Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 9114

 1                           Friday, 5 November 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness takes the stand]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 10.02 a.m.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Good morning, everyone.  Good morning, Dr. Turkusic.

 7             THE WITNESS:  Good morning.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor.

 9             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, Mr. President.  I wonder if I could clarify

10     very briefly one matter arising out of the admission of associated

11     exhibits.  As Your Honours will recall, yesterday you decided not to

12     admit reports dealing with nonscheduled incidents.  Now, on page 33 of

13     the witness's statement, he does refer to two incidents, and each of

14     those incidents concerns an impact which took place at approximately the

15     same time as the Markale 2 impact and each of the shells bears the same

16     markings on the stabiliser to indicate that they were -- the stabilisers

17     were manufactured in Krusik in Valjevo, in Serbia, in July of 1993.  So I

18     would tender those two reports in order for Your Honours to have to rely

19     upon, if Your Honours wish, as being an integral part of the evidence

20     concerning the question of who fired the Markale 2 projectile, for that

21     specific purpose.  So for that reason, I tender both of those reports

22     which -- both of which fall under the 65 ter number 16835.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Let me be clear.  This relates to another shell in

24     Markale 2.

25             MR. GAYNOR:  They relate to -- to -- a series of shells were

Page 9115

 1     fired on that morning.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  These are two of the shells which dropped not at

 4     Markale 2 but in the centre of Sarajevo.  So they form part of the same

 5     series of shells.  So the paragraph number 18 and paragraph number 19 are

 6     two of that series of shells.  They were nonfatal, I understand.

 7     Markale 2 was the only projectile that resulted in fatalities.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  But he states in his statement that all those are --

 9     shells were manufactured in Krusik Valjevo in July 1993?  So that's in

10     evidence already.

11             MR. GAYNOR:  I appreciate that point very much, but in order for

12     Your Honours to have the actual reports at your disposal, I would tender

13     the reports too, just to give Your Honours the option of relying on the

14     reports themselves.

15             JUDGE KWON:  I will consult my colleagues.

16             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you.

17                           [Trial Chamber confers]

18             JUDGE KWON:  We are of the view that the statements would

19     suffice.

20             MR. GAYNOR:  Very well, Mr. President.  Thank you.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Gaynor.

22             Mr. Karadzic.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Good morning,

24     Your Excellencies.  Good morning, everyone.

25                           WITNESS:  EMIR TURKUSIC [Resumed]

Page 9116

 1                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

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

 3        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Turkusic.

 4        A.   Good morning.

 5        Q.   We will have to make pauses between question and answer to enable

 6     interpreters to do their job.

 7             While we're at it, Mr. Turkusic, if somebody wanted to trick you

 8     experts by believing that a mine was produced -- a shell was produced in

 9     Serbia in 1993, that would not be a big problem, would it?

10             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection, Mr. President.  The question is inviting

11     speculation.

12             JUDGE KWON:  That's not for the witness to answer, Mr. Karadzic.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I believe the witness told us that

14     4 per cent of shells do not explode, that those shells cannot have

15     anything other useful than explosives.  Nothing but explosive explodes,

16     and everything else remains, and these remains can deceitfully

17     represented as something produced in Serbia, the remains of the shell

18     that did not explode.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Is that a question?

20             Can you make a comment on that statement, Dr. Turkusic?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely, I can comment.  The

22     stabiliser of any shell that exploded and a shell that did explode would

23     be the same in terms of your speculation that something was passed off as

24     something else, but I, as a witness of the truth, cannot follow that

25     argument which is hypothetical.  I am only testifying about facts that I

Page 9117

 1     know.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   I'm not asking you to confirm that they did pass something off

 4     for something else.  I'm just asking, did they have stabilisers of shells

 5     produced in Krusik Valjevo in Serbia?  Did your army have such

 6     stabilisers?

 7        A.   You're confusing stabilisers and shells themselves.  A shell that

 8     did not explode cannot be launched again, cannot be used again for an

 9     explosion.

10        Q.   But can a tail fin be placed somewhere, just be placed on an

11     incident site without trying to explode anything?

12        A.   I cannot tell you that because you're asking me to follow your

13     train of speculation, so to speak.  You know that hypothetically any one

14     of us can do anything.

15        Q.   That's enough.  Thank you.  You investigated the incident in the

16     queue for water.  It used to be the school called Simon Bulevar.  Now

17     it's called Skender Kulenovic.

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   What did you conclude there?

20             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

21             MR. GAYNOR:  I simply want to point out that this incident has

22     been dropped from the indictment.  We are not leading any evidence.  I'm

23     not suggesting that cross-examination needs to be stopped.  I'm just

24     making Your Honours aware of that.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  You're moving to another incident,

Page 9118

 1     Mr. Karadzic?

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Allow me to use this example to

 3     show the pattern of inaccurate conclusions of which my indictment is

 4     full, as well as the indictments against other Serbs.  This is a howling

 5     example of how that is done.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, but could you do that very briefly.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Do you stand by the conclusion that was submitted to the

 9     Prosecutor's office, the final conclusion about the direction of fire in

10     the case of this shell?

11        A.   If I remember the case correctly, that shell hit the frame of the

12     window of the gym, the very edge, and spilling shrapnel downwards, killed

13     a large number of people who were wounded in the upper parts of the body

14     from up high.  That was near the water pump.  If that's what you mean, I

15     stand by definitely -- by the azimuth we determined, and I remember that

16     investigation.

17        Q.   Then I don't need to call the report, or should I?

18        A.   You can call our report if you're going to ask about details from

19     it, but I know that -- I'm trying to select the right word for a report

20     of a foreign military investigator which shows a very wrong direction in

21     a very wrong way.

22        Q.    You're talking about Mr. Higgs.

23        A.   I don't know of that name.

24        Q.   Then I will have to call the report.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can I get 65 ter 15053.

Page 9119

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   What's the calibre of that shell?

 3        A.   Will you give me the source document, please?  It could be, if I

 4     remember well, 82 millimetres.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's not the right document.

 6     65 ter 15053, official report.  ERN 0033-4859.  Page 5 in this number.

 7     If this is 15053, then it is page 5.  The ERN number is 0033-4859.

 8     That's it.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Is this the first page, and your name is under number 5 here;

11     right?

12        A.   That's correct.

13        Q.   Probably on the next page here there is a conclusion that a

14     120-millimetre shell hit there.

15        A.   Can you show me that next page?  I have to refresh my memory.

16     This was 15 years ago, after all.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Can we see the English translation as well.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is not the right document in

19     English.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The English is another document.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Do you see the last but one line in the second column in Serbian?

23        A.   I only see Bosnian.

24        Q.   Okay.  Call it whatever you like.

25        A.   We wrote in Bosnian.

Page 9120

 1        Q.   It's my treat.

 2        A.   I don't need your treats.  Just call it whatever it's called.

 3     Which line?

 4        Q.   The last but one line of paragraph 2.  Below the place where the

 5     shell hit the wall, calibre, 120 millimetres.  A number of shrapnel was

 6     found originating from the exploded projectile.

 7        A.   Where is that line?  I believe this tail fin and the rest of the

 8     material was collected by members of the CSB, the security services

 9     centre.  And I believe in the file, on page 1, we can see their names and

10     affiliation.  It would be good to see the pictures.

11        Q.   We will.  Do you confirm --

12             JUDGE KWON:  We need to see the next page in English.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   It says:  "Traces of mechanical -- of machining --" it's the

15     second paragraph in English.

