that you would feel it better to delegate

13     cross-examination to a professional lawyer.  I don't expect a response

14     from you instantly on that, but I think it's something you ought to think

15     about, because we've got a long road ahead of us, and the easier it's

16     made is going to be beneficial for all parties.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Let's bring in the witness.

19                           [The witness takes the stand]

20             JUDGE KWON:  My apologies for your inconvenience, Mr. Miokovic.

21     We had something to discuss in your absence.

22             So we'll open the curtain again.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, we will briefly now touch upon some matters that

25     you must have been the one who conducted them.

Page 8602

 1             Is this procedure of collecting evidence, and especially

 2     specifically photo documentation, was that your job?

 3        A.   Well, yes, in the professional sense.  But technically speaking,

 4     that was the work of the forensic technicians.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  It is now for you to ask questions.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Is it correct that the Kenyan UNPROFOR officer tried to recover

 8     the fins -- the tail-fin of the first shell, because that is what you

 9     stated in your statement; correct?

10             MR. GAYNOR:  Excuse me, Mr. President.

11             I don't know why Mr. Karadzic keeps referring to this officer as

12     Kenyan.  The evidence was there was one major from Nigeria and one from

13     Bangladesh.  There are no Kenyan personnel involved.

14             JUDGE KWON:  But we all understood.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My error.  My apologies.

16             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   Did an UNPROFOR officer, wherever he may have been from, try to

18     recover the tail-fin of the first shell?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Did anyone try to recover the tail-fin of the second

21     shell?

22        A.   No, I'm not aware of that.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

24             Can we now have 65 ter 20879, please.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P1702, Your Honours.

Page 8603

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Are you familiar with this sketch?  Is this part of the

 3     investigative file?

 4        A.   I cannot confirm that with certainty because, from what I see on

 5     the monitor, I cannot really infer from that that this sketch actually

 6     relates to this particular case.

 7        Q.   Well, it is from the same file, but never mind.  Can we then

 8     briefly just hear this from you:  Did you take the photo documents?

 9        A.   Well, this on-site investigation also had video documentation, in

10     part.

11        Q.   Thank you.  But do you accept that this sketch is part of your

12     report?  I mean, will you take it from me or do I need to prove that?

13        A.   With all due respect, I would rather not rely on what you're

14     saying.  But if you show me the number or the evidence -- or exhibit

15     number, I will then be able to answer your question.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, thank you.

17             Then let's take a look at the video excerpt, and then we will see

18     whether this was part of the on-site investigation report.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Now, here we see that -- on the sketch that we saw earlier, we

21     saw that the angle -- the incoming angle was 67 degrees; correct?

22        A.   Well, 66.96, that's the angle alpha, if that's what you're

23     referring to.

24        Q.   Well, thank you.  Can you see the time shown here?  It says "1630

25     hours."

Page 8604

 1        A.   Yes, I do.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please watch this carefully.  The

 3     next moment, we will see that it shows "1631."

 4             Can we now please play this video?

 5                           [Video-clip played]

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Can you discern the angle of this stabiliser or tail-fin?

 8        A.   Well, from this photo, I can just conclude that there is a part

 9     called a stabiliser, a tail-fin, but that's all I can conclude.

10        Q.   But isn't the angle almost perpendicular, 90 degrees?

11             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection.

12             The witness has said several times that he's not an expert in

13     ballistics.  That was the role of other members of the team.  This is

14     venturing clearly into the area of ballistics.

15             JUDGE KWON:  I don't think the witness would be able to answer

16     the question from this video-clip.  I tend to agree with Mr. Gaynor's

17     observation.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.  I won't ask him about

19     the angle.  What I want to know is whether the position of this

20     stabiliser, whether it had been altered.

21             Now, please, I would like to ask you all to bear in mind this

22     photo and the position of this tail-fin, and then we'll move on.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   So did this person, or, rather, was this video edited in any way

25     or was it just one video excerpt in continuity?

Page 8605

 1        A.   Well, this video was taken on-site and it was in sequences.  In

 2     other words, it did not cover the entire on-site investigation.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, let's move on.  So we

 4     see it's "1631" here.  Let's move on.  Let's play the video.

 5                           [Video-clip played]

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Now, can you see that there was some intervention here -- that

 8     there was some editing done here on the video?

 9        A.   Well, I don't really understand your question, or your claim.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, let's play it again, and then

11     you will see that there is a cut there.  So this was not actually taped

12     in continuity, there was a cut, but let's play it over again.

13                           [Video-clip played]

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   Here we see the moment; correct?

16        A.   I don't know which moment exactly you're referring to.  I don't

17     understand what you're trying to tell me.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19             Can we now have 1D2675, please.  1D2675.

20             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Would you agree with me that the photo on the left-hand side is a

22     still from the video that we saw a moment ago?  Or, rather, I apologise.

23     The still on the right-hand side.

24        A.   Well, yes, the one on the right-hand side, yes.

25        Q.   Now, can you see that on the left-hand side, we can see the same

Page 8606

 1     tail-fin stabiliser which is a bit differently placed and that the angle

 2     is smaller?

 3        A.   Well, with all due respect, what you're asking me to do is to

 4     speak about things that I am not an expert on.  And in view of the fact

 5     that I'm not an expert on this, I really cannot observe this difference

 6     that you can, comparing these photos.

 7        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, we see a measuring stick, and that was placed there

 8     by your team.  Now, we can see that this is the same exact impact site.

 9     Now, is this curve that we see here, was that -- and this different

10     angle, is that the result of somebody pulling out the stabiliser or is it

11     something else?

12        A.   Well, the only way I can answer your question is this:  Fully

13     aware of the fact that I am under oath as I testify here, I state with

14     full responsibility that any manipulation for the purpose of altering the

15     crime scene or falsifying the evidence, no such manipulation was done

16     here, and I stand by what I've just said.

17        Q.   Thank you.  But can you see that the -- where we see that the

18     asphalt or the pavement is cracked, that it's exactly the same and that

19     the angle at which the stabiliser lies is now a bit different?

20        A.   According to all the features of both of these photographs, I

21     assume -- or, rather, I think that it is the same impact site and the

22     same shell.  The differences that you're referring to, or the

23     similarities, I really cannot comment in any way, in view of the fact how

24     the photographs are taken and whether they're close up or not.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Page 8607

 1             Can we now have 1D2676, please.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Before we move on:  Mr. Miokovic, do you not agree

 3     that in order to say there must have been some alteration or not you have

 4     to see the same picture from the same angle?  These two pictures were

 5     taken from a different angle.  The picture on the right side is a picture

 6     seen from the left side of the left photo.  It's very difficult to tell

 7     there's -- the angle of descent is the same or not from these pictures.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I fully agree with

 9     what you said.  Naturally, I have my own opinion about this.  However,

10     given that I'm not an expert in ballistics, I really don't want to

11     intentionally try to make some speculations and things like that.  I am

12     quite sure that the Court has -- can bring people who would be fully

13     qualified to comment on that.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15             I think that the next photograph is going to show exactly what

16     your question was about, so I would like to call up 1D2676, and

17     eventually we're going to tender these photographs into evidence.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, do you agree that here we have two frames from the

20     video and we have your photograph here?  Let's forget about the angles

21     and the ballistics.  Let's just concentrate on what we can see with the

22     naked eye.  Do these two positions, one on the film and one on the

23     photograph, differ?

24        A.   Your Honours, upon arrival on the site, as always, and in this

25     specific case as well, the first thing to be done was to film and

Page 8608

 1     photograph the position of the fragment of a projectile embedded in the

 2     asphalt, and this is what one can see in these two film frames.

 3             As for the photograph where you can see the stick in position, it

 4     means that in the meantime the criminal investigation technicians have

 5     cleared the area around the mortar shell, itself, in order to enable them

 6     to physically position a benchmark according to which, in the further

 7     proceedings, the angle of descent of the mortar would be determined, and

 8     this is a difference between the situation shown in these two frames as

 9     opposed to the situation in the photograph underneath.  So there is no

10     dispute that before the photo was taken with regard to these frames, the

11     crime-of-scene officer approached the shell in order to clear the space

12     around it for the stick.

13        Q.   Let's leave aside the issue of angle.  It couldn't be less than

14     80, but let's forget about that.

15             Somebody tried to pull out this shell, and its position was

16     altered.  The position of the second shell was not changed, for which the

17     UNPROFOR decided it came from your position.  As for the first one, whose

18     position had been altered, it was determined that it came from the

19     Serbian positions; is that correct?

20        A.   You are again making assertions that you expect me to confirm and

21     to take your word for that.  I don't want and I cannot do that.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

23             Let's move now to the next incident.  But before that, can we

24     have these photographs admitted into evidence?

25             JUDGE KWON:  Let's deal with them one by one.

Page 8609

 1             Do you tender that video-clip?

 2             THE ACCUSED:  [No interpretation]

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Can we have the 65 ter number?  Is it 40574?

 4             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, Mr. President, 40574 is the entire video.  It's

 5     about four minutes long.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, so we have to identify that time portion, but

 7     we didn't.

 8             We'll admit that portion which was shown to the witness, and the

 9     time slot will be identified by the Defence, to be conveyed to the Court

10     Deputy.

11                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

12             JUDGE KWON:  The entire video has been admitted.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  The video is Exhibit P1849, Your Honours.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

15             Could you identify the time slot for the record later on.

16             And then we -- and --

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

18             JUDGE KWON:  And about the photo analysis, do you have any

19     objection, Mr. Gaynor?

20             MR. GAYNOR:  I would like -- I would like to note that this photo

21     compilation has been prepared by the Defence team for Mr. Karadzic.

22             JUDGE KWON:  With that caveat, we'll admit both of them.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  1D2675 will be Exhibit D844, and 1D2676 will be

24     Exhibit D845.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

Page 8610

 1             Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 3        Q.   Did you investigate the sniping incident number 16 from the

 4     F list, the one that took place on the 3rd of March, 1995?

 5        A.   Yes, I can remember taking part in that, but I would kindly ask

 6     for my official report relative to this incident to be placed on the

 7     screen.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In that case, can we have 65 ter

 9     10439, page 6.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   In addition to this report that you made, was there another

12     Sarajevo MUP report produced?

13             JUDGE KWON:  I take it this is P1727.

14             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, I believe so, Mr. President.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know that I made this official

16     report.  But whether there were any other reports, I am not able to tell

17     you at this point in time.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Thank you.  Is it true that we see your names here -- your name

20     here and that you were designated the chief inspector here, because you

21     are number 1?

22        A.   We used to call that the team leader for a specific on-site

23     investigation.

24        Q.   And in this instance, that was you; is that correct?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 8611

 1        Q.   And who set up the team and who appointed you the leader?

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.

 3             Are we looking at the same document?

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The translation refers to another

 5     report that I made reference to.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  Yes, it's coming.  Yes.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   So did Judge Potparic set up a team and appointed you the leader?

 9        A.   The investigating judge is not the one who set up a team.  There

10     is an obligation to notify the investigating judge from the relevant

11     department.  In this instance, I informed the judge, and he, in turn,

12     appointed me the leader of the investigation team.  After that, through

13     proper channels of information, I informed my fellow workers from the

14     Criminal Investigation Ballistics Section to join me in this

15     investigation.

