Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 10982

 1                           Tuesday, 1 February 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness takes the stand]

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

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Good morning, everyone.

 7             Good morning, Mr. Witness.

 8             Mr. Karadzic, please continue your cross-examination.

 9                           WITNESS:  KDZ477 [Resumed]

10                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellency.

12             Good morning to all.  Good morning, Mr. Witness.

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

14        Q.   [Interpretation] As you remember, yesterday we established that

15     the bullet travelled vertically from bottom up.  Did you establish what

16     the situation was on the horizontal plane in relation to a perpendicular

17     line?  How did the bullet travel in relation to the walls of the room?

18     Was it under a 90-degree angle or did it go left to right?

19        A.   I cannot remember exactly, so that is to say that without my own

20     report, I cannot say.  After all, it's been 15 or 16 years.  My report

21     should say what I did and which measures were reported.

22        Q.   The Prosecution was kind enough to provide us with the entire

23     report, including your own.  Can I offer you a paper copy so that you see

24     what it was you did and what you recorded?

25        A.   Of course.

Page 10983

 1        Q.   Please take a minute or two to have a look at it and see what was

 2     actually done.

 3             MR. ROBINSON:  Excuse me, Mr. President.

 4             I think that this may be in 65 ter 10397.  The Prosecutor

 5     notified us of that this morning, and it may be that we can all look at

 6     that on the e-court, if I'm correct.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  Let's up-load that.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  If that might not be broadcast as well.

 9             Now, I don't believe we have an English translation of this

10     witness's report.  We just have the B/C/S original.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, I think the witness has read his

12     report.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] What we have on our screens is an

14     official report.  However, under that 65 ter number, on the further pages

15     we should see the crime technician's report.  Can we sort of leaf through

16     this?

17             Can we see the next pages?  Can you go one page further?

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Witness, is this your part of the report?  Yes, it is.  Crime

20     technician's report.  Right.  It is not being broadcast.

21        A.   Yes, this is the first page of my report, where we see the date,

22     the crime committed, the location, the subject of the attack, and then a

23     description showing that everything was described and photographed.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Could you please confirm, then, that a

25     7.62-millimetre bullet flew through the foil at 116 centimetres, then the

Page 10984

 1     curtain at 116.5 centimetres, hit the person concerned in the chest, and

 2     then hit a wardrobe at a height of 124 centimetres, flew through the

 3     wardrobe, and exited at 131 centimetres, so it travelled according to a

 4     vertical line.  Let us see whether there was any horizontal change.

 5             Next page, please.

 6        A.   This is the second page of my report.  That is where the traces

 7     found are recorded.  So we see that it was the vertical plane that was

 8     dealt with, not the horizontal.

 9        Q.   Don't you think that the horizontal plane is also very important

10     in order to establish where the bullet had come from?

11        A.   I was not working on this investigation on my own.

12     Zdenko Eterovic, an investigating judge of the Higher Court in Sarajevo,

13     was in charge of this investigation, so he's the person who asked what

14     was supposed to be done.  My report contains all the measures I took at

15     the request of the investigating judge who was in charge.

16        Q.   Thank you, Witness.  I am not trying to establish whose omission

17     it was, but let us just look further through this.

18             Can we see what the angle of descent of that bullet was?

19        A.   Apart from the report, there was compiled by the inspector,

20     listed under number 2, and also if you look at my report and my photo

21     file, which cannot be seen properly, there is also a death certificate

22     issued by the Dobrinja Hospital.  We have a statement as well.  I think

23     it's a statement that was taken by a member of the Security Services, or,

24     rather, the police station in Novi Grad, and also a crime report that was

25     signed by the head of the centre.  So there are no expert findings, apart

Page 10985

 1     from what I did at the request of the investigating judge.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  You do agree that the lines were very close there and

 3     that they even split the building in two, as it were?

 4        A.   As for the measurements I have, that is within the apartment, and

 5     it has to do with the entry of the bullet into the apartment and

 6     everything that happened in that room.  So the window was on one side,

 7     and the bullet happened to be on the opposite wall at a height of - what

 8     was it? - 132 centimetres.  It is only when we look through the window

 9     that we could see from where this could have been fired.

10        Q.   Thank you.  So what you did then was draw the conclusion that

11     somebody had fired from the Serb positions in the Street of

12     Miroslava Krleze; it was either you or somebody from your team that came

13     to this conclusion.  It says "from Dobrinja 1"; right?

14        A.   I am looking at the photo file now, and it is not legible because

15     it's a photocopy.  It says "Photo 10."

16             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter's note:  It is too fast for

17     interpreting everything the witness is reading.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Witness, probably you spoke a bit too fast, and

20     the interpreters had difficulty following you.  Did you say anything

21     about photo 10?

22             Shall we see page 11, then.  And we can collapse the English part

23     because we don't have an English translation.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a photograph that is part

25     of my entire photo documentation.  This is the view from the window of

Page 10986

 1     the apartment where the incident had occurred.  Buildings can be seen in

 2     the background, and there is a caption underneath saying that an arrow

 3     marks the building in Dobrinja number 1 that is under aggressor

 4     occupation from which the bullet most probably arrived.

 5             Now, what does "most probably" mean?  The bullet might have

 6     arrived from these positions.  However, as I've already said, I'm a crime

 7     technician, and in this case I was authorised by the investigating judge

 8     to carry out the measurements and to use a string.

 9             Now, is this relevant before a court of law?  That was not my

10     decision.  The investigating judge was pleased with what we had did.  And

11     after carrying out the measures and taking the photographs, we left the

12     scene.  Now, whether somebody came subsequently, that I do not know.

13             What else can I say?  It says here an arrow marks the building,

14     et cetera.  As you can see here on the screen yourselves, we do not have

15     a colour photograph, so you can barely discern anything.  You can just

16     see certain contours.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I, or do you have anything

18     else, Your Excellency?

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   So now you're taking a photograph of a building that is on the

21     Serb side, and you mark that building as the most probable source of

22     fire, as you say.  So there are these two planes here, the horizontal and

23     the vertical.  We see that the bullet is rising, ascending, and the

24     ascent is rather sharp.  How big is this room?

25        A.   Well, if you take into account that this is an averaged-sized

Page 10987

 1     room in Dobrinja, the maximum width can be between four or five metres

 2     maximum.  As for the vertical from 116 to 132, let's say it was

 3     16 centimetres.  That was the difference, in terms of height.

 4        Q.   So the fire came from a lower area, didn't it?

 5        A.   Well, it's hard to say from this point of view.  However, at the

 6     site, itself, this could be shown very simply.  Again, if these points

 7     were to be found at 132 and 116, and that line, that trajectory, would

 8     show what the direction was.  For example, if the firing had come from

 9     the entrance into the building, perhaps the bullet could have entered at

10     116 centimetres, but it probably would have stopped on the ceiling.  So

11     I think that this vertical height corresponds to this trajectory; namely,

12     that it had been fired from that distance.

13        Q.   How far away is the building that you marked as the source of

14     fire?

15        A.   It is hard to say now.

16        Q.   What is the angle?  What is the angle in relation to the

17     horizontal plane, the floor?  It ascends 16 centimetres?

18        A.   I'm not in a position to say that.  I didn't do it there and

19     then.  I wasn't asked to do it.  The calculations can be done later.  For

20     example, if we take 116 down to zero, and then you can calculate what the

21     angle is.

22        Q.   Well, don't you think that we should have two angles, the

23     horizontal and the vertical angle, so that we could mark this building,

24     and that we should also have the size of the room, itself, in order to be

25     able to calculate the angle and to have the distance between this

Page 10988

 1     building and the other building?

 2        A.   I think that there is one angle there.  If the entry was at 116

 3     and if it ends at 132, then we can say that there is a triangle there,

 4     and then the line can be calculated.  But this is mathematics that I

 5     cannot go into now.

 6        Q.   However, the depth of the room is of crucial importance for that

 7     angle.  How far in depth does the room go?  It's not the same if it's

 8     three or five metres, is it?  And, secondly, did you see what the

 9     situation was in relation to the horizontal plane to see what the

10     building was?  Was it 90 degrees?

11        A.   I told you just now, and my report says what I did.  I keep

12     repeating that I did not work in relation to the horizontal plane.  At

13     the request of the Prosecutor -- no, not the request of the Prosecutor.

14     He is now a prosecutor who was in charge of investigations, but at that

15     time it was the investigating judge.  He asked me to do what I was

16     supposed to do, and that's what I did at his request.  We specifically

17     state the address where this happened, which apartment it is.  Nothing

18     has changed there.  So as far as the width of that room is concerned,

19     that can be established.

20             However, I repeat, once again, I did not take the measurements,

21     and they are not contained in my report.

22        Q.   Thank you.  You stand by that; namely, that this happened on the

23     fourth floor in the Street of Dzavaharlala Nehrua number 10; right?

24        A.   My report says "J Nehru 10/4 on the 14th of May, 1995, at

25     2345 hours."  I believe that the same is written in the official reports

Page 10989

 1     of my colleagues and the investigating judge, who were all on the scene.

 2             Let me say one more thing.  I am not a person who is in charge of

 3     the team that goes to the site.  It is the operative from the

 4     Security Centre who is in charge of that.  That is the person mentioned

 5     under number 3.  He has a very good knowledge of the area, and he took us

 6     to the site when the entire team was brought together.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  We are now interested in what you were doing; that is

 8     to say, the measurements.  Was a sketch made?

 9        A.   As far as I can see in my report, no sketch was made, because I

10     was not asked to do that.  Only photographs were taken, and a crime

11     technician's report was compiled.

12        Q.   Would I be right in saying that I saw in your report that the

13     room was dark, it was 15 to 12 and the room was not lit?

14        A.   I have to read that.  It says the blinds were down on the window.

15     There was a foil and blinds were down, so the room was dark.  According

16     to the report, the room was dark.

17        Q.   Does that mean that the shooter could not see inside the room?

18        A.   I said it was dark.  Whether he was shooting at random or he had

19     a way of seeing inside, I don't know.  But the room was dark and the

20     blinds were down.  It's recorded in my report.  And the blinds were down

21     still during the investigation.

22        Q.   Can we try to find out where you were taken?  In an earlier

23     incident, the event happened in one street and the on-site investigation

24     in another.  Let's see if it happened here as well.  The incident

25     happened in Cvitkovica Street, and the on-site investigation was in

Page 10990

 1     Dzemal Bijedic Street.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see 1D03066.

 3             May I draw everyone's attention to the source.  This is a map of

 4     Sarajevo.  Navigator Sarajevo is an official web site.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Hamdije Kapidzica, former name in brackets, "Dzavaharlal Nehru,"

 7     do you see that the street, Hamdije Kapidzica Street, is here?

 8        A.   Yes, I can see that, and I see the former name in the brackets.

 9        Q.   In number 10 of that street, that incident happened, and

10     yesterday you marked lower down -- never mind, we'll look at that later.

11             Could you now mark more precisely where the incident happened?

12        A.   This is a very simplified map, but I accept that the incident

13     happened at 10/4 Nehru Street in the apartment where Jasmina Tabakovic

14     was found.  It's difficult now to go back to what we discussed yesterday

15     to find out what I marked.  We have maps, however, we have old names and

16     new names of streets.  Whatever the map says, I agree it was in

17     Nehru Street.  After all the on-site investigations I conducted, in

18     various incidents, including burglaries, et cetera, I maybe marked it

19     wrong the last time, but there is no question that it happened in

20     Nehru Street number 10, in that apartment.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Why don't we show the witness the map he marked,

22     Exhibit D893, dividing the screen.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, on a split screen.  That's

24     what I meant.