16        A.   Yes.  It says 120-millimetre mortar shell, et cetera.

17        Q.   And that shell hit the wall three or four metres high from the

18     side of the atrium where a water pump was mounted; is that correct?

19        A.   Correct.

20        Q.   Which part of the job did you do here?

21        A.   My first job here was to determine the azimuth.

22        Q.   Thank you.  So you made a sketch.

23        A.   Both the sketch and an analysis of the scene, and the photographs

24     later, of course, but the scene itself gives much more information.

25        Q.   You determined north, north-west, which corresponds to the

Page 9121

 1     aggressor barracks in Nedzarici.  Did you also determine the station --

 2     sorry, the distance?

 3        A.   No.  With the distance you have the same problem with every

 4     shell.  You have to know the angle and the charge.  It's common

 5     knowledge, nothing new.

 6        Q.   You say in your statement of 24 November 1994:

 7             "I'm making a sketch on the scene.  First of all, I used the

 8     method of elimination.  I marked on the drawing directions that have been

 9     ruled out as impossible under numbers 1, 2, and 3," and a negative sign

10     in a circle.

11             Did you use indeed the method of elimination?

12        A.   You have to show me that picture with numbers 1, 2, and 3.  And

13     mentioning this methodology, elimination results from the fact that on

14     our television that night in the news bulletin, it was said that the

15     shell had come from an easterly direction, which relative to this site

16     would be Lukavica barracks.  However, if you look at the impact and the

17     site, it was practically impossible.  Not even a guided missile Maljutka

18     could do that.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we get 65 ter 09969, page 3.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can we zoom in a little?

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   It says:  "I'm making a drawing of the situation on site."

23        A.   Right.

24        Q.   And you marked it, and you say:

25             "We also take into account the traces numbered 6.  They are

Page 9122

 1     traces we take in consideration to determine the direction of fire.

 2     These are traces caused by shrapnel."

 3               That's also useful when determining the direction of fire;

 4     right?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we get 1D02191.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   On this map can you mark primary school Skender -- sorry,

 9     Simon Bulevar, later called Skender Kulenovic?

10        A.   As far as I can see, it's probably the red rectangle.  It's

11     slightly deeper inside relative to this street that cuts through.

12        Q.   Can you extend the east wall with a line both upwards and

13     downwards?

14        A.   The east wall of the school?

15        Q.   If that's the school.

16        A.   If that's the school.  I'm not a cartographer, nor can I

17     immediately recognise what you have been studying for a long time

18     probably.

19             This is the school, and the map is or -- if the map is oriented

20     north-south, then this red rectangle would probably be the school.

21     Inside it is an atrium, and the east wall would be this.  I will extend

22     that line.

23        Q.   I'm afraid that would be the west wall.  You can extend both

24     lines, but if you agree, the east wall is on the right-hand side.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we erase this and try again.

Page 9123

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Do you agree that the east wall is between the red rectangle and

 3     the letter Sh?

 4             JUDGE KWON:  I'm asking this question for myself:  Suppose,

 5     hypothetically, you may succeed in raising a reasonable doubt as to this

 6     incident.  It was removed from the indictment.  The Prosecution did not

 7     rely on this.  What could -- could your success assist your defence at

 8     all?  I'm at a loss.  Why are you delving into such detail about this

 9     incident?  Be brief.  Just put your case and get the answer from the

10     witness.  I don't see any point of going into such detail with this

11     removed incident.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But the model on which they

13     determine the direction of fire is identical.  In many cases, this

14     witness did that job or other people on his team, in his service, and

15     everywhere they did the same thing.  They turned the globe around.  The

16     cardinal points were moved, and then it turns out -- or it's made out to

17     be from the Serbian side.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Can you mark the east wall and mark the direction where Dobrinja

20     is.  And very soon we will get to that.

21        A.   If this is the school, then the atrium is in the middle.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, I asked you to put your case.  Put

23     your case to the witness in relation to this and move on quickly.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 9124

 1        Q.   Witness, you erroneously established on the site the disposition

 2     of the traces and shrapnel.  Number two, you mis-determined the sides of

 3     the world.

 4        A.   That's not true.  Show me the photograph of the school -- of the

 5     atrium and precisely of the wall where the shell hit.  It's out of the

 6     question that we determined the sides of the world erroneously or

 7     anything else.

 8        Q.   Very well.  Please, then, draw an extension of the eastern wall

 9     upwards and downwards.

10        A.   I don't want to play games with maps.  Can I have Dobrinja from a

11     different angle, and can I have somebody tell me if north is up on this

12     map -- or, rather, can you enlarge the map for me to see the airport

13     runway?

14        Q.   Don't you see the runway?

15        A.   No.  I can see the neighbourhood.

16        Q.   Can't you see the runway at the bottom of the map?

17        A.   Is this the white shape here?  If the runway is the white line

18     going out of the map, then this is the southern side.

19        Q.   Do we see the meridians on the map?

20        A.   Well, if the map has the right bearing north/south, then these

21     are the meridians.

22        Q.   Can you now extend the eastern wall of the school?

23        A.   The eastern external wall of school would be thus disposed.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have 1D2244.  Let's skip

25     this now.

Page 9125

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Can you please place your signature and the date on the map?

 3        A.   Your Honours, is that proper?  I was asked to mark a wall, and I

 4     have no idea as to what the purpose of this will be, and is this

 5     consistent with cross-examination?

 6        Q.   Can I ask you Witness --

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.  If the questions are irrelevant, we

 8     will stop the accused.  You marked the location of the school for the

 9     Chamber.  Could you put the date and your signature on this map.

10             THE WITNESS: [Marks]

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   Do you agree that the wall -- the extension of the wall would go

13     on to the Bulevar?

14             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter didn't catch the name of the

15     street.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Can the document be

18     admitted.

19             JUDGE KWON:  What road was it that you referred to, Mr. Karadzic?

20     The interpreters couldn't hear that.  Boulevard something.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mimar Sinana, which is the street

22     south of the school.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  We'll keep it.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D877, Your Honours.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have just for a short while

Page 9126

 1     1D2244.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Is this the school, Mr. Turkusic?

 4        A.   It might well be.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Is this Bulevar Mimar Sinana, the street from which

 6     the photograph is taken?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  Is the white side of the school the gym?

 9        A.   Possibly.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Can you confirm that the gym runs at a 90-degree

11     angle to Bulevar?

12        A.   No.

13        Q.   At perpendicularly?

14        A.   No.  The photograph was taken from quite the opposite street, not

15     the one from which we would enter the school, and normally one would

16     enter the school from the northern side.  You would reach the atrium and

17     then to your left you would have the gym.  So this is the opposite view.

18        Q.   In other words, you would enter the school from the opposite side

19     and you had the gym to your left?

20        A.   Right.

21        Q.   So is this consistent with what we see on this photograph?  If

22     you enter the school from this side, the gym would be to your right.

23     Isn't this the gym, then?

24        A.   Yes, that's right.

25        Q.   Can you mark for us where the incident took place with an arrow.

Page 9127

 1        A.   No.  In this photograph, it can only be shown as an

 2     approximation.  So vertically into the atrium, and that would roughly be

 3     consistent with these two arrows.

 4        Q.   Can you mark the gym so that we can tell exactly the gym from the

 5     school.

 6        A.   [Marks]

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Can we have the date and signature, please.