16        Q.   Was there any written order or authorisation issued in this case

17     to the effect that you would be the team leader?

18        A.   As I said earlier, in such situations no written authorities were

19     envisaged by the law.  Consequently, no authorisations of that nature

20     were issued at all.

21        Q.   So according to the law, the judge does not issue or write any

22     orders under the law?

23        A.   Orders relating to what?

24        Q.   An order relating to the investigation and the forming of the

25     team and the on-site investigation.

Page 8612

 1        A.   I'm not aware of any such provision in the law.  In practice,

 2     both during the war and in peacetime, I have never received a written

 3     order from an investigating judge back then or from the prosecutor

 4     nowadays to conduct an on-site investigation.

 5        Q.   I'm sorry, I have to wait for the interpretation to finish.

 6             Did Judge Potparic, himself, visit the scene of crime, and did he

 7     lead the investigation?

 8        A.   In my official report of 3rd March 1995, it is stated that

 9     Judge Potparic led the team, visited the site, and conducted on-site

10     investigation.

11        Q.   So he was the one who commenced it and finalised it; is that

12     correct?

13        A.   It was standard practice for a judge to both commence and

14     complete the on-site investigation once he is present there.  I cannot

15     remember any extraordinary occurrence that would remove him from the

16     spot.  After so many years, I cannot confirm that he was there all the

17     time, but I suppose he was.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now have 65 ter 10439.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Do you know who Mihajlo Pavlovic is?

21        A.   As far as I can remember, at the time Colleague Pavlovic was, I

22     believe, an operative in the Centar Police Station, which in hierarchal

23     terms is one step below the CSB.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25             Can we now have page 5 of this document, page 5 in both the

Page 8613

 1     Serbian and the English, or the previous page.  Yes.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation].

 3        Q.   Is this a report compiled by another investigating team led by

 4     Mihajlo Pavlovic, but your name is also mentioned here as a member of the

 5     team?

 6        A.   Is it possible that I have this report in my own language?  Thank

 7     you.

 8        Q.   Do you agree that in paragraph 2 it says:

 9             "The duty investigating judge of the Sarajevo High Court was

10     notified ..."

11             And then added by hand, "Milorad Potparic, who formed an inquiry

12     commission consisting of ..."  The composition is pretty similar.  We

13     have "Mihajlo Pavlovic," number 1, and number 2, we see

14     "Dragan Miokovic"; is that correct?

15        A.   Yes, it is.

16        Q.   Thank you.  We can see from your report that this incident took

17     place where?

18        A.   Can I have my report on the monitor, please?

19        Q.   Let's first see, according to this report, where this incident

20     occurred.  Can you say specifically at which intersection this happened,

21     according to the report?

22        A.   From what I can see here is that the tram was moving from

23     Cengic Vila towards Bascarsija.  If you can help me find exactly where

24     the location is specified.  The tram was at the intersection of

25     Zmaja od Bosne and Franje Rackog.

Page 8614

 1        Q.   So according to you, this happened at this intersection between

 2     Zmaja od Bosne and Franje Rackog Street; correct?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have the previous page, or,

 5     rather, the next page, in which we see Mr. Miokovic's name first on the

 6     list.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  The next page.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Below the names, is there anywhere where you can determine where

10     this incident happened?

11        A.   You're referring to this paragraph which starts:  "Upon arrival

12     at the scene at the tram stop Marin Dvor ..."

13             Yes, I hereby confirm that the on-site investigation was carried

14     out at tram stop Marin Dvor.

15        Q.   Is the difference between these two locations between 200 and 300

16     metres?

17        A.   Yes, there is a difference.  But I would like to say and

18     underline that in my colleague Mihajlovic's [as interpreted] report, he

19     specifically indicated the place where allegedly the tram was fired on.

20     But in my report, I specify the position of the tram, itself, and the

21     place where the on-site investigation was conducted.

22        Q.   Thank you.  It says the examination of the scene happened in the

23     presence of the Higher Court judge, Mico Potparic; operative of the CSB,

24     Dragan Miokovic; and Mirza Sabljica; and Criminal Investigator Sasa

25     Kurto; is that correct?

Page 8615

 1        A.   I don't have the report in front of me, but that's probably what

 2     it says.

 3        Q.   And what does it say in your report about that?  Let's take a

 4     look.

 5             Can we look at the next page of this report, please.

 6             So you carried out the investigation at a distance of 200 to 300

 7     metres away from the alleged impact point of the bullet; is that correct?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   And then it goes on to say -- can we look at page 2 so that we

10     can see whether the judge carried out the investigation.

11             The investigative judge was informed about this, and then it says

12     that the investigating judge heard that an UNPROFOR soldier was hit, and

13     that he abandoned the on-scene investigation relating to this event.

14             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We don't know where the

15     accused is reading from.

16             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   Is that correct?  The one paragraph but last.  So the

18     investigating judge abandoned an investigation into this case:

19             "UNPROFOR personnel also carried out an investigation on the

20     site"?

21        A.   Yes, I see that.  This document that you are quoting is a

22     dispatch, it's a telegram, simply put, in order to convey information

23     internally within the CSB.  Judge Potparic abandoned the investigation at

24     the scene, or establishing the facts at the scene relating to the fact

25     that an UNPROFOR member was hit, because somebody from the command

Page 8616

 1     personnel of the FrenchBat that was there did not permit the

 2     investigating judge to conduct an investigation.  So the fact that the

 3     judge abandoned the investigation relates to the information that an

 4     UNPROFOR soldier was hit.  It does not imply a suspension of the

 5     investigation which related to the original event or incident due to

 6     which we came to the scene.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have 1D02545, please.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Do you know that one of the victims and a witness here,

10     Alen Gicevic, stated in a statement that he was hit at a tram station at

11     Marin Dvor, the one facing the factory, the tobacco factory, once the

12     tram had passed the Executive Council building?

13             This is not this one.  1D02545, or, rather, 1D02545.

14             Are you aware that Gicevic gave a statement the first time that

15     he was hit after the tram had passed the Executive Council building,

16     somewhere along the stretch of the tobacco factory?

17        A.   I cannot remember that detail after so much time has passed.

18        Q.   Do you see here -- can we have the Serbian version that

19     Mr. Miokovic -- so that Mr. Miokovic can see what Gicevic said.

20             And this was later corrected, but the first statement was that

21     the impact point was at the place where you inspected the tram.

22             Can we look at the Serbian version of this document.

23             JUDGE KWON:  What part of this document do you like the witness

24     to take a look?

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wanted to look at the Serbian

Page 8617

 1     version, because I can find my way around that much more easily.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  I'm advised that there's no B/C/S version for this

 3     information sheet.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Then we are going to

 5     call up the photograph so it can help us to locate or situate this

 6     incident.

 7             Well, can we then have the map while we're waiting for the

 8     photograph?

 9             JUDGE KWON:  You may bear in mind what Judge Morrison told you a

10     moment ago.  The witness said he cannot remember that detail after so

11     much time has passed, and there's no point to put similar questions to

12     the witness.  Just put your case to the witness and hear what he says.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, but we need to situate

14     where the incident happened.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Did you -- did your team establish the angle of the incoming

17     bullet?

18        A.   If this information has been noted down as a preliminary piece of

19     information in my report, or, rather, if within the dossier there is

20     relevant documentation that has to do with that particular segment of the

21     inquiry, then I am able to answer that question for you.  But like this,

22     just going by my memory, I really cannot recall that particular detail in

23     relation to that case.  I cannot speak with any authority about that.

24     It's a question of whether this was established or not established, and

25     I'm sure that this is something that was documented in the report by the

Page 8618

 1     ballistics expert.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 3             Can we look at page 19 of this 10439.  Page 19, 10439, please.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   I'm going to read while we are reading that:

 6             "The mouth of the fire-arm at the moment that the bullet was

 7     fired was on the left side of the tram, behind the tram; namely, the

 8     direction of fire was in relation to the right-hand side of the tram from

 9     the back towards the front, from the right towards the left, and from the

10     top down.  The angle of the trajectory of the bullet in relation to the

11     right side of the tram was 80 degrees."

12        A.   Yes.  Is this the report signed by Zlatko Medjedovic, because

13     I can see that on the screen.

14        Q.   Yes.

15        A.   Yes, I can see what you have read out, the last paragraph.  That

16     is correct.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Can you locate the correct English page for this?

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It says here "Report from the

19     Criminal --" now we're going to look and see where it is.

20             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   The last paragraph:

22             "The mouth of the fire weapon ..."

23             Is that what it says here, "the muzzle."

24        A.   Well, if you are putting this question to me, then, yes, that's

25     what it says.

Page 8619

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  I can't find the similar passage in English.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The last paragraph, the last

 4     paragraph of this page 0331-6379, the ERN number.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  I'm asking the English page.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have the English version on

 7     the right-hand side of the monitor, please.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  That's page 19 of the English version.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Do you agree that it says here that the angle of the trajectory,

11     in relation to the right side of the tram, is 80 degrees, and the angle

12     of the bullet trajectory, in relation to the floor, is 4 degrees?

13        A.   Yes, that's what it says.

14        Q.   Would that be an almost vertical strike, almost at the right

15     angle?

16        A.   I really cannot comment on this, in view of the fact that the

17     angle of the bullet trajectory, in relation to the ground, is something

18     that I really don't know anything about.  I am not a ballistics expert.

19     I don't see a connection between these two pieces of information, this

20     80-degree angle and 4-degree angle.

21        Q.   I think it's page 9 in the English.  Can the participants please

22     pay attention to the top part of the page on the right-hand side.

23             Well, let's leave the angle of 4 degrees.  The angle of 80

24     degrees, does that appear as if the shot was fired almost at a right

25     angle in relation to the tram?

Page 8620

 1        A.   If we only look at that piece of information, then yes.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now have -- well, this page

 3     can stay.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   I would like you to look at the previous paragraph, which states

 6     that:

 7             "The entry point of the first bullet in the tin is located in the

 8     metal of the back part of the tram, right outside side, 84.5 centimetres

 9     from the center of the tram and 153.5 centimetres inside the tram."

10             Is that correct?

11        A.   Yes, that's what it says.

12        Q.   Thank you.  And how thick is the wall, the side of the tram?

13        A.   With all due respect, you are again embarking on technical

14     aspects of this whole matter.  I really have no idea how thick the side

15     wall of the tram is.

16        Q.   All right.  Let's do it like this:  Between 84.5 centimetres,

17     where the bullet entered the wall of the tram, and 6.5 centimetres [as

18     interpreted], the difference between those two measurements is 18

19     centimetres; is that correct?

20        A.   Yes, in simple calculation, that's right.

21        Q.   Well, this does not appear to be a perpendicular angle, but a

22     very sloped angle.  So no matter what the thickness of the wall of the

23     tram was, the bullet would be travelling through the wall of the tram for

24     18 centimetres; is that correct?

25        A.   Your Honours, I really am unable to -- I'm a serious man.  I

Page 8621

 1     cannot participate in the clarification of this kind; not because I don't

 2     want to, but simply because I am not able to follow this terminology.  In

 3     my practice, when I have a case like this, the things that Dr. Karadzic

 4     is talking about are clarified for me and dealt with by my colleagues who

 5     are experts.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  You concluded that the bullet came from Metalka, from

 7     Grbavica, a building which was under the control of the Serbian forces;

 8     is that correct?