25             That's the same.  On the other side of the screen, we need

Page 10991

 1     yesterday's document.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  It's on its way.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Do you remember that Miroslava Krleze Street was 297?

 5        A.   Yes, I remember.  That was the street that I marked with

 6     number 1.  I know that street, and I have friends in that street still

 7     today, so I know where the building is.  But yesterday I was marking with

 8     number 2 Nehru Street, but I wasn't sure.  That's what maps are for.  We

 9     can see here exactly where Nehru Street is.  But I stand by my statement,

10     and I'm reading my own report for the first time after many years, and I

11     see that it was in Nehru Street, 10/4.  We can now see where the street

12     is, and that's where the apartment is where the incident happened.

13        Q.   So the incident happened not where you marked yesterday.  Could

14     you now use the red pen to mark the building in Hamdije Kapidzica Street

15     where the incident really happened?

16        A.   On this map, I'm not in a position to mark the building

17     accurately.  You cannot see that building here.  You can only see that

18     it's Hamdije Kapidzica Street, but you can't see any buildings.  It's

19     very difficult to show that here.  I can only show the

20     Hamdije Kapidzica Street, which on this map is Nehru Street.  But where

21     exactly the building was, it's difficult to mark now.  I can only mark

22     the street with its new name.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, where do you

24     suggest the marking should be made; on yesterday's map?

25             JUDGE KWON:  It's up to you, but, yes, why not.  On the right

Page 10992

 1     map, if you can mark the area where the Hamdije Kapidzica Street is.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   May I ask you to use the red pen to mark "3" and put a circle

 4     around it for the place where you think the incident happened?

 5        A.   I don't know exactly now, but I can mark the whole length of

 6     Hamdije Kapidzica Street, as designated here [marks].  And we can later

 7     establish where number 10 in Nehru Street was.  We see that this is

 8     Hamdije Kapidzica Street.  That's where the building was, and the street

 9     was formerly called the Nehru Street, and that's where, at number 10, the

10     incident happened, on the fourth floor.

11        Q.   How was the apartment oriented?  Which side did it face?

12        A.   It's difficult to say after all this time.  But photograph 10

13     could tell us that exactly, because from the window of that room, you see

14     some buildings, and I believe it faced Vojkovici.  It faced the number 1

15     that I marked yesterday, Miroslava Krleze Street.

16        Q.   I believe in one of your reports, it says the building and the

17     apartment faced south-east and it made an angle of 90 degrees with the

18     south-west line.

19        A.   I don't see that in my report.

20             JUDGE KWON:  In the meantime, we'll keep this image, as it is, as

21     a separate Defence exhibit.  Is it Exhibit D895?

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honour, that will be Exhibit D971.  Thank

23     you.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Should he also mark the left

Page 10993

 1     photograph, the "KDZ" and date?

 2             JUDGE KWON:  It will be kept altogether, as it shows in the

 3     current monitor.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Do you now agree, Witness, that with number 2, you had marked the

 6     street with the number 463, which used to be Zikica Jovanovic Spanac

 7     Street, and now it is called Vahida Maglajlic?

 8        A.   That's what the map says, I agree.  But I keep telling you that I

 9     was in Nehru Street, and the map can show where you that street was.

10        Q.   Do you agree that these two streets that you marked yesterday are

11     parallel, and the transverse line across them would make an angle of

12     90 degrees, whereas Hamdije Kapidzica forms an angle with

13     Miroslava Krleze Street?

14        A.   Yes, we get a certain angle between these two streets.  They were

15     not perpendicular.

16        Q.   So all these things being what they are, the horizontal plane and

17     the horizontal inclination are decisive in determining where the bullet

18     came from?

19        A.   At the moment when we were doing that on-site investigation, what

20     was important to us was to determine the point of entry and where it

21     landed in the apartment, itself, and to see visually the building where

22     it could have come from.  Now, what else should have been done, I

23     couldn't say.  I told you the investigation was led by the investigating

24     judge.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we now please see 1D3047.

Page 10994

 1     It's a Google view.  And perhaps we should leave one of these maps on.

 2             Can we get back one of those street plans on one half of the

 3     screen?

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   On this Google view, can we -- can you identify

 6     Miroslava Krleze Street and Hamdije Kapidzica Street, formerly known as

 7     Nehru Street?

 8        A.   I think I could.  Just a moment, because this is an aerial view.

 9        Q.   If you could also use the school as a landmark, and you can see

10     the bus terminal.

11        A.   Yes, I can see it now.  Should I mark something?

12        Q.   Well, if the electronic pen is on, please mark the building in

13     Miroslava Krleze Street and the building in Hamdije Kapidzica Street, the

14     two buildings in question.

15        A.   At this moment, I can only mark the streets.  I would not like to

16     mark the buildings because this is an aerial view.  What I am marking now

17     is Miroslava Krleze Street [marks], and what I'm marking now is

18     Hamdije Kapidzica Street [marks], as shown on this map.

19        Q.   Do you agree that both these buildings in Hamdije Kapidzica

20     Street are facing south-west, not south-east?  That is, if you drew a

21     perpendicular line onto this building, it would go from south to west?

22        A.   South-east, south-west.  I did not make these markings south-east

23     or south-west.  This photograph is not oriented to the north, so, no, I

24     wouldn't say it is south-east, south-west.

25        Q.   This map is properly oriented.  The north is up and the south is

Page 10995

 1     down, and we can even see a white meridian going across Dobrinja,

 2     I think.  This is properly oriented, according to all cartographic rules,

 3     and this building is facing south-west, not south-east.

 4             Could I ask you to draw a perpendicular line to one of these

 5     buildings?

 6        A.   Across my present markings or on the side?  I'll do it across all

 7     this.  [Marks]

 8        Q.   That would be north; right?  Do you see the marking in the right

 9     angle, where it says "North," what looks like a clock with hands?

10        A.   I can now see that the building is oriented south-west.

11        Q.   And the report says "south-east"?

12        A.   The report contains no orientation at all.

13        Q.   Could you just draw a perpendicular line to the building, a line

14     that goes through the building at 90 degrees?

15        A.   I just drew a vertical line through the building.  Now I can only

16     draw a perpendicular line to the building, like this [marks].

17        Q.   And that's the south-west.  You can now see that the building is

18     facing south-west?

19        A.   According to all of this, the building is oriented south-west,

20     this side that's closer to me, the apartment where the incident happened.

21        Q.   Do you agree that between this building in Miroslava Krleze

22     Street and this building, part of the building is hidden from view by the

23     buildings that are perpendicular to Miroslava Krleze Street?

24        A.   Yes, I can see some buildings that form an L with the building

25     where the incident happened.

Page 10996

 1        Q.   Thank you.  Can you put your witness number, your initials, and

 2     the date.  And then we can save the whole screen.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  In order to understand better, can you up-load on

 4     the right side of this image Exhibit D970?  Oh, we'll lose it.  On the

 5     right side as well?

 6                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

 8             Could you put your pseudonym and date of today, which is already

 9     February 1st, on the left picture, on the left side.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] KDZ477; right?

11             JUDGE KWON:  477.

12             THE WITNESS: [Marks]

13             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, that will be admitted.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D972, Your Honours.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

16             MR. GAYNOR:  During this pause, could I just check if

17     Mr. Karadzic intends to tender the witness's report and the photo file?

18     Because if he doesn't intend to tender them, then I can do so in

19     re-examination.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Which was 10397.

21             Mr. Karadzic, can you answer the question whether you intend to

22     tender that report?

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, by all means.  It is very

24     important for it to be in evidence.  It would also be good if we could

25     see the photographs in colour, the originals, so that we can see what

Page 10997

 1     things are, actually.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  We need to admit it under seal, Mr. Gaynor?

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  That's correct, Mr. President.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we'll do that.

 5                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we'll put it -- we'll mark it for

 7     identification, pending translation.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  Very well, Mr. President.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Which is Exhibit D973, then.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  MFI D973, Your Honours, under seal.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

12             MR. GAYNOR:  We've had a look for better colour versions of those

13     photographs.  We haven't found them, but I believe we can obtain them, so

14     I'll endeavour to do that and submit them to the Court.

15             JUDGE KWON:  That being the case, this will be replaced with

16     that.

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

18             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Gaynor.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20             Can we now have the first page of the official report again, and

21     then you will decide whether it is going to be broadcast.  09766, that's

22     the 65 ter number.  Was there a new number?  09766, that's the

23     65 ter number, and then page 2.  Page 2, please.

24             No, no, the previous page in Serbian, and probably the next one

25     in English.

Page 10998

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   The last paragraph here says:

 3             "Following the examination of the scene, it has been determined

 4     that" so-and-so "was killed at the moment when she was in the bedroom

 5     which is located on the south-eastern side of the apartment building,

 6     facing the aggressor positions of the Bosnian Serbs based in the

 7     neighbourhood of Dobrinja 1 and in the area of the Miroslava Krleze

 8     Street.  Damage caused by the entering projectile fired from a fire-arm

 9     has been found on the left window casement, looking from the window, on

10     the plastic foil that was placed inside the glass at a height of

11     116 centimetres from the floor," and so on and so forth.

12             We see here that a conclusion was drawn without establishing the

13     angle in relation to the horizontal line; right?

14        A.   This is not my report, so you'll have to ask the person who wrote

15     up the report.  How and why this person wrote "south-east," I really have

16     no idea.

17        Q.   Thank you.  While preparing for this trial, you remembered this

18     incident, and you said that you remembered, when you looked at your

19     diary, that you used string to establish the direction of fire; right?

20        A.   That's right, that's what I did.  However, it is not contained in

21     my report.  However, that is what we do when we have such points.  On the

22     basis of that and on the basis of this string, I could make this

23     photograph and mark that building with an arrow, the building in

24     Dobrinja 1 from which the bullet had arrived, because I was not saying

25     things just off the cuff.  I did it after I used the string.

Page 10999

 1        Q.   I'm a bit puzzled, because your diary does not refer to this

 2     string at all, and you said, when preparing for this trial, that it was

 3     your diary that jogged your memory.  Right?

 4        A.   Yesterday, I explained what was entered in the diary.  So when I

 5     go to my office to type up my report on the basis of the measurements

 6     entered in the diary, I remembered that I used the string.  I did not

 7     write everything down in my diary.  That diary was used only to jog my

 8     memory.  However, as soon as I saw that the height was measured and that

 9     any measurements were carried out, I realised that a string was used.  So

10     my diary is not a detailed report.  It is just a reminder for me that I

11     use when typing up my report.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  I'm afraid that that

13     page remained on the ELMO, and I would actually like to have it admitted,

14     that page, if possible.

15             JUDGE KWON:  The part of his diary?

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The page of his diary that pertains

17     to this incident.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Do we have it in e-court, Mr. Gaynor?

19             MR. GAYNOR:  We don't.  I think yesterday we were using a

20     photocopy of it.  Is that right?  I believe that's what Mr. Karadzic

21     submitted, and I don't actually know where that photocopy is, myself.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think it wasn't returned to me

24     from the ELMO, but we'll get it after the break.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's my original diary, but it's

Page 11000

 1     no problem, you can use it.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  I don't see any problem in admitting that

 3     page.  Mr. Gaynor?