 8        A.   [Marks]

 9             JUDGE KWON:  That will be Exhibit D878.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now have 65 ter 1 -- or,

11     rather, 21662, page 17.  Page 17.  Page 17.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   The street is now called Mustafe Kamerica; is that right?

14        A.   Probably.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Could you check the 65 ter number.  I checked it.

16     It's only of two pages.

17             THE ACCUSED:  [Interpretation] I have 65 ter 21662.  It's a

18     shelling documentation containing a diagram made by Mr. Turkusic.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Can we see the next page, the second page.  Are you

20     referring to this one?

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We can have this as well.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Please, did you mark here the direction of fire?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   From the direction of Nedzarici, but you cannot claim that it was

Page 9128

 1     fired from Nedzarici; is that right?

 2        A.   In all the trials before this Tribunal it is common knowledge

 3     that the place from where a shell was fired can be determined by the

 4     angle of descent and by knowing the charge, but -- so that we have

 5     several parameters that determine the place.  The direction of fire shown

 6     here is consistent with a 360-degree angle of the azimuth.  We have the

 7     bearings north-south as they should normally be.  So this is consistent

 8     with the way we entered the building.  To the left we have the gym and

 9     the eastern wall of the gym which was hit by the shell coming from the

10     opposite side but at an angle shown by the azimuth, and the pattern left

11     by the explosion can clearly be seen on the wall.  We will see it in a

12     photo later on.

13        Q.   Thank you.  Can we now have your diagram, which is 10357, page 6.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So 65 ter 10357, page 6.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation].

16        Q.   Is this your diagram?  Or sketch.

17        A.   Can I ask that it be confirmed that this is indeed my sketch.

18        Q.   Thank you.  You marked here the directions of shrapnel fragments.

19        A.   Well, I'm not sure.  I want somebody to confirm for me that this

20     is the sketch that I made, because I don't remember.

21             JUDGE KWON:  This is part of that investigation report.  Would

22     you like to see the legend as well?  I think it's on the previous page.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] With my signature.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Why don't you show the witness the first page of

25     this document.  No, no, not this one, the -- 15053, the report that we've

Page 9129

 1     seen before.

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] With the preamble.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With me it's 10357.  That's the

 4     number I have.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Is this the one?  There are various versions.  Can

 6     you try 15053?

 7             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.  There is a front page which is the 14th page

 8     of 15053, as Your Honour has said.  I don't see the witness's signature

 9     on that page, I must say, but we can show it to the witness.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I saw previously was the cover

11     page of the entire report.  As far as I remember, the entire report was

12     produced by the CSB Sarajevo, whereas we did what was shown in the

13     previous slide or picture and shown in a legend which was the place where

14     the shell landed.  That was the arrow.  And the azimuth below.

15             JUDGE KWON:  And let's show page 11 of that previous document.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this document we can see the

17     heading which indicates that it was the Security Services Centre Sarajevo

18     which produced it, Public Security Station Novi Sad.

19             JUDGE KWON:  I'll show you everything.  Page 11.  From there move

20     on to page 15 and 16.  Next page.  Next page.  Next page.  Next page.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A moment, please.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  Previous page.

23             THE WITNESS:  Previous page.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Who signed this?

Page 9130

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Just -- you can take a look again and let's move on.

 2     Next page.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I recognise -- what I can

 4     tell, that is, is that I don't recognise the two signatures at the bottom

 5     of that page.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  And the next page.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A moment, please.  I am almost

 8     certain that this sketch of the disposition of the shrapnel, places where

 9     the wounded were, is not something that I drew.  And the place of the

10     impact.  If the arrow on the left marks or indicates north, I don't see

11     that the place of impact has been shown explicitly.  What would this

12     arrow marked S stand for on the left-hand side?

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   Mr. Turkusic, who determined the azimuth in this particular case?

15        A.   I did with my colleagues from the KDZ.

16        Q.   Thank you.  You said first that it was you this morning.  Is this

17     north as you marked it here?

18        A.   You're telling me you again.  I told you that I am almost

19     positive that I didn't draw the sketch, and I am puzzled by the arrow

20     marked S, because it seems to indicate north.  But is that north really?

21     Had I drawn the sketch myself, I would have recognised this particular

22     symbol and would have been sure of it.

23        Q.   We are dealing, Mr. Turkusic, with an entire investigation

24     process where you were the one determining the azimuth.

25        A.   When it comes to me determining the azimuth, I urge you to show

Page 9131

 1     me the physical evidence, which is the photograph of the impact, where I

 2     will be able to explain to you where the shell came from, hitting the

 3     walls of the gym -- the wall of the gym, and the disposition of the

 4     shrapnel as well as the general geographic direction.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have the next page.  871 is

 6     what I wanted.  We seem to have a page missing here.  Right.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Is this something you made?  You say, "I made a sketch of the

 9     scene."  Is this the sketch of the scene you made?

10        A.   I don't recognise it.  Can we have a photograph and -- that will

11     help me tell if I made it?

12        Q.   And where in this case is the sketch you made?

13        A.   I haven't been able to see the entire case file.  Can you show me

14     all the pages and specifically the photograph of the point of impact.

15        Q.   We will come to the photograph in due time.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can I ask the Prosecution to

17     provide us with the sketch relevant in this case and the entire case file

18     for -- in hard copy for the witness.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  That would be the best if I

20     could get a hard copy of the case file with all the pages involved so

21     that I could find the sketch that I drew.

22             MR. GAYNOR:  Your Honour, we've been down this road before.

23     Mr. Karadzic should have hard copies ready during his cross-examination.

24     Once again we are still on the incident which has been expressly removed

25     from the indictment.

Page 9132

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 2             MR. GAYNOR:  I do -- I do have a hard copy here with some red

 3     words written by myself on the front.  I'm happy to give it to the

 4     witness.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  If you are happy with it, we will allow the witness

 6     to take a look at it.  Thank you, Mr. Gaynor.

 7             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I'm not representing that

 8     that's the entire case file.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we place on the screen another

11     sketch that will explain this indication of north.  1D2234.

12             MR. GAYNOR:  I think the witness was given an opportunity by the

13     Presiding Judge to look at the file.  Perhaps he can be given a moment to

14     do that.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Would you like to make any correction to the

18     statement you've made, Dr. Turkusic, after having taken a look at the

19     document?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I saw just a part of the document.

21     In the conclusion of this document where I can recognise my signature, we

22     say:  "Attached to this document a card -- a map with azimuth drawn in."

23             Now, the document we saw previously on the screen is the cover

24     page for the remaining part, then a sketch on which I confirmed -- a

25     sketch of the neighbourhood where I confirmed the azimuth.  It's also an

Page 9133

 1     attachment to the report.  The drawing of the scene was made by people

 2     from the CSB, and then come the two sketches that I did not recognise

 3     because I did not make them, and I did not see them before.  Let's move

 4     on.

 5             These are findings from the specialist of the general hospital

 6     Dobrinja.  Death certificates, death certificates.  I apologise to those

 7     people, the last traces of whose death I'm just leafing through like

 8     this.  Statements taken from citizens gathered.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Doctor.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Again, protocol of a statement.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Now that we --

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Then I really insist on being shown

13     a photograph that unequivocally shows the azimuth and where can be no

14     talk about the cardinal points being turned around and confusing the map.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   We'll come to photographs, but the problem is that they were

17     taken indoors and you cannot see any orientation or cardinal points.  We

18     see in the documentation that in this case you decided it was north.