 9        A.   I would like to see again my official report so that I could

10     possibly confirm what was just being said.

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We don't have time for that now.

12             Can we now look at --

13             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the accused please repeat the number of

14     the document.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   And is it true that the bullet came from Serbian positions?

17        A.   Yes, that was my conclusion.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  Just for the record, could Mr. Karadzic identify

19     where, exactly, the witness said it came from the Metalka building?

20             JUDGE KWON:  Do you withdraw that question, Mr. Karadzic?

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is definitely stated somewhere

22     in the investigation documents.  I don't know if that is in his part of

23     the report.  I'm talking about the whole report, and this witness was the

24     team leader.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Then you refer to the exact page.

Page 8622

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   While we're looking for this:  Mr. Miokovic, you said that the

 3     bullet came from Serbian positions.  Which part of the Serbian positions?

 4        A.   Once again, I will kindly request that my official report be

 5     placed on the monitor.

 6        Q.   In your part of the report, it says "from Grbavica."  Did you not

 7     conclude that the bullet came from Grbavica?

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Page 6 in B/C/S and 7 in English.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Was that your conclusion?

11        A.   I still don't see my report in front of me.

12             I see it now.

13        Q.   The automatic weapons from the aggressors' positions --

14        A.   Can we look at the second page, please.

15        Q.   No, no, no, the first paragraph.

16             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreters did not see where Mr. Karadzic

17     was reading from.

18             JUDGE KWON:  It should be the previous page, first paragraph:

19             "On the 3rd of March, this centre was informed ..."

20             That was information he received.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Was this information confirmed in your investigation?

23        A.   The official report that I drafted, in general, as well as the

24     one we see before us here, I've already explained the methodology of

25     preparing these reports.  And I stress, and I will do it again, each

Page 8623

 1     technical detail, such as it had come from Grbavica, and what type of

 2     weapon, that is something that I enter in my report as a preliminary

 3     information.  And then ballistics experts and forensic technicians

 4     prepare their own reports within a time-frame assigned, and those reports

 5     contain the full information, and they are, as such, forwarded to the

 6     investigating judge.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 8             Could we now please have 1D2433.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Tieger.

10             MR. TIEGER:  I'm sorry.  While we're waiting for the document to

11     come up, I just wanted to indicate I would ask the Court for two minutes

12     at the end of the session to address one scheduling matter.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   Could you please mark on this photograph, going from left to

16     right, the site where you found the tram?  First of all, let's do that.

17     The exact point.

18        A.   Just a moment.  In other words, the tram was moving from the new

19     to the old part of town.  I don't have the report before me.  Can you

20     just help me and tell me, was the tram moving from the old to the new --

21     from the new to the old part, or the other way around?

22        Q.   That's correct, from the new part of town to the old part, from

23     west to east.

24        A.   Okay.

25        Q.   And you found it -- where you found it, it was at Marin Dvor.

Page 8624

 1     Could you please mark that location on the photograph here?

 2        A.   Well, it's not easy to find my bearings, but I think it's about

 3     here somewhere [marks].

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Would you now please mark the old tobacco factory.

 5        A.   The premises of the old tobacco factory?

 6        Q.   Yes.

 7        A.   I really don't know what you mean.  I lived in Sarajevo for 50

 8     years, but I've never heard of the old tobacco factory.

 9        Q.   All right.  Could you then please mark the Vrbanja Bridge?

10        A.   Of course [marks].

11        Q.   Would you please put "1" next to the tram stop at Marin Dvor and

12     "2" at the Vrbanja Bridge?

13        A.   [Marks]

14        Q.   Would you now please put the number 3 on the Executive Council

15     building?

16        A.   [Marks]

17        Q.   Number 4 for the Assembly building?

18        A.   [Marks]

19        Q.   Would you now please draw a line through Djure Danicica Street,

20     as it was called in the past, which runs --

21             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter did not hear the directions.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] How do you want me to mark that?

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Well, just draw a line through it, and please put the number 5

25     next to it.

Page 8625

 1        A.   [Marks].

 2        Q.   And would you now please mark the Franje Rackog Street, all the

 3     way to the Holiday Inn, or, rather, to the tram tracks.

 4        A.   [Marks]

 5        Q.   Would you agree with me that what we see perpendicular to the

 6     tram tracks, that that is an articulated tram?

 7        A.   Yes, I think that's a tram.

 8        Q.   Would you please put the number 7 there.

 9        A.   [Marks]

10        Q.   And then on the right-hand track --

11        A.   I really can't see.  Can you help me?

12        Q.   Well, it lies across the road.

13        A.   Very well, I can see it now [marks].

14        Q.   Would we agree now that this tram that we see at number 8, that

15     it is moving from the Stari to Novi Grad, from the old part of town to

16     the new part of town?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Would you now please mark the spot where your investigative team

19     determined that the tram was impacted?

20        A.   In my official report, it says that the round had come from

21     Grbavica.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Now, for the transcript, would you please say the

23     right-hand tram -- number 8, it's moving from the new to the old part of

24     town.  I just want to say that for the transcript.

25             Now, first, mark the spot where your team determined that the

Page 8626

 1     tram received the bullet.

 2        A.   If I'm not mistaken, I think it was the corner of Zmaja od Bosne

 3     and Franje Rackog Street.  It is approximately in this area here.  I'll

 4     mark it now [marks].

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Where had the round come from?

 6        A.   From Grbavica.

 7        Q.   Did you determine the direction and the place --

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Put number 9, for the record, for the place of

 9     incident.

10             THE WITNESS:  [Marks]

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

12        Q.   Can you please just confirm whether the tram, marked with

13     number 8, is moving from the new part of town to the old part of town,

14     from Novi Grad to Stari Grad?

15        A.   Well, I can confirm that that is, in fact, the track leading from

16     the old -- the new part of town to the old part of town.

17        Q.   Would you please mark the tram that has not yet entered the

18     curve.

19        A.   Again, I don't see that tram that you're referring to.

20        Q.   Well, is the tram that is about to enter the place which you

21     marked with a circle number 9; can you see it?

22        A.   [Marks]

23        Q.   Very well.  Would you please the number 10 there.

24        A.   [Marks]

25        Q.   Now, could we put, either on this photo or on a new one -- could

Page 8627

 1     you indicate the trajectory -- the trajectory -- the bullet trajectory

 2     and the position from which it came?  Perhaps you can use the red pen and

 3     we can mark the trajectory on this same photo.

 4        A.   Well, all I can do is draw a line with an arrow indicating the

 5     direction from Grbavica to the spot where the tram was.

 6        Q.   Please do so.

 7        A.   [Marks]

 8        Q.   So this bullet was supposed to hit the tram, flying over the

 9     museum building; correct?

10        A.   Again, I don't quite understand your question.

11        Q.   Well, tell us, where the red line begins, is that the Metalka

12     building?

13        A.   No.

14        Q.   Well, this is the building that several witnesses have confirmed

15     to be the Metalka building, but never mind.

16             Would you please date and sign this photo.

17        A.   [Marks].

18             JUDGE KWON:  It's time to take a break, Mr. Karadzic.

19             We'll admit it as a Defence exhibit.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D846, Your Honours.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Tieger.

22             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Mr. President.

23             The next witness, I wanted to note, has actually been here since

24     Sunday, mainly to accommodate the accused's request to participate in an

25     interview.  We anticipated that we would begin his testimony on Thursday,

Page 8628

 1     based on the projected schedule.  Clearly, we won't begin until today.  I

 2     wanted, however, to inquire, particularly in light of the witness's

 3     co-operation and accommodation, if we could do the same for him and if

 4     there was a possibility of an additional session today.  I note that a

 5     courtroom is available.  I appreciate the logistical issues involved, but

 6     I would ask the Court to consider the possibility of an additional

 7     session, for example, from 2.30 to 4.30, to maximise the prospect of

 8     concluding this witness's evidence, if not today, at least first thing on

 9     Monday, before the videolinks.

10             If the Court needs any additional information, I'm happy to

11     provide it, but I think you understand the situation, and it would be

12     extremely helpful if we could implement measures that would maximise the

13     prospect of concluding this witness's -- the next witness's testimony at

14     the earliest possible moment.

15             JUDGE KWON:  We'll consider the matter.

16             But, Mr. Karadzic, after the session you will have about 15

17     minutes to conclude your cross-examination.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, in that case, many of the

19     incidents will remain unclarified.  I will not be able to explore them

20     with this witness.  And I do acknowledge that there is a certain

21     responsibility on my part for not being efficient enough, but I will not

22     be able to examine all these incidents.

23             The team leader of an investigating team has to be aware of the

24     information.  He has to know the explanations for certain things.  So who

25     else can I examine these issues with, if not with him?

Page 8629

 1             JUDGE KWON:  I told you, you had to prioritise your questions and

 2     not to waste your time.  After having wasted a lot of time, asking for an

 3     extension is unacceptable.  The Chamber will discuss your request for

 4     extension of time.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I just address you with one

 6     final issue.

 7             Can I ask the following:  Whatever I fail or am unable to cover,

 8     no matter how efficient I am, and even if I do prioritise it, can

 9     whatever was left out of what I was able to check, can that be the basis

10     for a conviction?  If that is the case, then there should be no

11     prioritisation.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Half an hour.  We'll resume at 12.40.

13                           --- Recess taken at 12.09 p.m.

14                           --- On resuming at 12.43 p.m.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, you will have half an hour to conclude

16     your cross-examination.

17             And thanks to the indulgence of all the staff involved, I'm

18     pleased to inform you that we can go until 3.00 this afternoon, albeit we

19     may have a short break in the meantime.

20             Mr. Karadzic.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

22        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, who is Enes Bezdrob?

23        A.   Enes Bezdrob was a police employee who, at a certain period of

24     time during the aggression against Bosnia-Herzegovina and Sarajevo, was

25     chief of Security Service of CSB Sarajevo.

Page 8630

 1        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, I hope that when I say "you," and by that I mean

 2     the BH Army, I hope this is not irritating you.  Therefore, do not refer

 3     to what we did as an aggression.

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  Can the accused please repeat the question.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.

 6             The interpreter couldn't hear your question.  What is your

 7     question, Mr. Karadzic?

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   My question was whether Enes Bezdrob was the chief of the centre

10     during the time that this incident that we are dealing with took place.

11        A.   Yes, as far as I can remember, he was the chief of the CSB.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

13             Can we have again 1D2433.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   Can you please mark the end of the street that used to be called

16     Titova Street?

17        A.   I'm not sure whether this is the end or the beginning, but

18     I think it's somewhere here [marks].

19        Q.   Thank you.  Can you please now draw a straight line along the

20     middle of the tram, which is here, so extend it.

21        A.   Parallel with the vehicle?

22        Q.   No, no, you can do it through the tram, itself.

23        A.   [Marks]

24        Q.   Thank you.  Can you do the same with the tram which is positioned

25     before the S-curve.

Page 8631

 1        A.   [Marks]

 2        Q.   Can you please just put number 1 where you think Titova Street

 3     ends.