 4             MR. GAYNOR:  No objection, Mr. President.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  So we'll mark it for identification, pending

 6     translation, that page only.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  As MFI D974, Your Honours.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 9             Can we now just cast a glance at 1D3047.  1D3047.  One will do.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Do you see that building again, the one in Hamdije Kapidzica?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Could you now please mark all the possible directions from which

14     the bullet could have come?  Do you agree that it is 180 degrees, that is

15     to say, half a circle?

16        A.   I disagree.  This is the building [indicates], this is the

17     building.  I'll put a dot next to it, the building [marks].  But, again,

18     I would like to emphasise that I'm talking now from a particular time

19     distance, so I don't know where the apartment was.  So this is the

20     beginning, this is the end [marks].  That's the way it should be.  And

21     the bullet came from here, roughly [marks].  I'm going to draw an arrow

22     now, in terms of the approximate direction from which it had come.

23     [Marks]

24        Q.   How come you know that?  How did you rule out 179 degrees and how

25     did you decide for this 1 particular degree from a lower level?  Do you

Page 11001

 1     assess the distance to be 300 metres, three football fields?  Right?

 2        A.   I stand by the photograph that I took that is an integral part of

 3     my photo file, and that is photograph number 10.  So the arrow marks that

 4     building.  Here we have a black-and-white version again.  I say, again,

 5     that it is certain that I carried out my work quite properly, as best I

 6     could, at the request of the investigating judge.  On the basis of the

 7     measurements I carried out, there could only have been one direction from

 8     which the bullet had come.  It is not that there could have been several

 9     directions, as you had put it.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Perhaps the other participants are going to find it

11     hard to understand this, but we have a saying that says "doing things in

12     a make-shift way by using a stick and string."  So that's the method that

13     you applied.

14             Can you say from which floor it was fired from the building in

15     Miroslava Krleze?

16        A.   I cannot say that.  I said that the arrow marks the building

17     where the fire had come from.  I do have to say that when I took this

18     photograph, I took a personal risk at being hit from that very same

19     building.  We were not working under normal conditions.  We were working

20     under abnormal conditions.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Can you tell us now what the horizontal plane is?

22        A.   Again, I underline what my report says.  It was compiled 16 years

23     ago, and I cannot do it, given the time that has elapsed.

24        Q.   KDZ477, could you place that number again, and could you write

25     down the date as well?

Page 11002

 1        A.   [Marks]

 2             JUDGE KWON:  That will be given another number.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D975, Your Honours.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 1D3048, can we have that now,

 5     please.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Could you please focus on this trajectory that was marked.  This

 8     shaded area is the area from which the bullet could have come to the

 9     left-hand angle of the apartment in number 10 from the territory held by

10     Republika Srpska, taking account these two buildings through which the

11     shaded area goes.  The remaining 179 angles belong to the territory that

12     is under the control of the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

13             Do you agree -- do you agree that 5 degrees is the area held by

14     the Army of Republika Srpska, whereas the difference is much bigger

15     compared to the area held by the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

16        A.   You can see here where it might have come from, and the area is

17     shown very nicely, the building from Miroslava Krleze 10, that it could

18     have gone through these buildings and ultimately arrived at the building

19     where Jasmina Tabakovic was hit.  In the previous one, where I marked the

20     previous direction of fire that I marked, it is possible, and it

21     coincides with what I see in the photograph.

22        Q.   Although you don't know what the horizontal plane is, and we do

23     know what the vertical plane is, that it goes up 16 centimetres?

24        A.   I stand by that, because the vertical plane was my yard-stick.  I

25     used the string to measure this.  Unfortunately, we didn't measure how

Page 11003

 1     long the room was, but this coincides with this photograph and the

 2     possible directions of fire that came at that building.

 3        Q.   Why didn't you document that, Witness?  Why did you decide on

 4     this 1 particular degree, and the remaining 179 degrees belong to the

 5     Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina?  How did you decide for this narrow

 6     passageway between the buildings?  Give us proof.  Why, how?

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  My objection is that the accused has stated that the

 9     remaining 179 degrees belonged to the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

10     He's twice said that.  Now, I don't believe that's in evidence.  It

11     appears to be the accused giving evidence.  Unless he can show something

12     that's in evidence to support that assertion, he should put that to the

13     witness and ask the witness about it, rather than giving evidence

14     himself.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, I agree.

16             And in addition to that observation, I don't think I follow the

17     meaning of 1 degree, 4 degrees, 5 degrees.  Did you, Mr. Witness?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not understand what I was

19     specifically being asked to do.

20             I keep trying to explain that on the basis of the points that I

21     measured, we used a string, and in this way we got a view of the building

22     from which the bullet had been fired.  That is to say, I did not

23     establish exactly which window it was, but with an arrow, number 10, I

24     marked the building from where the bullet had arrived.

25             I underline, once again, that we were not working in normal

Page 11004

 1     peacetime conditions, so I could not expose myself for too long at that

 2     window where the photograph was taken -- from where the photograph was

 3     taken.  So after using this string, we saw exactly the building where the

 4     bullet had come from.

 5             I can say that I ran a risk when I took this photograph that is

 6     pasted under number 10 in my photo file regarding this incident.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 8        Q.   Witness, please look at this shaded area.  Is it correct that the

 9     bullet could have come to the fourth floor of this building only through

10     this shaded area?

11        A.   This perspective, this view we have now, cannot show that.  This

12     is a view from above.  Now, I don't know how tall the building on

13     Miroslava Krleze Street is, how tall the building in the former

14     Nehru Street is, how tall the buildings are that form an L with the

15     building of the incident where Jasmina Tabakovic is hit.  We can only see

16     the shaded area that shows that there is a passage between these

17     residential buildings to the building where the incident happened.  What

18     you are asking is impossible to establish with this view.

19        Q.   Witness, with a bullet that ascends, where would it have come

20     from if its source was outside this shaded area?  That's what I'm talking

21     about when I say "179 degrees."  Where did it come from if it didn't

22     follow this shaded area?

23        A.   I don't know that.  But it did follow this shaded area, and I

24     established that with the usual procedure with a rope.  It came -- the

25     trajectory is marked with this red shaded area.  It was shot from one of

Page 11005

 1     the lower floors of that building, so it had an ascending trajectory, but

 2     it certainly did not come from outside this shaded area.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second, Mr. Karadzic.

 4             I'm not sure whether the witness has agreed with the place of

 5     where that incident took place, which is now marked in blue.  Do you

 6     agree that that place is the very house?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, we've cleared that up, that

 8     that's the building.  The blue is probably the entrance into the

 9     Nehru Street number 10, and this beam shaded in red is the area where the

10     bullet had come from.  And you'll see the building where this beam begins

11     and follows this trajectory to the building of the incident.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   This is the most favourable position of that apartment.  If it

14     had been anywhere else, the angle would have been even smaller.  Now, if

15     the bullet had come from outside the shaded area, from which position --

16     from whose positions would it have come from?

17        A.   I really don't know, because I didn't know who held this

18     building, and I don't know it now.

19             Now, looking now, I see that this area that is between

20     Miroslava Krleze and Vojkovici Street -- Vojkovici neighbourhood was

21     under the control of the Serbs, the neighbouring area also, but the

22     airport settlement, I believe, was held by the Army of

23     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  Now, who held which building, I don't know, because

24     I didn't walk these lines.

25        Q.   So you are not familiar with these adjacent buildings outside the

Page 11006

 1     shaded area?  You didn't know who held these buildings?

 2        A.   I don't know.  For instance, this building in

 3     Miroslava Krleze Street, that's the part of Dobrinja 1 that belonged to

 4     the Army of Republika Srpska.  Whether they also crossed to the other

 5     side across this wide street, I don't know.

 6        Q.   Where's the separation line here?

 7        A.   I don't know exactly.  It's possible that the separation line,

 8     and I'm talking now about something that was 16 years ago, it's possible

 9     that this wide street between Miroslava Krleze Street and this parallel

10     building on the other side was the separation line.  I don't know what

11     the name of that wide street is.  I believe it's Vahida Maglajlic Street.

12        Q.   It is.  Can you draw that separation line?  The marker is off.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The pen needs to be turned on.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, according to what I heard

15     from other people, and I didn't go into these streets myself, this should

16     be the separation line [marks], and perhaps the whole length.  I don't

17     want to ruin this shaded bit.  Now, how far it stretched, I see

18     Dobrinja 4 here, where I lived.  I know it was held by the Serbs.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Can you extend that line?  It went all the way to Trapari, the

21     village houses?

22        A.   Yes, I'm drawing the whole length now across the houses in the

23     neighbourhood where I lived during the war [marks].

24        Q.   Do you now see that you could only get to the Serbian side

25     through the shaded area?

Page 11007

 1        A.   Yes, which does not rule out that it came from there.

 2        Q.   I agree it doesn't rule out.  You did not rule it out, in fact,

 3     but it doesn't rule out the remaining 189 [as interpreted] degrees.

 4        A.   Unfortunately, I did not deal with the horizontal plane in my

 5     report, but I did draw that string, and it pointed to that building in

 6     Miroslava Krleze Street where this beam of shaded lines begins.  And I

 7     stand by the work that was done at the time.

 8        Q.   Let's finish with this bit, Witness.  Do you agree that 1 degree

 9     to the left and 1 degree to the right from this shaded beam are the

10     positions of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and all the remaining

11     degrees outside?

12        A.   I told you, I don't know the exact positions.  I didn't deal with

13     that at the time.  I was always accompanied by one of the colleagues who

14     said where the location was, and you probably have other witnesses who

15     could confirm who was occupying each of these buildings if that's

16     relevant to this Court.  I'm unable to say exactly now.

17             I believe that's the separation line, but, again, that's from the

18     stories I heard before or after.  I did not go there, because it was

19     dangerous.  And I'm not qualified to tell you now who was in those

20     buildings, whether these people occupied them all the time or came

21     occasionally.  I really don't know.

22        Q.   Could you put your number and date, please?

23        A.   [Marks]

24             JUDGE KWON:  We'll admit this with the caveat that all the

25     markings done by this witness is only the extended confrontation line,

Page 11008

 1     while all the others are prepared by the Defence.  Yes, that will be

 2     given the next exhibit number.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honour, that will be Exhibit D976.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 5        Q.   Witness, is it the case that all these buildings were occupied,

 6     inhabited, from both sides, or were they vacant?

 7        A.   Before the war, all these buildings were inhabited by civilians.

 8     This is a civilian neighbourhood.  Now, during the war, which of them

 9     were vacant, evacuated, or destroyed, I don't know.

10        Q.   You came to perform an on-site investigation in a place where

11     people were living.  You said you were in fear for your life.  You came

12     to do an on-site investigation, and you said you were aware where the

13     separation line was.  How come you don't know whether people lived all

14     around you?  I am putting it to you that all these buildings were

15     inhabited throughout the war.

16        A.   I meant the buildings on the separation line, itself.  As for

17     Dobrinja and the place where I did this on-site investigation, this whole

18     central area was inhabited by civilians.  Of course, people had nowhere

19     to go.  They were forced to live there, sometimes several families per

20     apartment, because they were looking for safety, like everyone else.  And

21     all those places that were exposed to fire were poorly frequented, and

22     people were wary of going in, tried to keep under cover.  That's how we

23     behaved everywhere around the city.  Areas that were exposed to all sorts

24     of fire were dangerous, and people tried to cross as fast as possible or

25     under cover.  People were trying to make due, under the circumstances,

Page 11009

 1     and had to live there.