19        A.   It's not real north.  North is an azimuth of almost 360.

20     Anything less than 360 takes the azimuth further west.

21        Q.   I'm not talking about the azimuth.  I'm talking about north.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we get 1D2234.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You see, Mr. Karadzic, the compass,

24     wherever you take it, shows the sides of the world.  If we had a compass

25     on this table, it would still be showing north, south, and east, west.

Page 9134

 1     The scene with clear traces just after the -- just after the explosion,

 2     the soot on the walls and the traces of TNT, all these are indubitable

 3     marks that show unequivocally the direction.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Look at this.

 6        A.   This is good.

 7        Q.   Then can you orient this and then draw -- you draw -- you drew in

 8     the -- the azimuth.

 9        A.   This is better.  Here you can see the north.  You can see how the

10     school is oriented, and you can see the azimuth showing the direction

11     from which the shell came.

12        Q.   Thank you.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May this case file be admitted?

14             JUDGE KWON:  The sketch at the bottom with marking, which is

15     made, apparently, by the Defence is something you can confirm that is

16     done correctly based upon the azimuth.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if I understood

18     correctly, this lower drawing was made by the Defence.  Of course, that

19     makes me wary.  Perhaps this is accurately done, but that makes me doubt

20     things again, and I want things to be analysed step-by-step.

21             Why are they avoiding to show me the photograph of the scene?  It

22     shows everything very clearly.  But considering the shadows of the

23     shrapnel, some mistakes may have been made in orientation, but they could

24     not have changed the sides of the world.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 9135

 1        Q.   Is this visualisation of your finding correct?  Is this the

 2     direction towards Nedzarici, and is this north, and is this the place of

 3     impact?  The place of impact is up.  We just drew in angles.

 4        A.   I cannot confirm.  I have the right to be suspicious because you

 5     just said we moved the cardinal points around.  That makes me suspicious,

 6     and I want us to discuss this from scratch.  Let's start from the place

 7     of impact.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Then, Excellencies, we have to go

 9     step-by-step because this is a perfect example how this was done, and we

10     are now in a position to disqualify, discredit all their work on just one

11     example.  Now --

12             JUDGE KWON:  As I said earlier, let's suppose that this is done

13     incorrectly.  What impact at all does it have on another investigations?

14     Why don't you deal with that investigation yourself?  This is purely a

15     waste of time.  And more than that, the witness said that he cannot

16     confirm this -- he cannot recognise this sketch, and he cannot confirm

17     that the direction of north was drawn correctly or not.  But what's the

18     point of delving into such detail on this document?

19             But having heard the witness that this was done by the CSB at the

20     time and the sketch -- and with the caveat that the sketch on the bottom

21     part was done by the Defence, we can admitted this.  We give the Defence

22     exhibit number.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be D879, Your Honours.

24             JUDGE KWON:  You will have ten minutes before the break, after

25     which you will have half an hour.

Page 9136

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Will you please just

 2     allow me one minute.  I accepted your suggestion to go through this case

 3     file skipping steps.  The witness wants to go through all the steps one

 4     by one.  I wanted to do what you said, just to show that everything was

 5     incorrectly determined.  First of all, the disposition of fragments and

 6     then the direction.  Two errors.  And that's a pattern how this security

 7     services centre worked.

 8             Now, I'm putting to the witness.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Mr. Turkusic, there was not a single deliberate shelling of

11     civilian areas by the Serbian side.  All the incidents of massive

12     casualties among civilians were caused by the Army of Bosnia and

13     Herzegovina, and this is proof how you laid it at the door of the Serbs.

14     I'm going to use your case to show it.

15        A.   All that you said is absolutely unacceptable.  I'm absolutely not

16     going to sign this drawing of yours, because on one example you want to

17     win this whole dispute.  You want to show that a million and 500.000

18     shells fell on Sarajevo just by shooting at military targets.  Then

19     Sarajevo must have been targeted more than the NATO alliance.  If

20     Sarajevo had that many military targets, Sarajevo would be stronger than

21     the whole NATO.

22             JUDGE KWON:  We're not asking you to sign this document.  Just

23     please answer the question.

24             Let's move on, Mr. Karadzic.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we get 1D2157.  Page 20.  And

Page 9137

 1     ERN is 875.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Which of these photographs do you wish, Mr. Turkusic?

 4        A.   Regarding this case, I had much better, much clearer photographs.

 5     You must have something better.

 6        Q.   This is from the file.

 7        A.   There are many more photographs in this file.  These are the

 8     least clear ones.  However, you can recognise the main elements both on

 9     the upper side and the lower side.  You can recognise the main elements

10     of the impact.

11        Q.   Just let's clarify one thing.  This is a complete case file that

12     goes before the Court.  This is completed material.  Is this the side of

13     the wall facing the room where the water pump is?

14        A.   Correct.

15        Q.   Thank you.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Now, we should now see another

17     photograph, 1D2209.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

19             MR. GAYNOR:  Sorry.  First of all, I want to note that this file

20     is a duplicate of the document with 65 ter 15053, and there's an English

21     translation under that number.

22             JUDGE KWON:  But what page is it?  I couldn't find it.

23             MR. GAYNOR:  This photograph --

24             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic said 1D2157, but what we are seeing is

25     15053, so that's why I was wondering.

Page 9138

 1             MR. GAYNOR:  I understand.  I understand the point.  In any

 2     event, there is an English translation available under this.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But in that case, under that number

 4     there are no photographs.  And believe us, the Defence team is not making

 5     duplicates.  We have only what was disclosed by the OTP.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I remember very

 7     clearly that there were great photographs of this scene with recognisable

 8     traces of shrapnel and clear traces of explosion leaving black stains.

 9     You can see very unclear stains on this picture, but this is really very

10     bad.  In the archive there are very high-quality photographs.  I remember

11     them very well.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Does it say that number 2 and the arrow indicate the place on the

14     wall where the projectile impacted and exploded?

15        A.   The projectile hit and exploded where this arrow shows.  If you

16     want me to show the direction --

17        Q.   No need.  This is the room where the water pump is.

18        A.   That's what the wall looked like, if I remember well.  This

19     corresponds to the photograph of that place.  The damage to the wall, on

20     the edge of the wall, shows the place where the shell hit and exploded.

21     To the left and right are stains of TNT, unreactive carbon.  In that

22     direction the blast is strongest, and the shrapnel goes.  The place of

23     impact, as we see it, shows the direction of descent of the shell,

24     although this is two dimensional.  In 3D, on the scene, we used

25     high-quality military compasses and they show north-north-west, the

Page 9139

 1     direction of Nedzarici.  There's no question of turning or moving around

 2     the cardinal points.

 3        Q.   Did the shell hit from the room where the water pump is or from

 4     the gym?

 5        A.   Neither.  The shell arrived from the air.  That space up was

 6     completely open.  Coming from the air it hit the edge of this wall, so

 7     close to the edge that the tail fin passed through into the gym that is

 8     behind the wall.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Did you measure the distance between the centre of

10     impact and this little post, this --

11        A.   Which one?

12        Q.   What is that, the little one next to the wall?

13        A.   That's the -- a bit of the frame of the window that used to be

14     there.

15        Q.   Can you put the date and signature there, please.

16        A.   [Marks]

17        Q.   Thank you.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May this be received?

19             JUDGE KWON:  I haven't got the answer.  What page is this from,

20     that 1D2157 or 15053 in e-court?  In the meantime we'll keep this.  We'll

21     admit this as Exhibit D880.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 1 -- 2157 is page 20.  Now I'd like

23     1D2209.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Page 20.  Did you say page 20?