 4        A.   [Marks]

 5        Q.   I don't think it's clear enough.

 6        A.   [Marks]

 7        Q.   Now it's okay.  Now, Mr. Miokovic, I'm going to put to you what

 8     is contained in the report by the team that you headed and under whose

 9     leadership they operated.  The report says that the bullet came from

10     above, from the right, and travelled downwards to the left from the back

11     side to the front side.  So this is what is said in the report, that the

12     bullet came from the back side of the tram, travelled towards the front

13     end of the tram, downwards to the left; is that correct?

14        A.   I remember having read this a minute ago, yes.

15        Q.   Thank you.  At the same time, it was established and determined

16     that the angle of trajectory had an angle with the axis of the tram of 80

17     degrees; is that correct?

18        A.   That's what the ballistic report says, the one that I read.

19        Q.   Thank you.  Can you please put the date and your signature on

20     this picture.

21        A.   [Marks]

22        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, according to the axes of these trams, can you use

23     them as a benchmark and draw an angle of 80 degrees, which would indicate

24     the incoming trajectory towards the tram?

25        A.   Well, I'm not able to draw that.

Page 8632

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it's simple geography.  This

 2     is not ballistics.

 3             But, anyway, can we have this document admitted into evidence?

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit D847.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 7             Can we now have 65 ter 10439, page 4.

 8             Well, let's keep this image for a second.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Can you please now mark the spot where you conducted your on-site

11     investigation.

12        A.   [Marks]

13        Q.   Can I now ask you to draw a straight line from the top of the

14     building of the Executive Council, from both tops, to the tram.

15        A.   Which ones do you mean; the one closer to the tram stop?

16        Q.   From both north and south, from which one can see the tram stop.

17        A.   [Marks]  So this is from the Executive Council building.  That's

18     number 1.

19        Q.   And then from the southern corner of the Executive Council

20     building.

21        A.   [Marks]

22        Q.   Thank you.  Can you also please date and sign this photograph.

23        A.   [Marks]

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now have 10439, page 4.

25             Has this image been admitted into evidence?

Page 8633

 1             JUDGE KWON:  I was about to say that asking the witness to draw

 2     meaningless lines is unhelpful.

 3             We'll admit this.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D848, Your Honours.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6             Can we now have page 4 that I asked for, 10439.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Can you please look at this document.  Was it signed by Enes

 9     Bezdrob, the chief of the centre, on the 4th of March, 1995?

10        A.   The document that I see in front of me is a dispatch, and earlier

11     I explained what this means.  And as a rule of service, all the

12     dispatches were signed by Enes Bezdrob.

13        Q.   Can we see here that in paragraph 3, the site location was

14     determined as being at the intersection of Marsala Tita Street and

15     Franje Rackog Street; is that correct?

16        A.   Yes, that's what's written here.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

18             Is this already in evidence?  If not, can we tender it, please?

19             JUDGE KWON:  It's already admitted as part of P1727.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

21             Can we now have -- can we now have 1D2673.

22             Once again, I am not going to throw you into any ballistic

23     discussions, but we will deal with simple geometry that is being taught

24     in elementary schools.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 8634

 1        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, in your report with respect to the articulated part

 2     of the tram, the difference between the entry and exit wound is 18

 3     centimetres or 180 millimetres; is that correct?  From 84.5 to 66.5

 4     centimetres, the balance is 18 centimetres?

 5        A.   I don't have my report in front of me, but to the best of my

 6     recollection, that is what is written there.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, I think we're heading down -- despite what

 9     Mr. Karadzic said, we're going straight into the area of ballistics,

10     which this witness has said repeatedly he is not -- it was not his area.

11     And, also, the expression "entry and exit wound" might be intended to

12     read "entry and exit point" in the question, in the English translation.

13             JUDGE KWON:  And I didn't follow, for myself, how we could come

14     to the number of 18 centimetres when he asked the question.  The witness

15     didn't confirm it entirely with you.  I agree with Mr. Gaynor.

16             Move on to another topic.

17             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  It's not entry and

18     exit wound, it's entry and exit point.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With all due respect, in the report

20     signed by Mr. Miokovic, it is stated that the external entry point is

21     84.5 centimetres above the articulated part and that the exit point is at

22     66.5 centimetres.  You can apply simple arithmetic, and get 18

23     centimetres, which means that the bullet travelled through the wall of

24     the tram along the line of 18 centimetres.  It's clear to everyone, and

25     the witness confirmed that these entry and exit holes were at these

Page 8635

 1     dimensions.  This is simple arithmetic and geometry.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   So, do you agree if --

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the accused please slow down.  It is

 5     impossible to follow all these figures and numbers.  Thank you.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.  I'm sorry, Mr. Miokovic.

 7             The interpreters couldn't hear you because you are too fast.  But

 8     I told you to move on to another topic.  You can discuss it with your

 9     expert.

10             JUDGE MORRISON:  Dr. Karadzic, these are matters which are

11     contained in the report and can be contested by -- either contested or

12     confirmed by an expert witness later.  As I understand this, these are

13     not an original analysis by this witness, anyway, but simply a repetition

14     of findings by others.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is simply a visualisation of

16     the figures contained in this witness's report.  The figures were

17     accepted.  I just wanted to present this visually.

18             Can we again have document 1D2433.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Mr. Miokovic, do you agree -- or do we agree that between

21     Grbavica and the tram track, at any point represented in this picture are

22     the buildings that were being used by the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

23        A.   I never became familiarised precisely with the positions of the

24     Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  However, what I know and what I'm certain

25     about is that Vilsonovo Setaliste and the River Miljacka were practically

Page 8636

 1     no-man's land and that practically that was the separation line between

 2     the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Army of Republika Srpska.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Do you accept that the buildings, such as the

 4     museum -- both museums, actually, the Faculty of Philosophy, the Assembly

 5     building, the Government building, Unis skyscraper, the technical school,

 6     were being used by the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 7        A.   I don't know, and I cannot confirm your statement.

 8        Q.   Who controlled this area that I described?  Was it the Army of

 9     Republika Srpska or the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

10        A.   The Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

11        Q.   Thank you.  In view of the angles stated in your report, did you

12     investigate the possibility of the bullet coming from any of those

13     buildings?

14        A.   This type of analysis, as far as I know, was not carried out.

15     However, I would like to reiterate that this particular investigation was

16     led by the investigating judge and not by me.  So if the investigating

17     judge gave such an order to the ballistic experts to do so, then it was

18     done.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Let me confirm about the 18 centimetres you raised.

21             Can you bring up page 9 of the Exhibit P1727.  I mean the English

22     page.  And I also refer to the transcript page, page 59, line 5 to 8.

23             Yes.  Is there a misinterpretation, a typo, in the English

24     translation?  It says "84.5 centimetres from center of the train," and

25     later on, "6.5 centimetres from the center of the tram," and you come to

Page 8637

 1     18 centimetres.  I didn't understand that right.  The transcript reads

 2     like --

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In the original, it says "66.5."

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, that's why I didn't follow it at the time.

 5             In any event, let's move on.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Do you agree that in your report, it says "66.5"?

 8        A.   Can I kindly ask to have a look at my report on the screen,

 9     please.

10        Q.   Yes, and we have it here on this side.  It says:

11             "The damage on the external part of the tram, between the --" [No

12     interpretation].

13             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreters kindly ask to look at the text

14     on the screen.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a criminal investigation

16     technician report, and I confirm that it is written just the way you have

17     read.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19             JUDGE KWON:  This is not the same page, I take it.  Can we see

20     the report written by Medjedovic.  It's probably page 7 or 8 in B/C/S.

21             THE ACCUSED:  [No interpretation]

22             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

23             MR. GAYNOR:  I think Mr. Medjedovic's report is at about page 17

24     in B/C/S.  This is the report that Mr. Karadzic has been presenting as

25     Mr. Miokovic's report, I believe.

Page 8638

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Miokovic was the leader of that

 2     team, and --

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, I was able to notice "66.5, left side of the

 4     tram."  Thank you.  It's hidden from the end of the frame.  Yes, "66.5."

 5             Let's move on.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 7        Q.   Can we now deal with the sniper incident number 14 from the

 8     List F, the incident that took place on the 23rd of November, 1994.  Did

 9     you take part in the investigation of that incident?

10        A.   I seem to remember so, but I would kindly ask to have my official

11     report on the screen.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

13             Can we have 65 ter 09699, page 1.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Exhibit 1714, P1714.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Were you the leader of the team in this investigation as well?

17        A.   This investigation was also headed by the investigating judge,

18     and by that very fact, I was somebody who was acting under his

19     instructions.  This investigation was headed by a judge.

20        Q.   Do you need to look or can you briefly tell us what happened and

21     what you concluded?  What was your final conclusion?  Can I recommend the

22     first passage to you after the names.  Is it correct that you did not

23     carry out the on-scene investigation but that you did this in the garage?

24        A.   Yes.  On the basis of what is written here, absolutely, yes.

25     Obviously, in this situation, we did not perform the investigation at the

Page 8639

 1     scene.

 2        Q.   And would this be important for the purposes of establishing,

 3     down to the metre, the precise position of the tram when it was impacted

 4     by the bullet?

 5        A.   In each kind of ballistics expertise, this is something that is

 6     exceptionally important.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  And here, nevertheless, the investigation of the tram

 8     is being carried out at the garage, in the depot, and the position is

 9     taken that the bullet had come from Serbian positions; is this correct?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Thank you.  And it states here that the tram was hit with one

12     bullet of an undetermined calibre, which fragmented, due to which two

13     bullet traces were left; is that correct?

14        A.   Yes, that is what it says.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Are you able to tell us what the consequences were?

16        A.   If I remember correctly, and I can see that here, that two

17     females were wounded.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19             Can we now look at 1D2415.  Is this -- this is probably part of

20     the exhibit, this thing, P17.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Are you able to mark, on this Google Maps photograph, the

23     location that you were told where the tram was when it was hit?

24        A.   I would kindly ask you to read from my report, if you have it in

25     front of you, what it says.

Page 8640

 1        Q.   I'm going to read it now.  It says that you -- the duty officers

 2     informed you that from the aggressor's position from Grbavica, and so on

 3     and so forth, was fired, and that the tram was hit in the section between

 4     the technical school and the Marsal Tito Barracks and Zmaja od Bosne

 5     Street.  The tram was hit in the area of its middle section; more

 6     precisely, a little bit in front of the articulated part.  The shot was

 7     fired from the south/south-west, isn't it -- south-east --

 8     south/south-east, and this was at the turning towards Nova Stanica.

 9             Are you able to mark here the turning to the Nova Stanica?  Are

10     you able to mark the technical school here?

11        A.   I am just trying to orient myself here.  This is the technical

12     school, if I'm not mistaken.

13        Q.   Isn't it this black square part that is a bit to the west in

14     relation to the Holiday Inn?

15        A.   Yes, you are correct.  I made a mistake.  Yes, yes, I confirm

16     that.

17        Q.   Can you please, then, circle the building where the technical

18     school was.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Wait a minute, Mr. Miokovic.

20             THE WITNESS:  [Marks]

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

22        Q.   What about the Marsal Tito Barracks?

23        A.   You can only see a part of it here.

24        Q.   Can you please mark it with the number 2?

25        A.   [Marks]

Page 8641

 1        Q.   And can you please now mark the trams that are going from the

 2     S-curve to the Nova Stanica.  You can mark the tracks along their length,

 3     and can that be number 3?