 2        Q.   You said the apartment was dark and the blinds were down.

 3     Doesn't that mean that the shooter could not see the victim and was not

 4     shooting at the victim?

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection on two counts.

 6             Number 1, this has been asked and answered.  Number 2, this

 7     witness cannot tell whether the shooter could see something, or had night

 8     vision, et cetera.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Agreed, yes, it calls for the witness's speculation.

10     Move on to your next question, Mr. Karadzic.

11             We are sitting for normal hours today, so the first break will be

12     at 20 past 10.00, in five minutes' time.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.  Then we'll move to

14     another incident.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   You were involved in the investigation of an incident that

17     happened on the 22nd January 1994 in Alipasino Polje; correct?

18        A.   Correct.

19        Q.   Can you tell us, briefly, what happened there?

20        A.   On that 22nd January 1994, mortar shells fell on Klara Cetkin and

21     Cetinjska Streets.  On that occasion, six children were killed.  That is

22     written in my report.

23        Q.   Can you tell us in what sequence those shells fell, and can you

24     mark it?

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 1D02152 in e-court.

Page 11010

 1             Perhaps we can zoom in on Alipasino Polje.  That's the central

 2     area of the map, these two "8"s formed by the buildings.  The central

 3     area, please, only.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Would you now be in a position to mark the place of the incident

 6     and the sequence of the shells?

 7        A.   That happened in stage C of Alipasino Polje.  This map is

 8     significantly worse than the one I had before, when I was giving my

 9     statement.  I can put a circle around the intersection of Klara Cetkin

10     and Cetinjska Street, where this happened.  Now, the sequence of the

11     shells, I can't tell you, because I didn't watch them fall.  [Marks]

12        Q.   This is very broad.  Can you mark the place -- the places -- the

13     exact places where the shells landed?

14        A.   I'm telling you, again, it's difficult on this map.  I'll just

15     put two dots -- no, it's not good again.  It fell on the street, itself,

16     to the left of this dot [marks], and another shell fell again on the

17     street to the left of this dot.  It's difficult to mark on this map.  We

18     would need to zoom in a lot to see the exact place which would be then

19     consistent with the photo file.

20        Q.   What about a third shell?

21        A.   I didn't work on the third shell, and that's written in my

22     report, because there were no casualties from the third shell.  These

23     first two shells took away six young lives.

24        Q.   What was the calibre?

25        A.   I'm looking now in my diary.  I cannot tell you off the cuff.  It

Page 11011

 1     says:  "Mortar shell, 120 millimetres," and I would like to see my report

 2     to see what it says.

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Do you have a copy?

 7             MR. GAYNOR:  I think it would be best if this is not broadcast,

 8     because it contains --

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Do we not have a public version, Mr. Gaynor?

10             MR. GAYNOR:  Well, this was admitted not through this witness,

11     but through a prior witness, as a public exhibit.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Do you like to save this marking or you'd like to do

13     it later on again?

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, before we save this, I should

15     like the witness to mark the azimuth, the direction of fire, as he

16     established it.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Without my report, I cannot tell

18     you who established the direction of fire.  I believe there were

19     ballistic experts present.  In this investigation, they established the

20     direction of fire, but I know it came from the west.  And I can put an

21     arrow to mark the approximate direction [marks].  The exact direction was

22     established by the ballistic experts.  Shall I mark that direction?

23        Q.   Do that.  We'll come back to it.  Put the date and "KDZ477."

24        A.   [Marks]

25        Q.   Do you know what was the interval between the first and the

Page 11012

 1     second and the third shell?

 2        A.   It says around 1315, two mortar shells fell.  It doesn't say

 3     anything else.  I believe the interval was very small.

 4        Q.   What about a third?

 5        A.   I don't remember the third shell.  I told you I didn't work on

 6     it.  As far as this incident is concerned, my job was to photo document

 7     what happened.  I had ballistics experts on the team who worked also on

 8     the third shell.  In fact, they used traces from the third shell to be

 9     able to write in their report what kind of projectile it was.

10        Q.   Could you now put a circle around these two buildings of student

11     hostels, and the "Oslobodjenje" building, but make it separate circles

12     marked with "1" and "2."

13        A.   [Marks]

14        Q.   Do you see these two buildings of the student hostel?

15        A.   Yes, these are the buildings of the student hostel [indicates],

16     and to the left, to the west, this building, the large red one, should be

17     the "Oslobodjenje" building [Marks]

18        Q.   Mark it "2."

19        A.   [Marks]

20        Q.   Put "1" for the student hostel.  Put "2" for "Oslobodjenje."

21        A.   [Marks]

22        Q.   Thank you.  Now, who controlled these three buildings throughout

23     the war?

24        A.   The student hostel buildings were accessible, the "Oslobodjenje"

25     building, too, although it was more risky, because this area was exposed

Page 11013

 1     to fire all the time, this area outside the building.

 2        Q.   Can you draw the separation line here?

 3        A.   That's difficult to do now.  I can only guess.  I never went

 4     there during the war.  I can put a circle, and I can confirm that

 5     buildings 1 and 2 were under the control of the Army of

 6     Bosnia-Herzegovina, and I believe that even in certain parts of the

 7     student hostel there were students who happened to be there when it all

 8     began and who had nowhere to go, couldn't go anywhere, so they were

 9     forced to live in those buildings.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

11             We can remove -- is this admitted?  Did it receive a number?

12             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we'll keep it -- yes, now my microphone is

13     activated.

14             We'll keep it as it is, Exhibit D977.

15             We'll take a break now for 20 minutes and resume at quarter to

16     11.00, when you will have about three-quarters of an hour to conclude

17     your cross-examination, Mr. Karadzic.

18                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

19             JUDGE KWON:  I was mistaken, Mr. Karadzic.  You have an hour and

20     three-quarters of an hour.

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

22                           --- On resuming at 10.48 a.m.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25             Can we now have in e-court 65 ter 09390C, sections 9 and 10.

Page 11014

 1     This will hopefully be of help to you to find your bearings with regard

 2     to the separation line.

 3             Can we please just separate sections 9 and 10, if possible.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  This is sheet 7.  Shall we go to sheets 9 and 10,

 5     two pages further.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I believe this is number 9, but we

 7     need both number 9 and number 10 at the same time.

 8             Can we please go back to the previous image, where all sections

 9     are represented, and just zoom in on 9 and 10.  However, can we also have

10     number 1, and that will enable us to enlarge number 9 and number 10.

11             Excellent, thank you.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Now, is this of any help, Mr. Witness, for you to find your

14     bearings?

15        A.   Yes.  I can see all the three sections of Alipasino Polje, A, B,

16     C, and also the incident site of 24th January.

17        Q.   Do you know that in one of the reports from your side, it is said

18     that the shells came from the west, slightly towards north?

19        A.   As far as I recall, members of the team were ballistics experts

20     as well who prepared their report, and I believe it is said in the report

21     that it came from the west or slightly towards the north.  However, this

22     can be found in this report.

23        Q.   Can you now please mark the incident site and 261 bearing,

24     because that is what has been established, that the bearing is 261?

25        A.   If that's what the report says, then it's 261.  So now I am

Page 11015

 1     marking Cetinjska Street.  It's a bit awkward to do that on the screen.

 2     [Marks].  What I have marked is a place that should be in front of the

 3     building.  Now, that's the place.  And the second site is on

 4     Klara Cetkin Street, which is to the right, a little bit more left on the

 5     driveway.

 6        Q.   Can you make a green circle encompassing both these points?

 7        A.   [Marks]

 8        Q.   Excellent.  So these are the incident sites.  Can you now draw a

 9     line towards the west?

10        A.   [Marks]

11        Q.   Thank you.  Do you know that UNPROFOR reached a slightly

12     different conclusion with regard to the bearing?

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

14        Q.   Since we have to call another document, can you please mark, with

15     the number 1, the place where the shell landed, and number 2, west?

16        A.   This is a much -- small map.  It would be much easier for me if

17     you could enlarge section C, i.e., to enlarge the intersection of

18     Cetinjska and Klara Cetkin Streets, and that would make things easier for

19     me.

20        Q.   At the moment, this should suffice, so could you please just make

21     the marking and put the date and the number?

22        A.   [Marks]

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this please be admitted into

24     evidence?

25             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

Page 11016

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D978, Your Honours.

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So this is the first page of my

14     report, where it reads that two mortar shells of 120 calibre fell on

15     Klara Cetkin and number 3 on Cetinjska Street, respectively.  My findings

16     can be found in the next page of my report.  This page contains only the

17     basic details.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please have the next page in

19     the Serbian language.

20             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Can you please explain what is stated here?

22        A.   This is a poor copy.  It identifies the place where the shells

23     landed, blood traces.  I don't see what is written underneath.  I believe

24     it says "parts of clothing and the sledge, and a fragment of a

25     120-millimetre shell," and I suppose that it says that it has been put in

Page 11017

 1     custody with the Crime Investigation Department.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 3             Have we already admitted this report into evidence?

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Shall we go into private session briefly.

 5                           [Private session]

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20                           [Open session]

21             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

22             Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

24             Can we now please have 09951, 65 ter, page 8.  I believe this

25     document has not been admitted yet.  If we go to page 8, one cannot

Page 11018

 1     identify anything on it.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   So you say here that you retrieved one tail-fin, and that the

 4     other is missing; that you investigated both shells that fell within a

 5     short period between them and 100 metres apart.  Is that correct?

 6        A.   They fell within the radius of 50 to 100 metres, because that's

 7     an intersection of these two streets which join together at this point.

 8     One shell fell in front of the building -- residential building number 4

 9     on Klara Cetkin Street and the other one in front of number 3 on

10     Cetinjska Street, so the area where they fell is about 100 metres.  I

11     said that I managed to recover one tail-fin, and I think it has been

12     recorded in my photo file, whereas the other one we could not find during

13     the investigation.

14        Q.   How did it happen that in the CSB report it is stated that one

15     shell was 120 millimetres, whereas the remaining two were 82 millimetres?

16        A.   Part of the team that investigated this incident were ballistic

17     experts who, on the basis of the evidence and clues collected on the

18     ground, were able to produce a report, and this is probably what they

19     wrote in it.  I said that two mortar shells exploded, which resulted in

20     the death of six children, and that those shells were of 120-millimetre

21     calibre.  Since I only managed to find one tail-fin of a 120-millimetre

22     shell, in the brief description is written what is not the official

23     finding of the expert analysis.  The official report is prepared by the

24     ballistic experts after they had analysed the traces.  So the fact is

25     that I found only one 120-millimetre tail-fin, and probably as a result

Page 11019

 1     of the subsequent analysis carried out by the ballistic expert, it was

 2     established that there were two 82-millimetre mines and one

 3     120-millimetre shell.

 4        Q.   Can you confirm what is written here:

 5             "At the same time, there were one or two personnel from UNPROFOR

 6     who carried out the same kind of investigation as we did"?

 7        A.   Now, after such a long time, I really cannot remember.  If that's

 8     what the report says about their presence, then they were there, but at

 9     the moment I cannot remember who attended the incident.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Do you have any explanation whatsoever, because you

11     said in your report that the second tail-fin had disappeared?  How can

12     you explain that?  How can a tail-fin disappear?