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.

Page 9140

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  That was my question nobody answered.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 1D2209.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Is this the same wall but viewed from the gym?

 5        A.   It could be.  However, I don't understand again why these

 6     photographs are so low quality.  I was looking at very clear, good

 7     quality photographs on which you can see everything.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Why don't we show him page 21 of this previous

 9     document.

10             It's from the case file, Dr. Turkusic.

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That would be fine if that's the

12     same.

13             JUDGE KWON:  The doctor wanted to see other photos.  Why don't

14     you show him all and we just skip through and then show this.  We start

15     from page 19.  We'll just skim through.

16             Next page, yes.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Lower on the picture is the water

18     pump, I think.

19             JUDGE KWON:  And this is what we saw already.  Next page.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.  We saw it.

21             JUDGE KWON:  The photo was the one shown to you previously.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, a moment ago.

23             JUDGE KWON:  I don't know why this is so low quality but -- and

24     you'd like to see the other photos as well or you are ready to answer the

25     question?

Page 9141

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am ready to view them all.  Have

 2     I seen them all?  Stop.  Very good.  This is the tail fin that passed

 3     through, because the shell hit the very edge of the window and tail fin,

 4     with the acceleration given it by the vacuum of the centre of explosion,

 5     got additional acceleration and flew into the next room.  That's where we

 6     photographed it.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Just answer the question to be put by the accused,

 8     but now just take a look.  Page 22.

 9             And from the next page there are photos of victims.  I don't

10     think you need to see them all.  So go back to page 21 and zoom in the

11     first photo.

12             And your question, Dr. Karadzic.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can this point of impact be zoomed

14     in as far as possible.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Please look at the text, at the caption below the photograph

17     first.

18        A.   A small arrow indicates the point of impact, and the larger arrow

19     indicates the place in the room where a fragment of the projectile, tail

20     fin, was found.

21        Q.   Which after impact?

22        A.   After impact flew into the other room, and that's what I said.

23     Into the adjacent room from the one where -- adjacent to the one where

24     the individuals who were hurt were found by the water pump.  I said so.

25             Can we have the other photograph where there was a large stain on

Page 9142

 1     the wall, and can we zoom in on it as far as possible.  More, if

 2     possible.

 3        Q.   Which side did the shell arrive from?

 4        A.   From the opposite side but by the very edge of the wall, and

 5     because of the strength of the impact, the plaster or whatever the

 6     material here is was damaged.  But I don't see what this -- what this

 7     white stain here is.  Has it been added or was it there before?

 8        Q.   Let me state for the record that the Defence made no

 9     interventions into the photograph.

10        A.   I didn't mean to say that, but I find the photograph unclear.

11     Let me note that there are no black stains.  It is a known fact that a

12     TNT explosive, wherever it is, regardless of the charge where it was,

13     whether it was the mortar or the rifle-launched grenade or whatever, it

14     always leaves upon impact a large black stain, because a part of the

15     carbon contained in the TNT does not oxidise because there isn't enough

16     strength in it.  And to explain it to you as laypersons, just as you have

17     the lead in the pencil, that's the sort of stain it would leave, which

18     mean that the stain was left by the mere impact and not by the explosion

19     which, in fact, took place on the other side of this wall.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Should we have our break now?

21             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we'll --

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If I need to, I can continue.

23             JUDGE KWON:  We'll take a break for ten minutes, after which you

24     will have about 20 minutes.  I will consult the court deputy in order to

25     find out the exact time which is remaining.

Page 9143

 1                           --- Recess taken at 11.09 a.m.

 2                           --- On resuming at 11.29 a.m.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Can we now have,

 5     please, a photograph of both walls one by one -- one next to the other.

 6     That's 1D022110 -- 1D02210.  These are both walls, the photographs of

 7     which have been taken from different rooms and they are side by side.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Do you agree, Mr. Turkusic, that the length or the distance

10     between the point of impact and the place where this post is on the left

11     photograph is less than the distance on the right-hand side photograph?

12     In other words, in relation to this wall, that the projectile descend in

13     a -- on an acute angle.

14        A.   I can't say anything about the acute angle.  What I can say is

15     that according to what the definition of the acute angle is, it doesn't

16     apply here.  We can see that the centre of the damage is different, but

17     the difference is minimal and not telling at all, because on the

18     photograph on the left-hand side the point of impact is the result of the

19     explosive charge of the shell, including the shrapnel; whereas on the

20     photograph on the right, the central place of damage is the result of

21     mechanical impact which could be the result of the plaster hitting it or

22     shrapnel hitting and is not indicative at all.  This cannot be predicted

23     in any way statistically or -- and it cannot illustrate anything.

24        Q.   And if the impact was the result of a 90 per cent angle of

25     descent -- of a 90-degree angle of descent, would we have the same

Page 9144

 1     picture as we do vertically?

 2        A.   What does vertically mean?  That the shell fell from above, just

 3     as the post is vertically to the wall.

 4        Q.   No, horizontally at a 90-degree angle.

 5        A.   What?

 6        Q.   Is it true that the damage -- the distance between the damage on

 7     one side of the wall would be the same compared to the other side of the

 8     wall?

 9        A.   You are presuming in terms of an ideal material.  This is not

10     solid material, because you don't know how a rock will react if you

11     hammer -- hammer it.

12             THE INTERPRETER:  Can the counsel please -- can Mr. Karadzic

13     repeat his question.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, when we are dealing with technical

15     issues, you need to slow down further considering the difficulties the

16     interpreters are having.  The interpreters couldn't hear you, your

17     question, so could you repeat your question, Mr. Karadzic.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will.  I apologise.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Did you measure the width of this shaft up there?

21        A.   No.  Twenty-five, 30 -- it might be 25, 30 centimetres.  We

22     didn't measure it.

23        Q.   Did you measure the distance from the point of impact on this

24     side of the wall to the point of impact on the other side of the wall?

25        A.   What impact are you referring to?

Page 9145

 1        Q.   I'm referring to the distance between the post and the centre of

 2     impact on this side and the post and the centre of impact on the other

 3     side.

 4        A.   That was your first question, and I said that we didn't measure

 5     it.  The distance might be some 20, 30 centimetres, and it doesn't tell

 6     you anything at all.  An impact into a nonorganic material such as this

 7     one, which is lime or cement, such an impact can cause the wall on the

 8     other side to break, and it has nothing to do with the impact on this

 9     side.  However, these two photographs that you wanted us to look at

10     simultaneously absolutely do show that on the left side, that is to say

11     the photograph showing the wall on the left side, we have strong black

12     TNT stains, and that the explosion took place on this side where the

13     shell first hit; whereas on the other side, we only have the mechanical

14     damage which could have been the result of this explosion, and of course,

15     you can have such damage from hitting it merely with a hammer, let alone

16     with such an explosion.

17        Q.   So how did you measure the angle of descent in relation to this

18     wall?

19        A.   Well, we determined the angle of descent regardless of the damage

20     inflicted on the photograph on the right-hand side.  On the left-hand

21     side we can see a photograph where the explosion definitely took place.

22     We can see the wings to the left and to the right.  We have the black

23     stains, that is, which shows that the shell did not hit the wall

24     horizontally, because then we would have a semicircle.  Rather, the shell

25     descended from the -- up above in a slanting manner, and if you want me

Page 9146

 1     to draw it -- sideways.