 4        A.   [Marks]

 5        Q.   And can you now mark the place where the tram was when it was hit

 6     and what was its position?

 7        A.   I would just like to ask you again:  In my report, did you say

 8     that was in this part of the tram that leads to the new railway station?

 9        Q.   Ah, and you don't remember that, do you?

10        A.   Dr. Karadzic, I did many of such investigations at the scene, and

11     they are all more or less similar.  Or you can just call up my report on

12     the screen, and after that I will be able to mark the location of the

13     tram precisely.

14        Q.   Then we would lose -- well, I would like it to be given to you.

15     You can have my copy of the hard copy of your report.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  Then maybe in the meantime I'll read out the

17     passage.  It says:

18             "The tram was hit in --" forgive my pronunciation -- "in

19     Zmaja od Bosne Street, between tehnicka skola," I take it "technical

20     school," "and the KMT.  It was hit in the center, more precisely, near

21     the connecting platform.  The bullet was fired from south or south-east."

22             You have that report with you now.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will mark it with the number 4

24     [marks].

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Page 8642

 1        Q.   Had the tram already turned towards the station?  More

 2     specifically, what was the position of its horizontal axis?

 3        A.   Dr. Karadzic, I don't see anywhere in my official report that the

 4     tram was turning towards the new railway station.

 5        Q.   Well, it says here that it was at the S-curve.

 6        A.   Yes, but that is why -- this is the S-curve.  There is the

 7     right-hand part of the tram tracks going to the new railway station, and

 8     on the other side it's going towards the new part of town.  So I don't

 9     see that, at the point when the tram was hit, that it was about to turn

10     north towards the railway station.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Are you able to indicate on this picture where the

12     south-east is, one long, straight line indicating the south-east?

13        A.   In relation to the tram position?

14        Q.   Yes, in relation to the point marked with the number 4, where the

15     tram was hit.  That is the direction that is stated, and you can extend

16     the line a little further, please.

17        A.   [Marks]

18        Q.   Thank you.  Can we mark this now with the number 5?

19        A.   [Marks]

20        Q.   That is the direction -- that is one of the directions that is

21     indicated in the report; is that correct?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Thank you.  And do you know where the line of separation is

24     located here on the left bank of the Miljacka River?

25        A.   As far as I know, it's from the Vrbanja Bridge towards the west.

Page 8643

 1     The entire left bank was under the control of the Army of

 2     Republika Srpska.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Are you able to mark the building of Unioninvest,

 4     which is now the building of the High Representative?  And you can mark

 5     that building with the number 6.

 6        A.   Well, I'm going to try, but I would also ask you to follow on the

 7     screen [marks].

 8        Q.   In relation to Vrbanja, you will remember where it is?

 9        A.   I think that's this.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Can you mark that with the number 6.

11        A.   [Marks]

12        Q.   In your opinion, who had that building in their hands?

13        A.   I know that that building in the Ljubljanska Street was --

14     actually, that the lines between the Bosnia and Herzegovina Army and the

15     Bosnian Serb Army was not always a constant straight line, so things

16     changed.  So I don't know at the time who had control of this building.

17        Q.   If I tell you that right from the beginning of 1992, that

18     building was under the control of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina,

19     would that be acceptable to you?

20        A.   The only thing that I can reply to that, with all due respect, is

21     that I cannot accept that assertion of yours for one simple reason, and

22     that reason is that I don't know.

23        Q.   All right, thank you very much.  Fair enough.  And now, please,

24     were any measurements taken on the tram, itself; height measurements and

25     the relational measurements along the vertical and the horizontal lines?

Page 8644

 1        A.   Well, according to my experience, that is the main task of my

 2     colleagues, technicians from the Criminal Investigation Unit.

 3        Q.   And were the measurements given in the report?

 4        A.   These measures should have been quoted in that report, and that

 5     report should have been a part of this file.  It should have accompanied

 6     my official report.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we ask the Prosecution, my

 8     learned friend Mr. Gaynor, to help us to find, in material that he has,

 9     whether this report exists?

10             JUDGE KWON:  Now it's time for you to wrap up your

11     cross-examination.

12             Could you kindly put the date and your signature on this marked

13     picture, and we'll admit it as a Defence exhibit.

14             THE WITNESS:  [Marks]

15             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, Exhibit D849.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Excellencies.

18             Mr. Miokovic was working, especially on the 1st of July, on some

19     incidents, but today we don't have time.  I kindly ask for the support of

20     the Trial Chamber and the Prosecution so that we can get all the reports

21     of all the investigative actions in which Mr. Miokovic took part, if the

22     Prosecution has them.  If not, we can request them from the Government of

23     Bosnia and Herzegovina.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Do you have re-examination, Mr. Gaynor?

25             MR. GAYNOR:  I do, yes, have a few minutes of re-examination.

Page 8645

 1     Thank you, Mr. President.

 2                           Re-examination by Mr. Gaynor:

 3        Q.   The first subject concerns the sequence of events on the 8th of

 4     November, 1994.  Mr. Karadzic was asking you a few questions about the

 5     time of your arrival at the site of the first impact, the time of your

 6     departure, and the time of your return after the second and third shells

 7     came.  Do you recall that?

 8        A.   I do.

 9        Q.   Now, did you, on Wednesday, with my assistance, create a short

10     summary of the sequence of events on the afternoon of the 8th of

11     November, 1994?

12        A.   Yes.

13             MR. GAYNOR:  Could I ask for 65 ter 90199, please.

14        Q.   Is that the short summary which you had an opportunity to review?

15        A.   Yes, that is the short summary.

16        Q.   You had an opportunity to make corrections to this, and, in fact,

17     you did make corrections; is that right?

18        A.   That's correct.

19        Q.   Is that your signature that appears at the bottom of this

20     document?

21        A.   Yes, I signed that on the 27th of October.

22        Q.   And that is an accurate summary of the events of the afternoon of

23     the 8th of November, 1994; is that right?

24        A.   That's right.

25             MR. GAYNOR:  Your Honour, I'd like to tender that for admission,

Page 8646

 1     Mr. President.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P1850, Your Honours.

 4             MR. GAYNOR:  The next subject I'd like to turn to is:  On the

 5     next day, the 9th of November, 1994, Mr. Karadzic was making the point

 6     that the investigative judge on that day was a Muslim.

 7        Q.   Do you remember him referring to that?

 8        A.   I remember that very well.

 9        Q.   Now, in your report of the incident, which is P1706 -- no need to

10     bring it up unless you want to see it, but you list the participation of

11     the expert ballistics member of your team, who is Zlatko Medjedovic.  You

12     know that man?

13        A.   Yes, unfortunately, I knew him.  I say "unfortunately" because he

14     passed away in the meantime.

15        Q.   Do you happen to know his ethnic background, what his ethnic

16     background was?

17        A.   I think he was a Croat.

18        Q.   Now, is that the same Mr. Medjedovic who is referred to as the

19     ballistics expert in your reports concerning the other -- the sniping

20     incident of the 3rd of March, 1995, and the sniping incident of the 24th

21     of November, 1994?

22        A.   Yes, that's the same person.

23        Q.   Earlier on today, Mr. Karadzic showed you a report dated the 3rd

24     of March, 1995, prepared by Mihajlo Pavlovic.  Do you know that man?

25        A.   Yes, I know him.

Page 8647

 1        Q.   Do you happen to know his ethnic background?

 2        A.   Mihajlo is a Serb.

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  No further questions, Mr. President.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can I address you briefly with a

 5     question or short explanation?  Namely, I do not attach any importance to

 6     ethnic background of any expert or government officials, but it was

 7     Mr. Gaynor who introduced this topic from Day 1.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Your intervention is not helpful, Mr. Karadzic.

 9             Judge Lattanzi has a question for you, Mr. Miokovic.

10                           Questioned by the Court:

11             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Witness, I need some

12     clarification from you regarding your relationship with the UNPROFOR.

13             This morning, during cross-examination, it appeared, regarding a

14     specific incident, I think the one in Livanjska Ulica, but I'm not just

15     referring to that incident because you presented the question as being

16     general, you mentioned some misunderstanding or lack of understanding

17     with UNPROFOR, so when you were investigating during on-site

18     investigation.  That's what you mentioned.  I wanted to know whether

19     there was an agreement between the UN and the BiH Presidency or

20     Government as to the procedure to be followed during on-site

21     investigations with regard to UN personnel participation or even for

22     independent on-site investigation.  So I was wondering whether you were

23     aware of such specific procedures.  Thank you.

24        A.   You're absolutely right, there were procedures, and now I'm

25     talking about the Security Services Centre of Sarajevo, of which I was a

Page 8648

 1     member, in relation to UNPROFOR forces deployed in the Sarajevo canton.

 2             Now, concerning investigations -- on-site investigations of this

 3     and similar incidents, the police of the CSB of Sarajevo canton and its

 4     investigating organs, by which I mean investigating judge, were

 5     completely independent, professionally speaking.  In professional terms

 6     and in terms of legal provisions that were in force in Bosnia and

 7     Herzegovina at the time, the position of UNPROFOR was not specified

 8     precisely by any means.  Let me be quite clear.  Anything that was

 9     determined during an on-site investigation is something that the local

10     investigating team takes responsibility for.

11             In view of the situation prevailing at the time, I'm just

12     limiting myself to the area of Sarajevo.  The interest, if you wish, of

13     the Presidency and the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina at the time

14     was to have everything relating to incidents of this nature be completely

15     transparent.  So in the majority of cases and in principle, and the

16     investigations that I was personally involved in, certainly 90 per cent

17     of them were attended by representatives of UNPROFOR who, in most cases

18     when they were present, again in 90 per cent of such cases, practically

19     did nothing.  They were just standing there and supervised, in a manner,

20     the operations that we carried out.

21             As much as I would like, I cannot remember a single on-site

22     investigation that I carried out of this type when UNPROFOR requested

23     that they carry out their separate investigation and that reconstruction

24     was requested.

25             So we had very clear-cut relationships with them.  In practice,

Page 8649

 1     there were instances, prior to the meeting mentioned by Dr. Karadzic,

 2     that UNPROFOR, due to the fact that their technical capabilities, in

 3     terms of the vehicles they had, and the possibility of their moving

 4     through the town during shelling or some other safety hazard, would

 5     arrive on the crime scene before us.  I have no reason to doubt that,

 6     vertically hierarchically, the UNPROFOR had their guide-lines and

 7     instructions as to how to conduct themselves during on-site

 8     investigations.

 9             There were some instances when, I must say that, UNPROFOR

10     representatives did not conduct themselves in an appropriate manner.

11     They would come before us to the site, I don't know why, and then they

12     would simply collect all the relevant evidence.  For example, if we had a

13     shelling incident, they would take all the fragments of the explosive

14     device, which made it virtually impossible for us to carry out an on-site

15     investigation.

16             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] To understand it properly, to

17     sum it up, the UNPROFOR was entitled to take part in on-site

18     investigation carried out by you, but they were not entitled to conduct

19     independent on-site investigations; is that right?