13        A.   The incident took place at 1315, and according to the official

14     documents, it says at what time we arrived at the scene.  So during that

15     period, intervening period, it was not possible to secure the scene,

16     itself.  That was true, because when we arrived, we did not find any

17     bodies.  We only had body parts, the sled, and the remaining fragments of

18     the shell that were collected in the close proximity of the point of

19     impact.  How it happened that this tail-fin disappeared, whether somebody

20     took it after the explosion, I really don't know.

21        Q.   I am waiting for the interpretation to be finished.

22             Do you know what conclusions were reached by the UN UNPROFOR

23     team, whose presence you have confirmed here?  What did they conclude

24     after their investigation?

25        A.   I had never had an opportunity to look either at the ballistic

Page 11020

 1     expert report, or the UNPROFOR report, or the records made by the

 2     investigating judge, or the police station Novi Grad.  My job was to

 3     compile my own report, to prepare my set of documents, and forward it,

 4     through my boss, to other organs in charge.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now briefly have document

 6     D964, which was admitted through KDZ450.  And I'm in the hands of the

 7     Chamber as regards the decision whether to broadcast it or not.  It's

 8     D964.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Can you please focus on the last paragraph.  ZK objected to the

11     UNPROFOR statement relating to the massacre on the Alipasino Polje, to

12     which General Soubirou responded that they were not able, on the basis of

13     the traces of the shell, to determine the exact position from where they

14     were fired?

15        A.   Yes, I can see that.

16        Q.   This is a Muslim document, and it is addressed to the

17     Security Administration?

18        A.   I don't think that was a Muslim one.  That was the Bosnian side.

19        Q.   Mr. Witness, the Bosnian side included Serbs as well.  This was

20     the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

21        A.   But there is no mention specifically of Muslims.  There were

22     other ethnicities there as well.

23        Q.   There were more Muslims than Serbs and Croats put together.  It's

24     already in evidence.

25             Did you pay any attention to the third shell that fell on the

Page 11021

 1     building on Rade Koncara Street?

 2        A.   A minute ago, I already said that it was technically impossible

 3     for me to make photographs because I didn't have any films.  There was a

 4     prior agreement for photo files to be made only when some major incidents

 5     were involved, which, according to the decision of either the

 6     investigating judge or the inspectors in charge, implied that only those

 7     shells that caused serious injuries or deaths would be photographed.

 8     Since this particular shell did not cause this kind of damage, I did not

 9     process this shell.  This does not mean, though, that the rest of the

10     team did not carry out their expert work, regardless of the lack of

11     photographs.

12        Q.   Your job was also to collect evidence.  Now, concerning the third

13     shell that fell on the soft surface, did you find its tail-fin?

14        A.   I said that I did not process the explosion site of the third

15     shell.  That was done by the ballistic experts who were part of the team.

16     And I think that in that particular instance, the ballistic experts were

17     the ones who processed the third explosion.

18        Q.   Just for the sake of exchanging information, Witness, none of the

19     members of the team dealt with the third shell.  Is it correct that it

20     fell on a soft surface?

21        A.   In my report, I say that once again, I have not processed that

22     third shell.  If you can show the report of the ballistics experts, in

23     their report, their comprehensive report, they had to deal with all three

24     explosions or only the two that we worked on together.  If the third one

25     is not there, then nobody had dealt with it.

Page 11022

 1             I repeat, once again, that ballistics experts belonged to the

 2     same department as I did.  However, I was a crime technician and they

 3     were ballistics experts.  One of these two experts for a while was my

 4     superior as well.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  We are now going to move on to the incident in

 6     Safeta Hadzica Street.  There are two of them.  One is at number 102 and

 7     the other one is at number 52; right?

 8        A.   I would need the date to jog my memory, and then I could look it

 9     up in my diary too.

10        Q.   The 26th of May, 1995; is that right?

11        A.   Yes, I found it.  The 26th of May, 1995, that is a case that I

12     dealt with.  It was called the shelling of the neighbourhood of

13     Pavle Goranin in the Street of Safeta Hadzica.

14        Q.   Yesterday, the distinguished Mr. Gaynor showed a photograph of a

15     shell that fell in that garden by number 102.  I don't need to call it

16     up.  You do remember the photograph, don't you, with the onions that were

17     planted there where the shell allegedly fell?

18        A.   Yes, I remember the photograph.  I took it.  It is one of the

19     10 projectiles, cannon projectiles, that had fallen on the ground there.

20     It was in the immediate vicinity of the police station where I was.

21     Behind the place where the explosion took place, there is a wall of the

22     open garages belonging to that police station.  The red roof, as far as

23     I can remember, covering these garages is the roof of the police station.

24             In this photograph, we see an arrow that marks the place where

25     the explosion happened.  Yesterday, I was asked whether that marks the

Page 11023

 1     direction from which the projectile had come.  My answer was that that

 2     was not the direction from where the projectile had come.  It was only

 3     subsequently, when the photo file was being compiled, an arrow was put

 4     there to show the place where the explosion happened.  So it could have

 5     been made in any way.

 6        Q.   Thank you for this exhaustive answer, but I would just like to

 7     underline another thing.

 8             Yesterday, we heard from you, for the first time, and we are

 9     grateful to you for that, that that was a police station and that there

10     were garages of that police station there.  Did you take part in the

11     investigation at Safeta Hadzica 52, in relation to the incident that took

12     place there?

13        A.   The building in Safeta Hadzica number 52 is part of the

14     investigation of the overall incident that we are discussing now, so

15     there was no separate investigation.  Investigating Judge Eterovic was in

16     charge of it.  There were inspectors from the State Security Service --

17     from the Public Security Service were there.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please don't mention any names.

19     This document was admitted as a public one, I think.

20             65 ter 09784, 09784.  I don't know what the status of that

21     document is.

22             JUDGE KWON:  My understanding is that it was admitted under seal.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Then it shouldn't be broadcast or

24     we should move into private session?

25             JUDGE KWON:  If you would like to name the protected witness, we

Page 11024

 1     need to go into private session.  But if you do not, we can stay in

 2     public session without broadcasting this document.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Then the second option, not to have

 4     it broadcast.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Could you please cast a glance at this official report.  It has

 7     to do with this incident; right?

 8        A.   That's right.  This is an official report that was compiled on

 9     the 1st of June, 1995, and it has to do with the incident that occurred

10     on the 26th of May, 1995, between 10.45 and 10 past 11.00.  The members

11     of the team are referred to here, the ones who carried out the expertise.

12        Q.   Thank you.  The report says that there were different shells

13     there and that one of them was of great destructive power.  You're

14     actually referring to a modified air-bomb; right?

15        A.   That's right, so it is Safeta Hadzica number 52.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

17             Can we now have 1D2198.  Could we have that in e-court.  Thank

18     you.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   This is a Google image.  Can I now ask you to mark the location

21     of the incident and a few other locations?  Can you mark the location of

22     the incident, the building that was hit in this incident?

23        A.   There were 10 cannonballs and one air-bomb in this incident.  You

24     asked me about that photograph a moment ago, where it fell on the earth.

25     The air-bomb fell on the right-hand side, on the extreme right, say 150,

Page 11025

 1     200 metres.  That was the entire area that had been shelled and

 2     ultimately hit by an air-bomb.  I can put a circle around the buildings

 3     that were hit during that incident and the area around the buildings.  It

 4     wasn't only the buildings that were hit, but the area around them as

 5     well.

 6        Q.   Let's focus on the air-bomb, the building that was hit by the

 7     air-bomb.

 8        A.   I'm putting a circle around the building that was hit by an

 9     air-bomb.  [Marks]

10        Q.   Is it on the left side or the right side in relation to

11     Majdanska Street?

12        A.   From my point of view, it's on the left side.  On the right-hand

13     side of that building is Majdanska Street that goes further down to the

14     Bulevar of Mese Selimovica, or, rather, the municipality of Novi Grad.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Can you now put number 1 there by that building that

16     had been hit?

17        A.   [Marks]

18        Q.   Now I would like to ask you kindly to put a circle around the

19     police station.  Mark that with number 2.

20        A.   [Marks]

21        Q.   Number 3, that is the school.  Could you mark the school with

22     number 3?

23        A.   [Marks]

24        Q.   Thank you.  The transformer station, please, number 4.

25        A.   [Marks]

Page 11026

 1        Q.   The municipality of Novi Grad, could you mark that, please,

 2     number 5?

 3        A.   [Marks]

 4        Q.   Can you please put a circle around the Geodesy Institute,

 5     number 6?

 6        A.   [Marks]

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Then the TV building, 7?

 8        A.   [Marks]

 9        Q.   Thank you.  To the right of this, number 7, what is that on the

10     other side of the river?  Is it Astra or Unioninvest, or what is that

11     building?

12        A.   That's Gras.  It's the garage of Gras.

13        Q.   Could you mark that, too, the garage of Gras?

14        A.   [Marks]

15        Q.   Number 8; right?  Now, you think that between this police station

16     and the building that was hit, there's about 150 metres; right?

17        A.   Well, I cannot say with any precision.  The area can be

18     calculated, but it's the length of Safeta Hadzica Street.

19        Q.   Thank you.  Can you place "KDZ477" and the date?  Perhaps we'll

20     have to call up other documents if you don't have them in hard copy; your

21     statements, I mean.

22        A.   [Marks]

23             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, that's admitted.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D979, Your Honours.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Page 11027

 1        Q.   Witness, on the 11th of March, 1997, and on the 24th of April,

 2     2006, you said that on the 26th of May, you were in the police station

 3     when an air-bomb flew over -- or, rather, this projectile, when it flew

 4     over the police station.  During your proofing when you testified in the

 5     Milosevic case, General Milosevic case, in January 2007, you changed

 6     that.  You said it wasn't the 26th of May.  You said it was, rather, on

 7     the 28th of August, 1995, or, rather, on the 28th of July, I think -- no,

 8     or the 28th of June, actually.  Can you explain this to us?

 9             While preparing for this testimony, how did you manage to

10     remember, 12 years later, that that was wrong and that you wrongly

11     believed, over the course of 12 years, that it was a particular date, and

12     then all of a sudden, during proofing, you remembered that it was a

13     different date?

14        A.   During both incidents that occurred in Safeta Hadzica 52, and I

15     don't know the exact date when the Kuwaiti Infirmary was hit also by an

16     air-bomb, I was at the police station on duty as the duty crime

17     technician.  I was gave that explanation yesterday when I was questioned

18     by the Prosecutor.

19             To this day, dates don't mean anything to me.  However, there is

20     one thing that remained imprinted in my memory, and that is the flight of

21     this projectile.  I was in the police station.  The window was facing

22     westward; that is to say, in this part which faces the municipality of

23     Novi Grad.  I was in an office that faces the west.

24             Now, during which one of these two incidents I saw, well, I

25     cannot say that after all this time now, I cannot say exactly what was in

Page 11028

 1     which statement.  I'm telling you the dates didn't really matter to me,

 2     but what I remember full well is that one of these two incidents,

 3     Safeta Hadzica 52 or when the explosion over there happened to the south

 4     of this building of Safeta Hadzica 52, on one of these two occasions I

 5     did see the projectile fly over.  It wasn't in both cases, just one of

 6     them.  Now, which one it was, I cannot remember exactly.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  In 1997 and in 2006, you said that it was on the

 8     26th of May.  So in two statements that were closer to the actual

 9     incident, that's what you said.  And then while you were preparing for

10     the third time to testify in General Milosevic's case, you changed that.

11     Do I need to call this statement of yours up or do you still remember

12     what you said?