 2             I'm trying to activate the pen.  That's better.

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  Mr. President, while the witness is preparing to

 4     draw, I just want to note for the record that the data in yellow and

 5     black has been placed on these two pictures by the Karadzic Defence

 6     itself.  The witness has not yet confirmed any of the information

 7     represented by the figures 1, 2, 3, the letters A or B.  He hasn't

 8     confirmed any of that.  So when this is being reviewed in due course, I

 9     simply want to note that.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Speaking for myself, I haven't followed what

11     meanings they have at all for the moment.  But the doctor gave us his

12     observation as to the comparison of the two photos, which is helpful.

13             Yes, Doctor, please carry on.  Just --

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm having problems with the

15     technology.  The pen cannot be activated.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Wait until our usher can assist you.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the meantime, I can give you my

18     comments on the yellow markings added by the Defence.  The dimensions

19     marked A and B and the markings 2 and 3 are absolutely irrelevant to the

20     traces on the other side of the wall, because I've already reiterated

21     three times that the damage on the other side is the result of the impact

22     on this side.

23             Is it working now?  No.  [In English] It doesn't work.

24             JUDGE KWON:  I think we are suffering technical problems.  We

25     can't mark on the map -- on the photo for the moment.  We should carry on

Page 9147

 1     without marking them.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   So this is your interpretation of the different distances between

 5     the damage on either side of the wall.  So your interpretation is that it

 6     is due to the peculiar nature of the material involved; right?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have 65 ter 10144, page 25.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   While we're waiting for this to appear, I will read for you from

11     the expert reports by expert Higgs, who disagreed with you, who said in

12     the event where the shell hit a wall, 3.2 metres from the wall, the

13     azimuth cannot be determined as it can when a shell hits the ground

14     resulting in a crater; that is right?

15        A.   Even if a projectile hits the ground or any other surface we

16     always speak in terms of the degrees of certainty.  We had

17     170 plus/minus 5 in the case of Markale.  So we always have a margin of

18     error even where we have certainty.

19             In this case we have a nonspecific impact of a shell, but the

20     determination of cardinal points cannot be an error, and I'm sure that

21     Mr. Higgs did not make a mistake either.  He could have made a mistake by

22     some 20 to 30 degrees but not more than that.  In any event, it is always

23     north or north-west but definitely not the eastern side when it comes to

24     this shell.

25        Q.   But if your error was by 30 degrees, will it not have a bearing

Page 9148

 1     on the determination of the direction of fire?

 2        A.   Let us not speculate about the 30 degrees.  Tell me what was

 3     Mr. Higgs's determination.

 4        Q.   I'm asking you if you agree with what Mr. Higgs said, that if you

 5     have a shell impacting a place at a height of 3.2 metres from the ground,

 6     it is impossible to determine the azimuth.

 7        A.   I disagree.  I will wait.  I cannot agree with the findings by

 8     Mr. Higgs as you presented them to me.  I should like to see what

 9     precisely Mr. Higgs said about the determination of the azimuth on the

10     basis of traces.

11        Q.   Not on the basis of traces but on the basis of the place of

12     impact.

13        A.   Well, we determined the azimuth based on traces, not based on

14     cardinal points.

15        Q.   In what cases can a method based on traces be applied when you

16     have an impact on a wall.  There you have the analysis by Mr. Higgs.

17        A.   What is the passage you're looking at?  The last one in the event

18     where a shell hit a wall 3.2 metres from the ground; right?

19        Q.   Yes.

20        A.   The azimuth cannot be precisely calculated as it can in the case

21     when a projectile makes the usual crater on the ground.  I don't know if

22     the translation is correct.

23             JUDGE KWON:  I can notice the gasping of the interpreters.  This

24     is not an argument.  That's the issue asked and answered several times.

25             Mr. Gaynor.

Page 9149

 1             MR. GAYNOR:  Yeah.  I was going to point out, Mr. President, that

 2     Mr. Karadzic has put on the screen what appears to be a translation in

 3     B/C/S of Mr. Higgs's report.  I request him to give us the precise page

 4     and passage in the English language so that we can follow what he's

 5     putting to the witness and also so that Your Honours can follow what he's

 6     putting to the witness.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In English; right?  Mr. Karadzic, I

 8     don't know that at this moment.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  He said 65 ter 10144, page 25.  What is this?  I see

10     the English version, and we can locate the ...

11             Please carry on, Mr. Karadzic.  That has been asked and answered.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

13        Q.   Let me just say that on this page Mr. Higgs indicates that the

14     UN team did not agree with your finding.

15        A.   It turns out that it's my interpretation and that I agree with

16     it.  I absolutely disagree in this specific case.  It's impossible to

17     determine with respect to both certainty the angle of descent, because

18     it's a very specific geometry of the scene, but the azimuth, which tells

19     us left or right relative to cardinal directions, enables us to determine

20     the direction of fire perhaps a little less precisely than in the case of

21     a shell landing on the ground.  That's why I believe the Presiding Judge

22     asked for the English version.  Maybe something was lost in the nuances

23     of translation.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]  Can we get 1D02205.  1D02205.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the paragraph above

Page 9150

 1     this, Mr. Higgs says after it was -- after this, it says it is absolutely

 2     possible to determine that the shell came from the west, and Mr. Higgs

 3     speaks of an angle of 320 degrees.  So we were not wrong, Mr. Karadzic,

 4     whereas you were trying to say that we made a lot of mistakes and that we

 5     determined everything inaccurately.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   It says that line 4 determines pure west, and that's what he

 8     says, whereas you said north, Nedzarici.

 9             Now, look at this picture.

10        A.   Excuse me.  What I see on the monitor, can you zoom in a bit.  It

11     says:

12             "After the direction west was confirmed," and that means

13     direction west generally, "they used again the traces of explosion and

14     dispersion on the ground and based on them calculated that the shell was

15     fired from a direction which closes the angle of 320 degrees."

16             So west was just determined as a direction.  It was oriented.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we get 1D02205.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   This, Mr. Turkusic, is your sketch related to the orientation on

20     the map.

21             JUDGE KWON:  No, he didn't say it was his sketch.  A sketch by

22     the CSB team.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I meant their sketch, their sketch

24     from the investigative material that was decisive for the finding.  So

25     this is part of the investigative material.

Page 9151

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Which angle was definitively

 2     determined by Mr. Higgs?  Why are you avoiding to tell me that?

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Mr. Higgs commented on your findings and those of the UN, and he

 5     disagreed.

 6        A.   What did the UN say?  Which angle?

 7        Q.   I don't have that finding now, but --

 8        A.   Well, you asked me to confirm that we did not generally disagree

 9     in our findings.  It was matter of precision.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Doctor, would you just wait for the accused's

11     question and answer that question, please.

12             What is your question, Mr. Karadzic?

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   My question is:  On this map where -- the sketch from the

15     investigative file of the team of which you were a part of, north shows a

16     deviation of 50 degrees.

17        A.   From 320 to 360, 60 degrees would be missing to make it pure

18     north.

19        Q.   Now look at this arrow which shows north on your sketch.

20        A.   It's not my sketch.  I can't confirm anything that was drawn on a

21     map and I have nothing to do with it.

22        Q.   But we agreed that this sketch is part of the investigation file

23     and that based on this, the azimuth was determined.

24        A.   You're asking me as a witness who has certain knowledge and has

25     given an oath and stands by this knowledge.  The sketch that you are

Page 9152

 1     showing me has nothing to do with my previous experience and my

 2     knowledge.  You cannot lead me to confirm something that I disagree with

 3     and I have no knowledge of.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.  How much would you need for your

 5     re-examination, Mr. Gaynor?