20        A.   They had the right to conduct independent investigations.  We

21     never wanted or did dispute that.  However, according to the procedure

22     laid down by our law, that could not be considered a relevant part of the

23     investigation relating to a specific incident.

24             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25                           [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 8650

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Miokovic, that concludes your evidence.  Thank

 2     you for coming to -- thank you for your coming to The Hague to give it.

 3     Now you are free to go.

 4             Before we start again with the next witness, we'll have a short

 5     break for 10 minutes, and we'll resume at quarter to 2:00 clock.

 6                           [The witness withdrew]

 7                           --- Break taken at 1.36 p.m.

 8                           --- On resuming at 1.48 p.m.

 9                           [The witness entered court]

10             JUDGE KWON:  Good afternoon, Mr. Brennskag.

11             If you could take the solemn declaration, please.

12             THE WITNESS:  I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the

13     whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

14                           WITNESS:  PER ANTON BRENNSKAG

15             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  Please be seated.

16             Yes, Ms. Sutherland.

17             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Thank you, Your Honour.

18                           Examination by Ms. Sutherland:

19        Q.   Witness, could you please state your full name.

20        A.   Per Anton Brennskag.

21        Q.   You gave statements to the Office of the Prosecutor of this

22     Tribunal in May 1996 and October 2006; is that right?

23        A.   That's right.

24        Q.   You testified here on two previous occasions, and that was in the

25     trials of Dragomir Milosevic and -- in March 2007 and in Momcilo Perisic

Page 8651

 1     in February 2009; is that correct?

 2        A.   That's correct.

 3        Q.   On Tuesday, the 26th of October, you had an opportunity to review

 4     and sign an amalgamated statement which contains relevant parts from your

 5     earlier statements, testimony, and information provided to the OTP.  Do

 6     you recall that?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Could I ask for 65 ter 90195, please.

 9        Q.   Mr. Brennskag, on the screen in front of you, do you recognise

10     that which bears your signature, an electronic copy of the first page of

11     your amalgamated statement which you indicated you had an opportunity to

12     review?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Does that statement accurately reflect your previous statements

15     and testimony, or, in fact, those portions of the previous statements and

16     testimonies which have been put into this statement?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   If you were examined in court today on the same subjects, would

19     you provide the same information to the Court in response to those

20     questions?

21        A.   Yes.

22             MS. SUTHERLAND:  I tender for admission 65 ter 90195, the

23     amalgamated statement.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

25             MR. ROBINSON:  Mr. President, I simply note the objection to some

Page 8652

 1     unscheduled incidents which are contained in paragraphs -- the beginning

 2     of paragraph 39 and also paragraph 50.  You've already ruled on that, in

 3     principle, and I don't have anything to add.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  I'm wondering whether you have to repeat every time.

 5             MR. ROBINSON:  Perhaps if it could be understood that we have a

 6     continuing objection to unscheduled incidents, I won't do that anymore.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  That will be more convenient.  Thank you for your

 8     understanding, Mr. Robinson.

 9             Yes, Ms. Sutherland.

10             MS. SUTHERLAND:  The exhibit number, please.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honour, that will be Exhibit P1851.

12             MS. SUTHERLAND:  With the Court's permission, I'll read a short

13     summary of the evidence contained in the amalgamated statement.

14             Mr. Brennskag, a retired lieutenant-colonel from the Royal

15     Norwegian Army, was deployed with the United Nations in Bosnia and

16     Herzegovina on the 22nd of March, 1995, as a military observer in Sector

17     Sarajevo.  At that time, he held the rank of major.

18             The witness was stationed in Pale until 24 May 1995.  He was part

19     of the military observer team responsible for monitoring weapons stores

20     and weapons collection points.

21             On the 2nd of June, 1995, the witness was posted to the side of

22     Sector Sarajevo held by the Bosnian government.  The witness confirmed

23     that he was in Team Pofalici, based in the north of Sarajevo.  A number

24     of locations could be observed from the team's observation post.  The

25     team had a clear sight of the territory west of Sarajevo.

Page 8653

 1             In June 1995, it was very hectic.  The witness observed up to 150

 2     impacts incoming into Sarajevo during a 24-hour period.

 3             The witness confirms a situation report concerning an explosion

 4     in the area of Dobrinja on 18 June 1995, where the fire originated from

 5     the VRS side.

 6             Mr. Brennskag describes the use of modified air-bombs by the VRS.

 7     During his service in Sarajevo, he observed a number of modified aircraft

 8     bombs being fired from VRS positions which landed in the area of

 9     Alipasino Polje and to the east of that area.  The witness investigated

10     two incidents involving modified aircraft bombs, one on the 22nd of June,

11     1995, in Alipasino Polje, the other on the 1st of July, 1995.

12             The witness also describes the shelling of the TV building and

13     the PTT building in Sarajevo on the 28th of June, 1995.  The damage to

14     the TV building was caused by a modified aircraft bomb.  He witnessed the

15     bomb being launched from an area held by the VRS.

16             That concludes the brief summary, Your Honour.

17        Q.   Mr. Brennskag, in paragraphs 7 to 16 of Exhibit P1851, which is

18     your amalgamated statement now in evidence, you describe your posting in

19     Sector Sarajevo with the Pale observer team.

20             In paragraph 10, you state that part of your duties was to

21     inspect two weapons collection points, one situated in Bljustavac,

22     commonly known as Mokro barracks, and the other in Kresevo.

23             Were these collection points the only places of inspection by the

24     UNMO team that you were part of?

25        A.   This was the two weapon collection points, yes.

Page 8654

 1        Q.   Were those two collection points the only places where weapons

 2     were inspected by the UNMO team?

 3        A.   No.  There were some weapons in positions that were not in the

 4     collection points.

 5        Q.   Whereabouts were these situated, these places?

 6        A.   Those I inspected were nearby Resa [phoen] and on the other side

 7     of a canyon called Gradiste.

 8        Q.   Who controlled the territory where the collection points were and

 9     these other areas that you have just mentioned?

10        A.   This was on BSA side.

11        Q.   And what do you refer "BSA" to mean?

12        A.   Bosnian Serb Army.

13             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Mr. Registrar, I call for 65 ter 23024.

14        Q.   Mr. Brennskag, do you recognise what is on the screen in front of

15     you?

16        A.   Yes.  This is a copy of my map which I used in 1995.

17             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Could we zoom in to the area just east of

18     Sarajevo.

19        Q.   What do -- the markings that we can see there in the area of Resa

20     [phoen] and Gradiste, what do those markings depict?

21        A.   Those are my markings on my map where each single weapon outside

22     the weapon collection point were situated.

23        Q.   Do you recall now what the letters and numbers signify?

24        A.   No, I'm sorry, I can't remember.

25        Q.   But you said that each of the markings and each of the -- if we

Page 8655

 1     could zoom in again further.

 2             But you're saying that each of the dots on that map signifies

 3     where a single weapon was outside the collection point?

 4        A.   That's correct.

 5        Q.   To what area were these weapons directed to?

 6        A.   Towards the eastern part of Sarajevo.

 7             MS. SUTHERLAND:  I seek to tender this map, Your Honour.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P1852, Your Honours.

10             MS. SUTHERLAND:

11        Q.   Mr. Brennskag, I wish to focus now on your posting in Sector

12     Sarajevo on the territory held by the Bosnian Government.  This is

13     contained in paragraphs 17 to 57 of your statement.

14             In paragraphs 17 to 18, you describe that you were posted to an

15     observation team called "Team Pofalici," which had its observation post

16     in a hill north of the city.  Where, exactly, was the OP located?

17        A.   This OP was located on the hills, on the place called Vitkovac.

18             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Mr. Registrar, can I have 65 ter 23025.

19        Q.   Do you recognise what is shown on the screen in front of you?

20        A.   Yes.  It's a map of a part of Sarajevo.  And in 2006, I marked

21     the OP, the observation post, with the triangle you can see on the map.

22        Q.   That triangle is in blue, just above the word "Vitkovac"; is that

23     correct?

24        A.   That is correct.

25             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Your Honour, I seek to tender that document.

Page 8656

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P1853, Your Honours.

 3             MS. SUTHERLAND:

 4        Q.   In paragraph 36 of your statement, you said that you saw the

 5     first modified air-bomb, during your time as an observer in the Pofalici

 6     team, around the middle of June 1995.  From what location did you observe

 7     this from?

 8        A.   It could be from the OP, and it could be also from other places

 9     where I were working in Sarajevo.

10        Q.   How many modified air-bombs did you observe during your time as

11     an UNMO?

12        A.   Around four or five, six.

13        Q.   What direction did the modified air-bombs come from?

14        A.   Apart from the bomb I investigated at the 2nd of June -- of July,

15     mostly, as I remember, from the west.

16        Q.   Do you know the name of the area where the -- that you're

17     referring to as being west?

18        A.   Yes.  It's the area which we called "Ilidza area."

19        Q.   Who controlled this position at that time?

20        A.   At that time, it was a BSA area.

21        Q.   How did you know that they were modified air-bombs?

22        A.   I didn't at first know that it was modified air-bombs.  But as I

23     got to know and when I was observing, and when I was investigating the

24     impacts, I learned now that this was modified air-bombs.

25        Q.   Was there any -- anything that you could notice as this

Page 8657

 1     projectile was in the air?

 2        A.   Yes.  They had, in a part of their flight, a smoke tail from a

 3     rocket.

 4        Q.   You also said that you got to know that they were air-bombs when

 5     you were investigating the impacts.  How were you able to determine that

 6     they were, in fact, modified air-bombs?

 7        A.   You saw the rest of the rocket when we investigated the impact.

 8        Q.   And, in particular, what do you mean when you -- can you describe

 9     what you mean by "the rest of the rocket"?

10        A.   It was mounted on the shrapnel or the rest of the bomb.

11        Q.   And how was that different to the other sorts of shells?

12        A.   Artillery or mortar don't have any rocket rests on their -- that

13     you can find when it has exploded.

14        Q.   In paragraph 52 of your statement, you describe witnessing the TV

15     building in Sarajevo being hit by a modified air-bomb.  Where were you at

16     the time that you witnessed this event?

17        A.   This morning, I was on my job at the observation post at

18     Vitkovac.

19        Q.   What direction did the modified air-bomb come from?

20        A.   The direction of the -- where it come from, from Ilidza area.

21        Q.   And, again, at this time on the 28th of June, 1995, who was

22     controlling this position at Ilidza?

23        A.   It was still BSA.

24             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Thank you, Your Honour.  That concludes my

25     examination.

Page 8658

 1             I seek to tender into evidence the associated exhibits listed in

 2     Appendix A and Confidential Appendix B to the Rule 92 ter notification.

 3             And I have a correction to make to the Rule 92 ter filing, and I

 4     apologise for this.  It was -- there's a typographical error in

 5     paragraph 2 of the notification in a sentence.  A change was made in

 6     paragraph 48 by the deletion of a reference number, 65 ter 14919, in

 7     fact, should read "14939."  And that is also in paragraph 3(b).  In

 8     relation to Confidential -- sorry, in relation to Appendix A; the first

 9     associated exhibit has the 65 ter number 10002, and that's the witness's

10     statement from May 1996.  I don't seek to tender the statement, but I

11     wish to tender the three -- in the comments column, it says "Two maps

12     attached," but, in fact, there's two maps and a diagram.  The first map,

13     ERN -- sorry, the first diagram, ERN 0039-1399 is referred to in

14     paragraph 54 of the witness's statement, and that -- Mr. Reid has given

15     these three documents new 65 ter numbers so that they are single exhibits

16     and not attached to the witness statement, because we don't want the

17     witness statement into evidence.  So that 65 ter number is 23026.