13        A.   I have to underline the time distance, once again, and the

14     statements that I gave in the period that you're referring to now.  Then

15     I think that perhaps the first variant would be more plausible quite

16     simply because there is this time distance.  That was the first statement

17     that I gave.  That was closer to the 26th of May.  And I don't know when

18     the other explosion took place, I don't know the exact date, but I'm

19     trying to say now that we shouldn't really waste any time over this.  I

20     don't know the exact time, but I will accept that as I stated it in the

21     first statement, let that be it, because I think that less time had

22     elapsed from the incident until the time when I made my statement on that

23     occasion.

24        Q.   Thank you.  In that statement, you say that you were very close

25     to the location of the incident when it took place, and then you

Page 11029

 1     indicated on the photograph the roof of the police station where you were

 2     when the bomb exploded.  The bomb came over the police station from the

 3     west; is that right?

 4        A.   It came from that direction.  The windows were facing west.  I

 5     cannot say that it came over the police station exactly, because I was

 6     looking at it and it was a bit further to the south in relation to the

 7     room that I was in.  So it's not that it flew over, it's not that I had

 8     to raise my head.  I saw it.  I saw it on my left as I was standing on

 9     the -- at the window.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We have this in e-court, this

11     Google one.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Please, could you now mark what it was that you saw, the

14     direction that this shell came from?  You have what we used a moment ago.

15        A.   I'm going to use a dot to mark the wing of the station where I

16     was [marks].  The projectile flew this way [marks], so that would be it,

17     approximately.

18        Q.   Can you go to the building that it hit?

19        A.   Yes, that's the building [marks].

20        Q.   The usual thing, "KDZ477" and the date, please.

21        A.   [Marks]

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted, this

23     photograph?

24             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, as Exhibit D980.

Page 11030

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   You said you had seen the shell fly?

 3        A.   Yes, for a second or two.  I don't know how long it was, but I

 4     saw it fly.

 5        Q.   You said it made a lot of noise, a racket, like somebody revving

 6     up an engine?

 7        A.   I was just trying to describe what I heard, and that was

 8     approximately that sound.

 9        Q.   Was it the sound of rocket engines?

10        A.   Probably.

11        Q.   Was there any smoke?

12        A.   I don't remember.

13        Q.   In your statement of 24 April 2006, you say precisely:

14             "I conducted investigations on places of impact of modified

15     air-bombs.  I saw such one bomb fly before it hit.  It was the

16     26th of May, 1995.  The bomb flew over the police station before it hit

17     the Street of Safet Hadzic.  It had small, stubby wings --"

18             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the speaker slow down, please.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Is this the correct description?

21        A.   That's what it looked like to me at that moment, those couple of

22     seconds that I had to watch it.

23        Q.   In your opinion, rocket engines were on at the time, they were

24     propelling the rocket?

25        A.   Well, it was flying, so they must have been working.

Page 11031

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, I was advised that we have lost the

 2     markings done by the witness just now, which is D980.  Do you like the

 3     witness to do the markings again which shows the direction of projectile?

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He remembers.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Please look at e-court and do the same thing you did before to

 7     mark the direction.  You can mark the station, the direction.

 8        A.   I'm now marking the building that was hit by that air-bomb

 9     [marks].  Now I'm marking the station [marks], and now I'm marking the

10     direction of the projectile [marks].

11             JUDGE KWON:  And your pseudonym and the date, please.

12             THE WITNESS: [Marks]

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   What was the height -- the altitude at which the shell was

15     flying?

16        A.   I don't remember exactly.  Whether it was at the altitude of the

17     high-rise or above the high-rise, I can't remember.

18        Q.   Did it fly in a straight line or was it a parabolic line?

19        A.   I believe it was a straight line.  Whether it was falling down or

20     not, I can't remember.

21        Q.   So it flew by the police station, not over the police station?

22        A.   As I said, I was in the window, and I was watching it fly on my

23     left side.  It was not directly above me; it was to my left.  And looking

24     from that window, it would be the west side.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this photograph be admitted or

Page 11032

 1     does it already have a number?

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, it was admitted as Exhibit D980.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 4        Q.   You worked on many more incidents, as we can see from your

 5     statement.  I would, therefore, like to look at incident involving the

 6     Elektroprenos bus.  Was it on the 18th of August, 1995?

 7        A.   Yes, 18 August 1995, the intersection of the ninth transversal

 8     and Safeta Hadzica Street.  Object, the public utility company

 9     Elektroprenos bus.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now see photographs showing

11     that type of bus to see what kind of bus it was that was hit.  Can we see

12     1D3038.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   You've seen those pictures of buses?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   These are our photographs.  This is the kind of bus.  Was that

17     bus one of these three types?

18        A.   I cannot really talk about the type of bus.  I don't think we

19     need this, because there are photographs of that bus, original

20     photographs.

21        Q.   We'll be very grateful if you can provide them, please.

22        A.   I made a whole photo documentation.  Do we have that photo in

23     electronic form?

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I hope the Prosecution can assist.

25     Otherwise, we can put it on the ELMO.

Page 11033

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

 2             MR. GAYNOR:  We have photographs in hard copy, and I'll just get

 3     them right now.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  These are -- these are hard-copy print-outs which

 6     were provided to us by the witness at the weekend, and they are -- he can

 7     explain their relationship to the photo file, but they were used -- they

 8     were the same ones as were used to create the photo file.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The Defence would like to receive

10     those photographs, and we also kindly ask that a copy be made for the

11     witness to mark some things we need.  But there is no photo of the bus in

12     this documentation.

13             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd like to point out that these photographs were,

14     in fact, notified to the Defence on Sunday, and the Defence has, in fact,

15     inspected these photographs.  I'm going to see if there are any

16     photographs of the bus.  One moment, please.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With all due respect, we would like

18     to have these photographs.

19             MR. GAYNOR:  My apologies.  I handed over the wrong batch of

20     photographs.  This is the batch here.  Thank you.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

22             These four photographs could be of assistance, but we really need

23     to ask the witness to make some drawings on them.  Can we make

24     photocopies of these photographs so the witness can mark them?

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 11034

 1        Q.   Witness, could you please look, in e-court, at the third bus at

 2     the bottom.  It's just the same as the one on your photograph; do you

 3     agree?

 4        A.   The bus that I see could be.  But without the photograph, I can't

 5     claim it's exactly the same type.  I need a photograph.  I made a photo

 6     file, and I believe, just with the other incidents, it should be in

 7     electronic form with a caption underneath.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] We need photographs for this

 9     testimony, but we also need it for our own expertise, for our own expert

10     report, so we have to have them.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This red bus is the original bus,

12     and the photograph was made recently from the original negative that is

13     kept with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  And if you look at this other

14     photograph, the bus that is blue or turquoise in colour, you could see

15     it's from the same manufacturer, but the difference between them is that

16     the blue bus has a door in the middle and the red one, the original one,

17     doesn't.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Can you show, here on the bus, where the shell impacted?

20        A.   We see damage on the bus here, where the body was twisted, and

21     then we can see the same on another photograph - it's marked with

22     number 1 - and this deviated part of the bodywork is also clearly

23     visible.  And that's what it says in my report, the bus was hit just

24     above the window.

25        Q.   From which direction did the shell come from in relation to the

Page 11035

 1     bus?

 2        A.   The bus was hit on the right side while crossing the intersection

 3     between Deveta Transverzala and Safeta Hadzica Street.

 4        Q.   This is a photograph from inside?

 5        A.   Yes, this was taken from the inside of the bus.

 6        Q.   Do you see that this exit hole is just next to the frame of the

 7     window?

 8        A.   This damage was created when the projectile exploded.  I don't

 9     know which kind of projectile it was.  I'm not a ballistics man; I just

10     photographed the damage.  And it's true that it hit the upper part of the

11     window.  I don't know which window in sequence it is.  We could see it on

12     one of the other photographs.

13        Q.   We'll need to get photocopies to mark them.  But do you agree

14     that this inside damage is just next to the frame of the window?

15        A.   Yes.  The whole frame of the window was twisted, as well as the

16     roof.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see again the previous

18     photograph to see the outside damage.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Here, you can see clearly that the

20     frame was hit in full, and we saw the damage it created on the inside.

21     We can put both photographs on the ELMO at the same time.  Now you can

22     see the inside and the outside.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Now, regarding the horizontal plane, do you agree that the entry

25     impact is a bit more forward than the exit hole?  Look at it carefully.

Page 11036

 1        A.   Number 1 is marking the whole damage created.  It just marks the

 2     point of impact.  Under what angle and how it entered, it's difficult to

 3     see on these photographs.  They just show specific damage created by the

 4     impact of the projectile.  Now, what angle, that's difficult to say, all

 5     the more so because the photograph was taken at a certain angle in both

 6     cases.

 7        Q.   Based on the traces, based on this distance from the frame of

 8     both the entry and exit holes, can you make any conclusions about the

 9     direction of the projectile vertically and horizontally?

10        A.   No, I can't.  I can only say the bus was hit on the right side,

11     above the window on the bodywork, but I cannot be more specific than

12     that, based on this damage.

13        Q.   Do you agree that determining the direction is decisive in

14     determining the origin of fire?

15        A.   Yes, but we can get that direction if we know the bus was hit on

16     its right side.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We'll now look at that

18     intersection.

19             I would like these photographs to be admitted.  But we would

20     really need photocopies of these photographs after the break so that the

21     witness can mark these things, although they are pretty clearly visible.

22     Maybe both these photographs can be admitted under one number.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D981, Your Honours.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 11037

 1        Q.   Somebody did make a determination.  Was it you or somebody else

 2     from the team that determined the calibre and type of weapon involved?

 3        A.   It couldn't have been me.  It must have been one of the

 4     ballistics experts.  But if you want me to say anything at all about it,

 5     I need the documents of this investigation, my whole report, the whole

 6     photo file, the statements of ballistics experts, the findings of other

 7     members of the team, if you want any comment from me.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I ask that the witness be given

 9     all that?

10             MR. GAYNOR:  According to the witness's amalgamated statement,

11     his report should be 65 ter 09884.  If that's to be called up, it should

12     not be broadcast.  And there is another report which is compiled by an

13     inspector from the CSB, and that is 65 ter 09885.  Neither of those have

14     yet been admitted.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Gaynor.

16             Just a second.  I noted that this document was briefly broadcast.

17     We may need to redact it.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  Very well, Mr. President.

19             JUDGE KWON:  I'm not sure whether I was mistaken or not.  I'll

20     leave it in the hands of the Court Deputy.

21                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

22             JUDGE KWON:  No.  Thank you.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Witness, will this be of assistance?

25        A.   Yes.  That is my report, where it says what case it is, and it

Page 11038

 1     says that it's shelling, and the intersection where it happened, and what

 2     actually happened.  The bus of Elektroprenos, a public company, was hit,

 3     and then there is a description that follows.  And on the second page is

 4     this same report continued and my signature.

 5        Q.   The former Street of Ive Andrica in this case is called the

 6     9th Transversal; right?

 7        A.   Yes, and it continues from the Street of Ive Andrica from the

 8     north and then moves down south to the intersection with Safeta Hadzica.

 9        Q.   Could you please have a look at this.  The projectile hit the

10     metal plate, et cetera, while the bus was moving towards the

11     Olympic Village.  Is the type of weapon identified anywhere and the

12     calibre?  It seems to me that somewhere in these reports it says that it

13     was a PAT, an anti-aircraft gun.  Right?