 6             MR. GAYNOR:  No more than five minutes, Mr. President.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  We need about five minutes for administrative

 8     matters.  You have five minutes.  Conclude your cross-examination in five

 9     minutes.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Do we have your sketch in this case file, Mr. Turkusic?

12        A.   What I see here is a sketch superimposed on the map of Dobrinja

13     by your side.  I cannot stand by what is drawn here, because I didn't

14     draw it.  And all this analysis which you are trying to push through so

15     quickly would require at least an hour or two.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Doctor, the question was whether there had been a

17     sketch drawn by you.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not this one.  I've already said

19     that.  I remember sketches that show laterally the projection of the

20     place of impact, possible direction of impact in a cross-section, as we

21     call it, not viewed vertically, downwards.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   It says here you made a sketch of the scene and determined the

24     azimuth.

25        A.   Then there must be a sketch which bears clear traces of my work.

Page 9153

 1     You either don't have that sketch or you're not showing it to me.

 2        Q.   To conclude this topic, Mr. Turkusic, we don't have any other

 3     sketch apart from the two we've shown.  On this sketch, which was

 4     authoritative for that investigation, we see north deviating by

 5     50 degrees.  If you depicted it on a plane, then you would see that the

 6     direction of fire was determined incorrectly.

 7        A.   You're showing me a sketch that I did not make, so you cannot

 8     impose on me an interpretation of that sketch.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I tender this, because this is a

10     superb example of how wrong things were done at the time.

11             JUDGE KWON:  You can tender that when your expert testifies later

12     on, not with this witness.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We have to go briefly to Markale.

14     We cannot deal with other incidents.  Can we just see the footage --

15             JUDGE KWON:  You have two or three minutes.  Whether you can

16     finish or not, it's up to you, after having spent -- wasted a lot of

17     time.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I hope I can.  If I must, I will.

19     1D2732.

20             JUDGE KWON:  For whatever purpose, we cannot go further than

21     beyond 12.00.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Can you confirm that this is indeed the tail fin found at

24     Markale 2, on the site of that incident?

25        A.   It looks very much like that tail fin, but many tail fins may

Page 9154

 1     have this shape.  To identify it as accurately as a finger-print, of

 2     course I can't.

 3        Q.   But you confirmed yesterday's from the movie.

 4        A.   Yes, we saw it on the film.  It was crushed.  We also saw a

 5     soldier photographing it.

 6        Q.   Can we see the tail fin which is here in the courtroom, and you

 7     can tell us if it's the same one?

 8             JUDGE KWON:  I don't follow.  We have the tail fin?

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Oh.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this is Exhibit P1454 in this case.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you for showing us the tail

13     fin, because the erosion, as you call it, and what we see on this

14     picture, and it really indicates some sort of erosive and abrasive

15     action, is absolutely invisible after 15 years.  Any expert in artillery

16     will confirm to you that these deformations on the stabiliser, on the

17     tail fin, are absolutely regular, usual, and standard.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor.

19             MR. GAYNOR:  No objection.  I'm ready to begin my re-examination

20     now.  I believe the accused has used up his time.  I'm wondering if he's

21     going to tender two documents concerning the Simon Bolivar school

22     incident which were referred to during cross-examination.  In any event,

23     I'd like to do just two minutes of re-examination to allow

24     Your Honours --

25             JUDGE KWON:  I take it we can go to five past 12.00,

Page 9155

 1     Mr. Registrar?  Should be no problem.

 2             Just conclude in two minutes.  What is your last question?

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   So you believe that's the tail fin, the one?

 5        A.   In the axiometric position consistent with the photograph, it is

 6     the tail fin.  And we could use -- we should use the physical tail fin,

 7     not the picture, because the picture distorts the information.  These are

 8     no traces of erosion.  These are typical traces of explosion, of a strong

 9     blast.

10        Q.   And you claim that this deformation is due to the fact that it

11     was run over by a truck.

12        A.   Yes, this is soft tin, and its only job is to keep the shell on

13     course during flight.  During flight it bears no other pressure and

14     during firing it also bears no pressure from the impact on its surface.

15     That pressure is only parallel to its shape.

16        Q.   And what happened to the damage to the tail fin which -- that we

17     see on the picture?  Is it a living creature so it healed?  How do you

18     explain the differences between the picture and the tail fin?

19        A.   With a very precise instrument, you could show that the angles on

20     this tail fin and the distance between the little fins are absolutely

21     identical.  What you see on the picture is perhaps not an optical

22     illusion but something like that.  These stains on the tail fin could

23     look like that on the picture.  A picture is never a 100 per cent

24     reflection of what you see in the flesh, in nature.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, that was your last question.

Page 9156

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Turkusic.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor.

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. President.  First of all, can I

 4     confirm whether Mr. Karadzic intends to tender 65 ter 15053 and 10144.

 5     The first is the case file concerning the Simon Bolivar shelling

 6     incident -- school shelling incident.  The second is the report of

 7     Mr. Richard Higgs, dated 21st of December, 2006.  He put a fair number of

 8     questions to the witness about those.  If he doesn't intend to tender

 9     them, I'd tender them in order for Your Honours to be able to assess the

10     witness's credibility.

11             JUDGE KWON:  First one -- 65 ter number of the first thing is

12     151 --

13             MR. GAYNOR:  15053.

14             JUDGE KWON:  And the next one.

15             MR. GAYNOR:  Is 10144.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Which is Mr. Higgs's report.

17             MR. GAYNOR:  It is a report of the 21st December 2006.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Which hasn't been tendered yet.

19             MR. GAYNOR:  It has not yet been tendered.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The Defence tenders it.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Then they will be admitted as Defence exhibits.  We

23     will give it a number.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibits D881 and D882, respectively,

25     Your Honours.

Page 9157

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

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

 3                           Re-examination by Mr. Gaynor:

 4        Q.   Mr. Turkusic, I just want to ask you really one question about

 5     one issue.  Yesterday you were asked a question by the accused dealing

 6     with the issue of repeated shellings.  And your answer, which was

 7     yesterday's transcript at page 93, reads as follows, I'm going to read a

 8     few lines to you:

 9             "A. There were several such incidents at funerals when the dead

10     were being buried.  One shell would fall.  When people are trying to deal

11     with those wounded, then another one would fall in the same place.

12             "Q. Please tell the Trial Chamber when --" sorry, "where and when

13     that happened.

14             "A. In few of the fact that it's been 15 years now, I cannot say

15     that on the basis of memory only.  If you insist on that, it is very easy

16     to come by this information."

17             That ends the extract.  I'd now like to see if I can refresh your

18     memory with a video.

19             MR. GAYNOR:  Can I ask -- we're going to play a video with the

20     number -- 65 ter number 40349B, which is an extract of the video

21     65 ter 40349.

22                           [Video-clip played]

23             MR. GAYNOR:  Can I request that the sound be turned down for the

24     video, please.

25                           [Video-clip played]

Page 9158

 1             "Journalist:  When they arrived they were told that Vedrana had

 2     already been buried half an hour early because the graveyard was being

 3     shelled by the Serbs.  That was bad enough but it got much worse.  More

 4     shells started falling.  One landed as the boys and girls from Vedrana's

 5     Children's Home arrived with their flowers.  As quickly as they could,

 6     they dropped them on the graves of Vedrana and the baby boy the sniper

 7     also murdered.  It was time to go.  As the family was leaving.  The

 8     gunners found their range."