18             Then there is a map with an ERN number 0039-1400 that's referred

19     to in paragraph 49 of the amalgamated statement.  That is 65 ter 23023.

20             The second map, which is the one that we just looked at, that is

21     now Exhibit P15 -- 1852.

22             The second 65 ter number is -- in the column is 10143, and again

23     that's the witness's October 2006 statement.  I don't seek to tender the

24     statement, but I wish to tender the map which is attached.  And this was

25     an oversight in not listing that in the comments column.  The map has an

Page 8659

 1     ERN of 0604-9663.  It's referred to in paragraph 18 of the witness's

 2     statement, and the 65 ter number is 23025.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Which we have admitted now a minute ago.  We

 4     admitted --

 5             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes, Your Honour, yes, and that is --

 6             JUDGE KWON:  P1853.

 7             MS. SUTHERLAND:  1853, yes, you're correct.

 8             Then the next in line is the transcripts of the witness's

 9     evidence in Milosevic and Perisic.  We don't seek to tender.  Neither do

10     we seek to tender associated Exhibit 14731.  But we do seek to tender the

11     remaining exhibits listed there.  One already has been admitted.  That is

12     P1528.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, thank you.  Why --

14             MS. SUTHERLAND:  In relation --

15             JUDGE KWON:  Why under seal, the last item?

16             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Simply, as I've explained with previous

17     witnesses, where it's been an under-seal exhibit in another case, I've

18     put it in the confidential appendix for this purpose, but that exhibit

19     can be tendered publicly in this trial.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Any objection, Mr. Robinson?

21             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. President.

22             With respect to that last document, 09814, the amalgamated --

23     first of all, it's a 33-page police report about this incident, and the

24     amalgamated statement simply says that this document confirms the

25     witness's presence at the scene of that incident.  We don't think that

Page 8660

 1     that's a sufficient basis to admit the entire report.

 2             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes, Your Honour.

 3             I -- at this stage, I would ask that two pages of that exhibit

 4     be -- if two pages, 0090-5111 to 0090-5112, could be admitted from that

 5     exhibit.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Let me take a brief look at para 48.

 7             I take it there's no opposition in that case.

 8             MR. ROBINSON:  That's correct.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we'll admit them all.

10             To make clear -- again, to make it clear:  His personal note is

11     not being tendered?

12             MS. SUTHERLAND:  No, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

14             Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

16                           Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic:

17             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. Brennskag.

19        A.   Good afternoon.

20        Q.   Before I begin, I would like to express my gratitude for meeting

21     with the Defence team, and I hope that the cross-examination will go

22     smoothly because of that.

23             Are you able to tell me, with these three observation points at

24     the Muslim side, how many observation points did you have on the Serbian

25     side in Sarajevo?

Page 8661

 1        A.   I'm not sure what you mean.  I was working on one observation

 2     post inside Sarajevo.  At my time on the Bosnian Serb side, I had no

 3     fixed observation post.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  If I were to tell you that, on the Serbian side, you

 5     always had from 11 to 13 observation posts, or four to five times more

 6     than in the Muslim side, would that correspond to what you know about

 7     this?

 8        A.   I am not able to remember how many observation posts

 9     Sector Sarajevo had.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Is it correct that the UN Military Observer teams,

11     and their staff in their headquarters in Sarajevo, received reports and

12     reported back every day orally and in writing?

13             Mr. Brennskag, did you receive a translation?

14        A.   Oh, yes.  I'm just reading it.

15             Normally, our UN observer military HQ in Sarajevo got -- received

16     reports every day from their teams.

17        Q.   Thank you.  May I ask you, what was your mandate, exactly?  What

18     was it that you were observing and what were you reporting on?

19        A.   As military observer, my mandate was to inspect weapon collection

20     points, or let me say that the Total Exclusion Zone of 20 K around

21     Sarajevo was in order, and the next mandate for the observer team was the

22     anti-sniper deal inside Sarajevo.  Then we also had a mandate to

23     investigate impacts of heavy weapon on both side of the confrontation

24     line.

25             MR. ROBINSON:  Excuse me, Mr. President.

Page 8662

 1             If I could just make a suggestion, and I realise the witness is

 2     not speaking in his native language, but I think he's distracted by the

 3     monitor when he's giving his answers.  And it might be easier for him if

 4     he gives the answer without following the reading, because he seems to be

 5     doing that, and it's making the -- making the testimony somehow not very

 6     smooth.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Without having the benefit of interpretation, I can

 8     understand that.  But do we have difficulty in following him?

 9             MR. ROBINSON:  Not difficulty in following him, but the evidence

10     is very slow, and it may affect the time that Dr. Karadzic has for his

11     cross-examination.

12             JUDGE KWON:  We'll bear that in mind, Mr. Robinson.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14        Q.   And did you conduct these investigations that you mentioned in

15     your previous answer?

16        A.   I conducted investigations of impacts at my time as an observer

17     inside Sarajevo.

18        Q.   What was the objective of those investigations?  What did they

19     encompass?

20        A.   My job was to investigate the impacts that was told me from my

21     UNMO HQ in Sarajevo, and the objective of those investigations is my -- I

22     can't understand, sorry.  The objectives of those investigations is the

23     UNMO HQ to tell.

24        Q.   Thank you.  And was the objective to establish the type of

25     weapons, or the projectiles, and elements which would, without doubt,

Page 8663

 1     prove which side had fired the shot?

 2        A.   When we investigated an impact, it was always to find what kind

 3     of weapon was fired, the direction from where the firing were coming,

 4     and, in case it was possible, to find the point of firing.  And, of

 5     course, if we were able to do it, it was to find what happened around the

 6     impact; injuries or so on.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  And were these investigations, in the criminal legal

 8     sense, investigations which would establish without doubt the

 9     perpetrators and the consequences?

10        A.   We delivered our investigation report as a part of a whole

11     investigation of an impact, and it was the UNMO HQ and UNPROFOR to decide

12     exactly what was happening.

13        Q.   So you established the direction from which a projectile came.

14     Did you also establish the distance from which it came, or did you try to

15     calculate the position -- the location from where the projectile was

16     fired?  To be more precise:  In how many cases was it possible to

17     determine the distance?

18        A.   At your last question, I don't remember.  At your first question,

19     it was not always possible to find from -- the firing point.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Did you make some sort of selection about the events

21     that you were reporting on or did you report everything that was

22     happening?

23        A.   When I was on the observation post, we reported what we were able

24     to detect as impacts, and we always had to be two observers to agree,

25     what we saw or heard, before we reported it.

Page 8664

 1        Q.   Thank you.  And how unimportant did an event have to be that it

 2     would not be included in your report?

 3        A.   I have to answer that I can't remember.

 4        Q.   If I may help you.  Can we consider it that what you reported on

 5     was important and what you did not report on was not important?

 6        A.   Everything we reported were, for us, important.

 7        Q.   But what you didn't report on you considered unimportant; is that

 8     right?

 9        A.   No, it's not correct.

10        Q.   So there were some important things that you didn't report about;

11     is that correct?

12        A.   I can confirm that there were some evidence we didn't report, but

13     they were not -- that was not why, they were not important.

14        Q.   What were the reasons, then?

15        A.   At times, it was very, very busy, and two observers were not able

16     to report everything that happened.

17        Q.   Thank you.  Can you just briefly tell us:  What were the

18     restrictions or limitations you had in your work?  Now I'm speaking about

19     your work in Sarajevo, in the Muslim part of Sarajevo.

20        A.   Normally, we should have freedom of movement as observers.  This

21     is not -- this was not true.  Inside Sarajevo, the ABiH put restrictions

22     on our movements; where to go, when to go there, yes.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Did that prevent you from getting an insight into

24     certain events of which you wanted to report?

25        A.   Yes, of course, because we were not allowed to go close to the

Page 8665

 1     confrontation line, as they said to us, for our own safety.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  Is it true that you heard that among the UN troops,

 3     there had been rumours about Muslims shooting at their own civilians?

 4        A.   It may happen that I heard those rumours, but I can't remember

 5     exactly.

 6        Q.   Do you agree with me that you saw the BiH Army opening fire from

 7     Sarajevo?  Most usually, the fire was mortar fire; is that correct?

 8        A.   I saw and heard BiH Army firing mortars from BiH side, yes.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Since you were on that side, you couldn't see where

10     the shells fell in the Serbian part of Sarajevo?  It was not customary

11     for monitors from one side to cross over to the other side; right?

12        A.   From my --

13             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Sorry.  Compound question.

14             JUDGE KWON:  There are two questions.

15             Can you answer the question, Mr. Brennskag?

16             THE WITNESS:  I answered the question:  From my side inside

17     Sarajevo, I could not see the impacts of those mortars firing from inside

18     Sarajevo.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20        Q.   And the second question was this:  Was it customary for monitors

21     to cross from one side to the other side across the confrontation line or

22     did they actually stick to their original side?

23        A.   I entered Sarajevo -- inside Sarajevo, on the BiH side, at the

24     2nd of June, and at that time, sector UN observers -- Sector Sarajevo did

25     not have any observers on BSA side, and we, inside Sarajevo, were not

Page 8666

 1     allowed to go across the line and inspect on BSA side.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  What were your observation posts known as?  What were

 3     they called?

 4        A.   I can only remember exactly my own observation post, and this was

 5     on the hills of Vitkovac.  And as far as I remember, it was called

 6     Sierra Victor 2.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Is it also correct that you observed that the Muslim

 8     side had opened mobile mortar fire, and after that, the mobile mortars

 9     were moved to a different position?

10        A.   I didn't observe that the firing from mortars were mobile, but we

11     knew that they -- after the firing, they moved the weapons.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Do you agree with me that you were aware -- that you

13     had either seen, yourself, or learned from others that the Muslim forces

14     deployed their mortars close to your positions; for example, close to the

15     PTT building and so on and so forth?

16        A.   We knew that the BiH -- ABiH had mortars in a junkyard downhill

17     from our OP, but I was never able to spot the mortars visually.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Did you establish that the Bosnian Army, as you call

19     it, set up its military positions in the civilian zones, which, according

20     to you, they should not have done?

21        A.   I'm not sure of the word you mean, "establish."

22        Q.   Did you see them do that?  Were you sure that they were doing

23     something that they were not supposed to do, that they should not have

24     done?

25        A.   I did not see any weapon positions, as I earlier said, inside

Page 8667

 1     Sarajevo.  We knew they had weapons; for example, what I said about the

 2     mortars in the junkyard.  And, also, if they had weapon positions close

 3     or inside civilian area, where civilian people are living, they shouldn't

 4     do that.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Allow me to quote a sentence from your statement

 6     provided on the 26th of October, 2006.  On page 4:

 7             [In English] "I did see the Bosnians establish military position

 8     within civilian areas, which is something they should not have done."