14        A.   In my report, it says "projectile," exactly.  I did not say what

15     type at all.  Quite simply, it is because I could not establish, on the

16     basis of the damage on the bus, what weapon was involved.  I left that to

17     the ballistics experts.  The vehicle was moving when it was hit.  It was

18     moving towards the Olympic Village, and I can read it:

19             "While the vehicle was moving from Alipasino Polje towards the

20     Olympic Village, the projectile hit the metal plate above the first large

21     window next to the front door."

22             So this is an exact reference where the bus was hit, the first

23     large window next to the front door.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Can we go through this further and see whether the

25     report contains anything more specific?  Does anyone know what type of

Page 11039

 1     weapon was used?  Paragraph 112, you say the bus was hit on the

 2     right-hand side with an anti-aircraft bullet, you say.  So what would the

 3     weapon be, a machine-gun, because it's not an explosive charge?

 4        A.   The report that I wrote up is more important, the one I wrote

 5     after visiting the scene.  I'm reading the names of the people who were

 6     on the team.  I'm reading it from my diary.  I don't know if it would be

 7     right for me to read the names.  I can say it was a member of the KDZ.

 8     I'm not going to give the name of that person.  So at the time, he was in

 9     charge of dealing with the traces and sending everything for further

10     expert evaluation to see what projectile was involved.  Now, whether they

11     gave an official report as to what projectile was involved in this

12     incident, I don't know, but I didn't want to say anything specific.

13     That's why I wrote "projectile."  What kind of projectile it was, perhaps

14     I said it later in my statement, but perhaps it is not the result of my

15     having read an official objective report, but perhaps I just heard

16     somebody say it.  If we are specifically interested in that, we'd have to

17     read the official report.

18        Q.   Could you please ask for them to leaf through this report

19     further?  But in 112, you say that it was an anti-aircraft bullet, so

20     that would be a machine-gun, wouldn't it?  And the last sentence says.

21     And that's what you said when you gave your statement of the

22     15th of November, 1995, and you repeated that when you testified in

23     General Milosevic's case on the 31st of January, 2006, transcript

24     reference 328, that's the ERN number:

25             [In English] "The shot could only come from the VRS-held

Page 11040

 1     territory."

 2             [Interpretation] So you are drawing an unequivocal conclusion

 3     here that the shot could only come from VRS-held territory.  That is why

 4     it is so important for us to see whether it is direct or indirect fire,

 5     and we need to test this conclusion of yours that purports not to leave

 6     any doubt.

 7             Please ask for a paper copy of the report, or let's leaf through

 8     this further.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have the next page.

10             MR. GAYNOR:  Mr. President, I can provide the witness with paper

11     copies of his report and of the report compiled by the CSB, if it would

12     assist the witness.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Gaynor.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please have in e-court

15     65 ter 10179, 10179; P147 in General Milosevic's case.  It's a map.

16             Can we have a hard copy too, just one.

17             MR. GAYNOR:  The two reports that the witness has just been

18     provided with are, as I said earlier, 65 ter 09884 - that's his

19     report - and the CSB report is 09885.  And if either of those are to be

20     broadcast, they should -- or to be brought up, they should not be

21     broadcast, please.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No need to have it broadcast.

23             We have a map here now that pertains to Grbavica, and that's not

24     what we are asking for.  65 ter -- I mean, it's paragraph 113.  It should

25     mark the place where the bus was hit.  It's not this map that we see here

Page 11041

 1     now.

 2             Can we then have 09390C, and then section 10.  Maybe that's it,

 3     yes.  Actually, give us section 10.  65 ter 09390C, and then section 10.

 4             Can the left-hand side be zoomed in.  Further.  Actually, the

 5     lower part of the left-hand side.  Thank you.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Can you now mark the location of the incident for us,

 8     Safeta Hadzica and the 9th Transversal, the location of the incident?

 9        A.   I'm going to mark the intersection of Ive Andrica and

10     Safeta Hadzica, where the bus passed before it was hit [marks], and in

11     this circle we should see the place where the bus was actually hit.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Was the bus already there?  Had it already reached

13     the intersection, or did this happen before or after the intersection?

14        A.   I was not an eye-witness.  So this intersection is a dangerous

15     one.  That's what we called it.  It was visible from the neighbourhood of

16     Nedzarici, and from time to time, different types of fire were reaching

17     it coming from different kinds of weaponry.  There was no protection

18     there at the time, and I'm sure that the bus was moving faster than it

19     would when it was moving through areas where there were many buildings.

20     You can look at the statement of the driver, himself, where the bus

21     actually was, if he does make a reference to that in his own statement.

22     I was not an eye-witness.  As for the bus, itself, and for taking its

23     photograph, I did that when it stopped in Dobrinja, together with the

24     investigation team.

25        Q.   Thank you.  Which route was the bus supposed to take?  Was it

Page 11042

 1     supposed to continue along Ive Andrica or Safeta Hadzica and then

 2     Ante Babica?  Can you mark the route it took to Dobrinja?

 3        A.   Yes, I'm going to explain how it moved by using short arrows

 4     [marks].  So this is the route of the bus before it stopped.  So it moved

 5     down Ive Andrica Street, it crossed the intersection with Safeta Hadzica,

 6     and then it went further on, not through Mojmilo, but around it, and then

 7     it went down to this narrow area that was protected visually at the time.

 8     There were containers that provided visual protection, and then the bus

 9     could be sheltered that way.

10        Q.   Can you mark where the containers were?

11        A.   I haven't finished yet.

12             As for the intersection between Ive Andrica and Safeta Hadzica,

13     there were garbage containers there, and I think that that can be seen in

14     my photo file.  However, they did not provide enough visual protection.

15     Now, I don't know how many of them were there and what visual protection

16     they could provide to the bus, in view of the Nedzarici neighbourhood.

17     As far as I can remember, when I went to on-site investigations, garbage

18     containers were there all along the road.  However, there was no visual

19     protection by Dobrinja 5.  Certainly, there was more than at the

20     intersection of Ive Andrica and Safeta Hadzica.

21        Q.   First of all, you found glass there on the actual site, and you

22     believe that that is the point of impact, although you say that vehicles

23     were crossing along that -- over that shattered glass.  Where was the

24     glass and where was the impact?

25        A.   The very intersection of Safeta Hadzica and Ive Andrica,

Page 11043

 1     somewhere around there.

 2        Q.   Could you please put number 1 and number 2 there, that is to say,

 3     the location of the incident, and, to the west, the containers?

 4        A.   [Marks].  I put a circle around the intersection where it

 5     happened.  And this short line that marks number 2, that's where the

 6     containers were lined, and that would be much clearer if we looked at the

 7     photograph.  You could understand immediately what kind of visual cover

 8     it provides relative to the height of the bus.

 9        Q.   And you say these shards of glass were all over the intersection,

10     exactly on the intersection, and the front of the bus was on the

11     intersection?

12        A.   That should be it.

13        Q.   Thank you.  Can you tell the Trial Chamber:  From the separation

14     line, how tall are these buildings across the separation line?  What

15     neighbourhood is that to the north-west?

16        A.   To the north-west is stage 2 of Alipasino Polje, the Square of

17     ZAVNOBiH.

18        Q.   Can you mark it?

19        A.   I apologise.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Apologies to the interpreters.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Now, number 3, how tall are these buildings?

23        A.   I'm marking number 3 to denote stage B of Alipasino Polje

24     [marks].  Ten days before coming here, I made new photographs, and I

25     turned them over to the Prosecution, photographs showing this

Page 11044

 1     neighbourhood.  Those are several-storey buildings around the periphery

 2     of the neighbourhood, whereas buildings on the square are five,

 3     six storeys tall.  To the south-west of number 2 is Mojmilo

 4     neighbourhood.  It's an Olympic project, also a residential/civilian

 5     area.  The buildings are several storeys high.  I don't know exactly how

 6     tall.

 7        Q.   Can you also put a circle around Mojmilo?

 8        A.   [Marks]

 9        Q.   Number 4 there, please.

10        A.   [Marks]

11        Q.   Now, these buildings towards the separation line, what are those

12     neighbourhoods?  Is that stage A?

13        A.   This is stage B [marks].  It says on the map "Mojmilo."  I don't

14     need to mark it.

15        Q.   To the west of stage B, what's there?

16        A.   Saraj Polje, also a civilian neighbourhood adjacent to Nedzarici.

17        Q.   Put a circle around that.  Does it have a name?

18        A.   Vojnicko Naselje, "Soldiers' Settlement."

19        Q.   Is this the student hostel to the north of the Soldiers'

20     Settlement?

21        A.   Yes, it is.  Should I put a circle around there?

22        Q.   Mark the Soldiers' Settlement with "5" and student hostel with

23     "6."

24        A.   [Marks]

25        Q.   What's this building that remains standing alone next to Mojmilo?

Page 11045

 1        A.   This should be the health centre.

 2        Q.   Put a circle.

 3        A.   [Marks]

 4        Q.   How tall are these buildings in number 5?

 5        A.   Several storeys high.

 6        Q.   Can you put "7" on the health centre?

 7        A.   [Marks]

 8        Q.   Do you agree that Nedzarici is a Serbian neighbourhood, with

 9     detached houses, with no tall buildings in it, that the tallest is the

10     Home for Abandoned Children, two storeys high?

11        A.   I agree that those were private houses.  They still stand today.

12     They had two or, maximum, three floors, including the loft.  And as for

13     the layout of the terrain, which you cannot see on the map, from the

14     place of the incident marked with "2," there's a downhill slope.  On this

15     map, you see Mojmilo Hill, so naturally the whole street, Safeta Hadzica,

16     goes downhill towards this transversal line, Ante Babica Street.  You can

17     see that on the map, and Nedzarici is at the foot of this slope.

18        Q.   Witness, do we again find here a very narrow area on the Serbian

19     side that could have potentially been the origin of fire, a very small,

20     narrow space between buildings, so it would practically take a miracle

21     for a bullet to find its way through?  Can you now draw a line to the

22     possible origin of fire on the Serbian side?

23        A.   I will not agree with what you just said, because this is not an

24     extremely narrow space.  This is a very large field in Safeta Hadzica

25     Street, a very large space from which you could fire.

Page 11046

 1        Q.   Now change the pen, use red, and draw a line between the

 2     health centre and the northern building.

 3        A.   [Marks]

 4        Q.   Thank you.  You can shade it, please.

 5        A.   [Marks]

 6        Q.   Witness, what's the direction vertically?  Did it go -- how did

 7     the projectile go, horizontally or from -- or downwards or upwards?

 8        A.   Upwards.

 9        Q.   But if we look at the photographs, we see that the exit hole on

10     the inside shows a downward line?

11        A.   I wouldn't agree.

12        Q.   Okay.  We'll come back to that.

13             Now, tell us all, please:  We have here a possibility of

14     360 degrees, so if the bus was just before a turn, 180 degrees, you opted

15     for these 5, 6 degrees, how did you rule out the remaining 180 degrees?

16     Which method did you use to exclude the possibility that the origin of

17     fire was elsewhere?

18        A.   Well, first of all, the bus was hit on its right side, and I said

19     that in my report.  I don't want to repeat it.  I photographed the bus in

20     Dobrinja, and it indicates that the bus was coming from down-town towards

21     Dobrinja.  If it had been on its way down-town, it would have been hit on

22     its left side.