 9             MR. GAYNOR:

10        Q.   Mr. Turkusic, does that refresh your memory at all on the point

11     you were making?

12        A.   A long time ago I saw this film.  If this is not terror against

13     civilians, what is it?

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can Mr. Gaynor tell us who filmed

15     this, which TV crew, which broadcasting company, and when?

16             JUDGE KWON:  It's not for you.  It's -- you can raise it later

17     on.  Not at this time.  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  That ends the re-examination.  I tender that video

19     as an exhibit.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Has --

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We object.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Has it not been admitted yet?

23             MR. GAYNOR:  It has not yet been admitted.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Then you can answer the question.  Can you clarify

25     who filmed?

Page 9159

 1             MR. GAYNOR:  It was filmed by the BBC and the journalist is

 2     Jeremy Bowen.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  We'll admit it.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P1933, Your Honours.

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Thank you, Mr. Turkusic.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  And also you can tell us later on when it was

 7     filmed.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  I will do so, Mr. President.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And where.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

11             Dr. Turkusic, that concludes your testimony.  Thank you for your

12     coming to the Tribunal to give it, on behalf of the Bench and the

13     Tribunal as well.  Now you're free to go.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Thank you,

15     Your Honours.  Fiat iustitia et pereat mundus.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

17                           [The witness withdrew]

18             JUDGE KWON:  As I indicated, we will adjourn for a month from

19     now, and then when we will have heard from the Prosecution, Mr. Tieger,

20     that -- as to the witnesses we have to hear because of several logistical

21     problems, we will let the parties know when we will resume.  But there is

22     one matter I want to raise at -- today.  This concerns the

23     cross-examination by the accused.

24             Mr. Karadzic, I mentioned during the course of yesterday's

25     hearing that I would come back to the issue of your cross-examination.

Page 9160

 1             As you are aware, in June of this year, the Chamber determined

 2     that it was necessary in the interest of fair and expeditious trial and

 3     for reasons of trial management to impose reasonable time limits on your

 4     cross-examination.  The Chamber does not approach the assessment of what

 5     constitutes a reasonable time in each instance arbitrarily.  Quite to the

 6     contrary, as I have noted before, the Chamber considers a range of

 7     factors, including your estimate of time you will require, the scope of

 8     the anticipated testimony, the type of witness, the quantity and type of

 9     written evidence proffered by the Prosecution for the witness, the number

10     and nature of associate exhibits tendered for that witness, and the

11     length of testimony and cross-examination in the previous case or cases

12     that the witness testified in.

13             As Judge Morrison mentioned yesterday, taking into account that

14     you are not a lawyer trained and experienced in cross-examination, to

15     date we have given you considerable leeway in conducting your

16     cross-examination, including by -- in almost every instance extending the

17     time we considered reasonable, often multiple times.  However, granting

18     you additional time has not resulted in you conducting your

19     cross-examination efficiently, focusing your cross-examination on matters

20     relevant to the case which the witness is in a position to comment on or

21     desisting from reading at length from documents and making unnecessary

22     commentary.

23             You regularly complain that you do not have enough time to cover

24     issues you consider to be important with the witnesses.  The problem is

25     not the time limit that has been given to you.  It is, rather, that you

Page 9161

 1     waste a lot of time in the conduct of your cross-examination.

 2             The Chamber has offered you advice on multiple occasions on how

 3     to improve, and we strongly suggest once again that you also get and pay

 4     heed to advice from your legal advisors.

 5             The Chamber expects you to comply with the time limits that we

 6     set for your cross-examination of each witness.  To that end, you must

 7     prepare your cross-examination to ensure that you will be completed at

 8     the end of the time allocated to you.  We will no longer be extending the

 9     time for your cross-examination as a general rule.

10             We also note at this stage your ability to cross-examine is

11     central to whether you are adequately representing yourself, and has

12     therefore fair trial implications.  It is your job to ensure that you

13     address the issues relevant to your case in your cross-examination.  If

14     you continue to show that you are unable to conduct your

15     cross-examination properly and within a reasonable time, so much so that

16     fair trial is affected to the extent that you cannot cover important and

17     relevant issues despite the sufficient time allowed to you, the Chamber

18     may find that to be grounds for limiting your right to

19     self-representation and requiring that one of your legal advisors, or

20     indeed Mr. Harvey, take over the task of cross-examination.

21             There is one further matter I would like to raise, that of

22     translations of documents being used during your cross-examination, as

23     raised by Mr. Tieger.

24             The absence of translation into English of documents put to the

25     witness by you, Mr. Karadzic, has been a cause of concern by the Chamber

Page 9162

 1     for some time.  The lack of translation makes it difficult for those in

 2     the courtroom to follow your line of questioning and slows down

 3     considerably your cross-examination of witnesses.  It also creates a lot

 4     of work for your team and the Chamber's staff outside the courtroom, as

 5     determination of admissibility of each untranslated document that has

 6     been MFI'd have to be made at a later stage.

 7             It is up to you and your team to ensure that if you want to put a

 8     document to a witness, you have a translation of that document.  We've

 9     said that before and have seen no discernible improvement on this.

10             If the situation does not improve from this point on, we will

11     consider preventing you from putting untranslated documents to witnesses

12     at all.

13             Once again, I emphasise that it is your task as lead counsel in

14     your own defence to organise your team and your -- and considerable

15     resources that have been put at your disposal properly.  The inability to

16     do so may also factor into any decision by the Chamber to limit your

17     right to self-representation.  I therefore urge you to work closely

18     together in the pro se office and the CLSS to manage the translation

19     process more efficiently.

20             Unless there's anything to be raised by the parties -- yes,

21     Mr. Karadzic.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to respond, with your

23     leave, briefly, on both issues.

24             First of all, as regards examination, I greatly appreciate and

25     owe great thanks to the Trial Chamber for their understanding both due to

Page 9163

 1     my inexperience as a lawyer and lack of experience in cross-examination

 2     for which they had understanding, but it was quite recently that

 3     Honourable Judge Morrison told me that the Trial Chamber would not take

 4     into account peripheral matters.  Witnesses speak at length about all

 5     sorts of things here.  They make assertions about political and factual

 6     matters that need to be responded to, and we have to be sure that they

 7     will be rejected, not taken into account.

 8             Second, the OTP has the ambition to overload this case with a

 9     huge number of documents and a huge number of claims by witnesses.

10             With due respect to this Trial Chamber, I must say that in other

11     judgements I have seen, the Trial Chambers give credit to peripheral

12     elements, while at the same time rejecting reports by United Nations or

13     observers, et cetera.  So I have great reasons for concern without

14     pre-empting what this Trial Chamber would do in this case.  But if a

15     single claim can determine something in the judgement, then the Defence

16     has to deal with that claim.

17             I have to tell you that regardless of the fact that I will have

18     problems with time restrictions, I will not assign to anyone else the

19     right to lead my defence, and I will have to fight for my right to

20     self-representation by all means.  Not because I have no confidence in

21     Mr. Harvey or his team, but because nobody knows the facts as I know

22     them.  Therefore, nobody can defend me.  I have seen innocent people

23     being convicted because their very good lawyers were unable to know the

24     facts.

25             As far as translations are concerned --

Page 9164

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, I note the time.  It's time to rise,

 2     and I don't feel the need to respond each item you raised.  All I can say

 3     at this moment is that take seriously what I have told you today.

 4             We'll rise.

 5                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned

 6                           at 12.16 p.m. sine die