 9             [Interpretation] Is this your sentence, a sentence from your

10     statement?

11        A.   Yes.  I said first that I didn't see any weapon positions.  I

12     know -- and I visited military offices inside Sarajevo, close to where

13     people were living.

14        Q.   Thank you.  You also stated that, judging by the fire, you could

15     establish that the fire had been opened from 80-millimetre mortars, and

16     those were the mortars that were deployed within the city of Sarajevo?

17        A.   I know that they were firing from that junkyard, as I have stated

18     before.

19        Q.   You also stated, did you not, in the Dragomir Milosevic case, on

20     the 8th of March, 2007, on page 3492:

21             [In English] "Several times I saw soldiers in the uniform of the

22     BH-held side of Sarajevo"?

23        A.   Yes, there were a lot of soldiers in uniform, or uniformed

24     people, inside Sarajevo.

25        Q.   Thank you.  You also saw, close to your observation post, a 55

Page 8668

 1     tank belonging to the BiH Army; right?

 2        A.   Yes, I saw this every time I went to my OP on Vitkovac.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  You also realise that Alipasino Polje and the

 4     "Oslobodjenje" building were close to the PTT building, and that trenches

 5     and a front-line were in front of the two of them; right?

 6        A.   No, I didn't see any trenches in the place where I call

 7     Alipasino Polje.

 8        Q.   And do you know where the "Oslobodjenje" building was?  And if

 9     you do, could you tell us whether that building was on the front-line,

10     itself?

11        A.   I can't remember where the "Oslobodjenje" building was.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Is it correct that the 1st Corps of the BiH Army was

13     deployed in the Muslim part of Sarajevo?

14        A.   I can't remember.

15        Q.   If you didn't know the name of that strategic unit, did you at

16     least know the names -- the deployment of brigades in Sarajevo?  I'm

17     talking about Muslim brigades in the Muslim part of Sarajevo.

18        A.   I can't remember the deployment of the brigades inside Sarajevo.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20             Could the Court please produce 65 ter document 14731.

21             I would like to jog your memory of the things that you once

22     noted.

23             Can this be blown up.  I don't think that there is a translation.

24     Or, rather, there is.  Can we have the English and the Norwegian page.

25     We don't need the translation in Serbian.  Instead of Serbian, if

Page 8669

 1     available, can we see the Norwegian version.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Are these your notes, sir?

 4        A.   Yes, it's my personal notes.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  In the third paragraph after the date, it says:

 6             [In English] "All that I have left from that time is a loose

 7     collection of personal notes."

 8             [Interpretation] Can you tell us where these notes are, and would

 9     it be possible to use them?

10        A.   These notes were made for me, I think, around 2001, and they were

11     at that time meant just for me.  Some of the comments are what I had

12     observed and seen, some of the comments are just my own thoughts, and

13     some of the comments are second-hand information collected after the war.

14        Q.   Thank you.  You stated at one point that the two of us had never

15     met; is that correct?

16        A.   That is correct.

17        Q.   Thank you.  Do you agree with me that now I have the right to be

18     shocked, when I read the fifth paragraph in your notes, where it says:

19             "I also write this article with a sense of shock that neither

20     Radovan Karadzic nor Ratko Mladic have been arrested ..."

21             And so on and so on.

22             [Interpretation] Why were you in a state of shock, given the fact

23     that the two of us do not have any sort of history together?

24        A.   As I said, this is my personal notes, and it was meant for me.

25     And you have the right to react as you want.

Page 8670

 1        Q.   Thank you.  Is your shock now over, and can I take it that your

 2     testimony here today has been and will continue to be impartial?

 3        A.   I don't know any answer to that question.  Could you please be

 4     more correct?

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6             Can we now go to page 16.

 7             I am still confident that your state of shock that you once felt

 8     will pass in the course of this testimony.

 9             It's the previous page in English -- or, rather, in Norwegian.

10     The section that I'm interested in is on the previous page.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   Can I draw your attention to the last paragraph in English, and I

13     believe that you will find the case to be the same in Norwegian.  You

14     were talking about military units within Sarajevo in the summer of 1995.

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   And then you say that BiH liaison officers at the headquarters

17     for UN Sector Sarajevo were Captain Edvo and Captain Nermin, and then you

18     say that the Command of the 1st Corps was close to the October Square; is

19     that correct?

20        A.   Yes.  It's the office, yes.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Does it arise from all that that you knew that the

22     1st Corps consisted of the 12th Division, the 14th Division, and the 16th

23     Division, and that the 12th Division was deployed in the city of

24     Sarajevo, itself?

25        A.   I can't say the accuracy of this note.  This was my personal

Page 8671

 1     notes, what I had managed to obtain.  And what is correct of it, I can't

 2     say today.

 3        Q.   Very well, but these are your notes.  You either checked all that

 4     or you believed somebody's words.

 5             Do you know that the 12th Division consisted of brigades and that

 6     they were deployed in the Muslim part of Sarajevo?

 7        A.   It's two questions.  I try to ask -- to answer the first

 8     question, if I had checked all that or you believed somebody's words.  I

 9     noted this, what I heard, for myself.

10             As to the second question, do you know that the 12th Division

11     consisted of brigades and that they were deployed in the Muslim part of

12     Sarajevo, I didn't exactly know.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14             Can we go to the following pages, both in English and Norwegian.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   To console you, sir, I can tell you that your notes are

17     absolutely correct.  Does it say here that the Staff of the 111th Brigade

18     was in the city and that the Staff of the 112th Brigade was close to the

19     Dolac Railway Station, and then the 115th Brigade had its headquarters in

20     Stari Grad, and the 152nd Brigade headquarters was in the old part of the

21     town of Kovaci, and then the 155th Brigade had its headquarters at

22     Dobrinja?  Is all that correct?

23        A.   I said I'm not sure if my notes are correct.  But if you say it's

24     correct, maybe I have got my notes correct.  But this was what I heard in

25     meetings or from others.  I did not exactly check where those

Page 8672

 1     positions -- where they were.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Ms. Sutherland.

 3             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Your Honour, I was going to rise a moment ago to

 4     say:  Can the accused be told to refrain from making comments and put

 5     questions?

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Let's move on, Mr. Karadzic.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 8        Q.   Do you see that the Slavne Olovska Brigade was headquartered near

 9     Buco Potok and that Buco Potok was very close to Vitkovac, where your OP

10     was?

11        A.   I don't know where this position is.

12        Q.   Very well.  When we look at the map, then we will establish it.

13     Does it not say here that the Tvrtko Brigade had its headquarters in

14     Cengic Vila, and the Staff of the 1st Mechanised Brigade was near Hrasno,

15     and of the 102nd Mechanised Brigade, its headquarters was close to Dolac,

16     and outside of Sarajevo, at Igman, was the 82nd Mountain Brigade, in

17     Hrasnicki Stan, Hrasnica, 181st Brigade, and in Hrasnica itself the 104th

18     Brigade; is that correct?  Did you not write that in your notes

19     about the deployment in Sarajevo?

20        A.   I don't have a map here.  I noted what's stated in my personal

21     notes, but I don't know where the positions are.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

23             Can we -- can I just read just one sentence of Article 31 of your

24     statement:

25             [In English] "It was a very hectic time.  There could be up to

Page 8673

 1     150 impacts incoming into Sarajevo during a 24-hour period."

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Do you know that in June, a large Muslim offensive began to

 4     unblock Sarajevo, as they called it?

 5        A.   No.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 7             Can we look at page 10, and that will be the last thing for

 8     today.  Page 10 of this same document, please.  Page 10 --

 9             JUDGE KWON:  We'll adjourn for today.  We'll continue next week.

10             I was told that --

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] One --

12             JUDGE KWON:  -- we need to adjourn right now.

13                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

14             JUDGE KWON:  I misunderstood the situation.

15             It is my understanding that you have to leave by 4.30 on Monday.

16             THE WITNESS:  I've already told that I had to leave Monday, not

17     the time.

18             JUDGE KWON:  I think that's arranged by the -- is there any

19     reason why we should not sit in the morning on Monday, then?

20                           [Trial Chamber confers]

21             JUDGE KWON:  No, there is a reason for that for Monday.  We are

22     supposed to have a videolink testimony, which should be conducted in the

23     afternoon, because the morning session should be used by another Chamber

24     which uses the same videolink.

25             I think you will have about less than two hours on Monday, and --

Page 8674

 1                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 2             JUDGE KWON:  It was suggested to us by the Court Deputy to sit in

 3     the morning, to conclude the evidence of this witness in the morning, and

 4     then we continue with videolink in the afternoon, if that is agreeable to

 5     the parties.

 6             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Yes, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I say what I think.  May I say

 9     what I think.

10             Namely, Mr. Brennskag speaks Norwegian.  He doesn't speak Serbian

11     or English.  On the other hand, the Prosecution has no restrictions in

12     relation to written materials that they can introduce through this

13     witness.  So I believe that the time that -- that the time allocated to

14     me, in view of the mother tongue of Mr. Brennskag and the slow manner in

15     which he's responding, is overly restrictive, and I would kindly like to

16     have this matter reviewed once more.

17             I understood that Mr. Brennskag did not have to leave, but that

18     somebody else told him that he had to leave on Monday.

19             JUDGE KWON:  It is the VWS that arranged the travel arrangement

20     for him.

21             And I don't agree with your observation that he does not speak

22     English.  His English is just perfect.  I don't see any problem.

23                           [Trial Chamber confers]

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With all due respect, Brennskag,

25     himself -- Mr. Brennskag, himself, has said that he needs to read it.  I

Page 8675

 1     understand that he understands English, but he also needs to read it, and

 2     this is taking up a lot of our time.  So if it may be permitted, that

 3     I can remind Mr. Brennskag of what we have here.  BH starts an

 4     offensive --

 5             [In English] "The offensive gradually peters up to the BS

 6     intensifies its bombardment of Sarajevo and other so-called safe areas."

 7             [Interpretation] Therefore, you were aware of the --

 8             JUDGE KWON:  No, we'll --

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- the offensive.

10             JUDGE KWON:  We'll continue on Monday.

11             MS. SUTHERLAND:  Your Honour.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Ms. Sutherland.

13             MS. SUTHERLAND:  I was just going to say that Your Honour had

14     already decided that we would not continue further for today.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we will adjourn today, but there are a couple

16     of other matters.

17             If it is agreeable to the parties and staff, we will resume on

18     Monday at 9.00, and the conclusion of which we'll resume to hear the next

19     witness through videolink at 2.15.  Monday may be a long day for all of

20     us.

21             And in relation to - is it the 26th motion?  I didn't count -

22     which requested for an adjournment or suspension, we've received the

23     response from the Prosecution.  Whatever the decision we may make, it is

24     our opinion that immediate [indiscernible] is not warranted, so we'll

25     continue next week, and we'll try to issue our decision as soon as

Page 8676

 1     possible.

 2             Mr. Brennskag, we'll adjourn for today and resume tomorrow

 3     morning -- yes, Monday morning, and please be reminded that you are not

 4     supposed to discuss your testimony with anybody else.

 5             Please have a nice weekend.

 6                           [The witness stands down]

 7                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.09 p.m.,

 8                           to be reconvened on Monday, the 1st day of

 9                           November, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.