23             In addition to my report, which is typed up and photographs

24     attached to it, there are reports of other members of the team, and there

25     are statements of several witnesses who were on the bus, itself, and who

Page 11047

 1     can confirm that the bus was moving and where it was moving, so it's

 2     indisputable that the bus was moving from down-town towards Dobrinja in

 3     the direction I indicated on the map.

 4        Q.   Witness, we now need perfectly reliable information about the

 5     type of weapon.  Is it a weapon that produces direct or indirect fire?

 6     And we need angles on a horizontal and the vertical plane to be able to

 7     make determinations.  Do you have these angles?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   Does anybody have them?

10        A.   It says in my report that the bomb squad from the CSB Sarajevo

11     extracted pieces of the projectile.  They were analysed, and that

12     analysis helps determine the type of weapon used in this incident.  There

13     are other documents that speak about the type of weapon that fired on

14     this intersection not only in this incident, but also in the past, and

15     there is also documentation of all the shelters that were put up to

16     reduce the risk.  And I knew that this intersection was risky, because I

17     lived close by, and that it was open to fire from Nedzarici.  That's why

18     the shelters were placed as they were placed.  They provided cover from

19     Nedzarici, not from Mojmilo and not from other areas, because it was

20     common knowledge that there was constant fire from Nedzarici.

21        Q.   Why weren't there any shelters put up facing Mojmilo and other

22     areas?

23        A.   Because no incident was recorded where fire came from those

24     places.

25        Q.   Let's see if it was ever established, and how, that this fire

Page 11048

 1     came from the Serbian side.  Is there anything -- any document in the

 2     report about the angle of descent of this projectile, and where can we

 3     find it?

 4        A.   I can't help you there.  There was a whole team working on that

 5     investigation.  It was led by the man under number 1.  I was part of that

 6     team.  And in addition to the two of us, there was also an employee of

 7     the Counter-Sabotage Unit from the Security Services Centre, the

 8     Novi Grad station.  You have to ask that man, because we sent him all the

 9     documents in this file, and he was supposed to send them on to the

10     investigating judge.

11        Q.   Please put "KDZ477" and the date.

12        A.   [Marks]

13             MR. GAYNOR:  Just while the witness is doing that, I just want to

14     inform Mr. Karadzic that a black-and-white version of the original photo

15     file, which is what we have, has now been up-loaded under 09884, and it

16     has been previously disclosed to the Defence.

17             JUDGE KWON:  We'll give this an exhibit number.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, Exhibit D982.

19             JUDGE KWON:  And are you minded to tender the report of the

20     witness and of the CSB?

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

22             JUDGE KWON:  They will be admitted under seal.

23             I'm not sure whether we have an English translation.  Did we have

24     one?  Yes, we have it, we have it.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In the amalgamated statement, from

Page 11049

 1     paragraph 107, ending with 116, inclusive, is the description of this

 2     incident, and it's very important for us to establish how these

 3     investigations were conducted and how the facts were established.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Now, with these photographs, I'd like to ask you for a little

 6     patience to go through them.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  You objected to the admission of this document and

 8     use of it, and you are tendering it.

 9             Why don't we give the numbers for those two reports.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, Your Honour.

11             65 ter 09884 will be Exhibit D983, under seal, and 65 ter 09885

12     will be Exhibit D984, also under seal.

13             JUDGE KWON:  And, Mr. Karadzic, it's time to have a break.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let me just say one thing, please.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If that incident is covered by the

17     amalgamated statement and will not be extracted from the amalgamated

18     statement, then there is no further restriction to admitting anything

19     whatsoever.  My intention was to tender, through this witness, only

20     what's in the indictment.  If that's not the way it works with the

21     amalgamated statement and there are contradictions in certain issues,

22     then we have to admit everything.  That's my position.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

24             After the break, will you have about a quarter of an hour to

25     conclude your cross-examination, Mr. Karadzic.

Page 11050

 1             We'll break for half an hour and resume at 10 to 1.00.

 2                           --- Recess taken at 12.20 p.m.

 3                           --- On resuming at 12.55 p.m.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6        Q.   Witness, do you agree that vehicles, especially buses and tanks,

 7     when on the move, are aimed directly, rather than indirectly, which would

 8     require the non-existence of visual contact?

 9        A.   I am not privy to the ways and means of how to target buses and

10     tanks.

11        Q.   You did say that you became well versed in your investigations

12     and you all became experts.  Did that enable you to conclude how vehicles

13     in motion are targeted?

14        A.   I am not an expert in that area.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please have 1D3039 in

16     e-court.  Thank you.

17             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   The yellow dot, does it mark the spot where the bus was hit?

19        A.   Yes, the crossroads of Derventa Transverzala and Safeta Hadzica

20     Streets.

21        Q.   Thank you.  You said it is at an elevation, slightly, in

22     comparison with the neighbourhoods?

23        A.   Yes.  Alongside the Safeta Hadzica Street, there is a slope which

24     can be seen on the photographs, although we can't see it on this aerial

25     image.

Page 11051

 1        Q.   Can you delineate Nedzarici, the family homes adjacent to the

 2     apartment blocks?  Just draw a line so that the Chamber could have a

 3     picture of where Nedzarici is.  You should use the pen, but turn it on

 4     first, please.

 5        A.   These family homes with the red-tiled roofs, this is Nedzarici

 6     [marks].

 7        Q.   Thank you.  It is my position, Witness, that this bus was hit

 8     from the front and from above, as well as on the right side.  The bus was

 9     hit by a bullet moving towards the back of the bus and to the left.  That

10     was the projectile trajectory.  From above, so a descending bullet, the

11     entry point indicates that the projectile entered the bus.  If it had

12     come from below, it would have gone through the floor and out through the

13     roof; is that correct?

14        A.   No, it is not.  According to the photographs we saw, we can see

15     what the technical characteristics of the impact were and the damage

16     caused by the projectile.  Therefore, your assertion is incorrect.  If we

17     go by the photographs, that would not allow you to draw such a

18     conclusion.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We seem to have lost the markings

20     of the witness delineating Nedzarici.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Please place an "N" there for "Nedzarici," as well as your

23     pseudonym and date.

24        A.   [Marks]

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Therefore, we agree that the yellow

Page 11052

 1     spot indicates the place of incident.

 2             May I seek to tender this, please?

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 4             Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  I simply want to make the observation that the

 6     two red arrows which are visible on this photograph have been put there

 7     by the Defence, and that the witness has not made any comment about

 8     those.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, true.  Thank you, Mr. Gaynor.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D985.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   I would kindly ask the witness to mark the position of the bus

13     length-wise.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We need to go back to the previous

15     document for that purpose, D985.

16             These arrows were entered according to what the witness said

17     about the direction of movement of the bus.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Was this the position of the bus, Witness?

20        A.   No, these arrows do not indicate the direction of movement of the

21     bus, because they go from the north-west towards the bottom of the map.

22     And the bottom one moves from the south-east towards the yellow spot.

23     They do not represent the line of movement of the bus as I indicated.

24     These arrows were not made by me.

25        Q.   Thank you.  Can you indicate, on the red dot, how the bus was

Page 11053

 1     positioned length-wise?

 2        A.   I can only indicate the direction of movement, and then that can

 3     be used to ascertain where the front or where the rear of the bus was.

 4     This is the road it was moving along [marks].  It came down

 5     Ive Andrica Street, and before the crossroads is where the incident was.

 6     Of course, it faced the crossroads with its front.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, this suffices.

 8             May this be admitted as well under the same number?

 9             JUDGE KWON:  That will be done.  That will be kept as it is now.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

11             Could we please have 65 ter 21214.  65 ter 21214.

12             Could we please zoom in and focus.  It is rather unclear.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   Witness, on one of the photographs presented by the OTP, you

15     marked the police station building.  Could you indicate Cetinjska Street

16     on this photograph, just behind the apartment blocks?

17        A.   Cetinjska Street is part of the street in Alipasino Polje where

18     the C stage of the buildings is.  We can see only one part of it.

19        Q.   Could you please mark that with a pen?

20        A.   This is where Cetinjska Street begins [marks], and it circumvents

21     the C stage of the Alipasino Polje neighbourhood.  We can't see it here

22     in its entire length because of the buildings, but eventually it joins

23     the Klara Cetkin Street.

24        Q.   You marked that.  Thank you.  Do you know what were the military

25     facilities shown here and military production facilities?  We do have the

Page 11054

 1     police station, don't we?  Please mark that.

 2        A.   [Marks].  I marked it with a "1."

 3        Q.   Could you please mark the transformer station?

 4        A.   Yes.  How should I mark it?

 5        Q.   With a "2."

 6        A.   [Marks]

 7        Q.   Then Novi Grad municipality?

 8        A.   It is just behind the transformer station.  I'll mark it with a

 9     "3."  [Marks]

10        Q.   The surveying institute?

11        A.   It is adjacent to Novi Grad municipality.  I'm marking it with a

12     "4."  [Marks]

13        Q.   The TV building, mark it with a "5," please.

14        A.   [Marks]

15        Q.   The wire factory?

16        A.   It is behind the television building in its entire length, but

17     I'll circle only one part of it.  [Marks]

18        Q.   Mark it with a "6."

19        A.   [Marks]

20        Q.   Did you know where Unis and Igman were?

21        A.   Well, it's an industrial area following the TV station area.

22        Q.   Did you know that there was a headquarters in the television

23     building?

24        A.   This is the first I hear of it.

25        Q.   Did you know that there were some military installations in the

Page 11055

 1     surveying institute?

 2        A.   I hear that for the first time.

 3        Q.   Did you know that in the wire factory, mortar mines were

 4     produced, mortar shells?

 5        A.   I wasn't present there.  I'm not familiar with it.

 6        Q.   What is the gray building or brown building next to the

 7     wire factory?

 8        A.   The entire block of buildings just behind the TV building is what

 9     used to be the industrial area before the war.  We all -- we referred to

10     the whole area as the wire factory, but I don't know which part you mean

11     precisely.  I know that somewhere to the east, the Astra chemical factory

12     was.

13        Q.   Please place a date and your signature.

14        A.   [Marks]

15        Q.   We'll use a particular software application to show you another

16     view of this area.  Do you know what brigade was deployed in this area,

17     the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina brigade.

18        A.   I can't see it clearly, but I think it was the 101st Mountain or

19     Motorised Brigade.

20        Q.   And across the railway tracks up-hill?

21        A.   I don't know exactly.

22        Q.   What if I told you it was the 111th?

23        A.   I know there was a brigade there, but I don't know which one.  I

24     only know of the 101st.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Has this been admitted?

Page 11056

 1             JUDGE KWON:  D986.  And, Mr. Karadzic, you will have

 2     five minutes.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please have Sanction on.

 4             Yes, we see the 101st.  You can remove the signs.  We have the

 5     155th.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Is this the area of responsibility of the 101st Brigade?

 8        A.   I can't tell you anything about the AORs.  I know the 101st was

 9     there.  As for the neighbourhoods where I conducted my investigations,

10     I can tell you that these were civilian neighbourhoods, inhabited by

11     civilians, both Alipasino Polje and Pavle Goranin.  You are now showing

12     me certain front-lines, where I was not, and I don't know where the areas

13     of responsibility of the respective brigades were.

14        Q.   Let's have a look at the headquarters and various staffs of the

15     101st Brigade.  Did you know that there were command posts in the area?

16     Did you know that there were command posts?

17        A.   I was a police member.  I was not a member of the 101st Mountain

18     Brigade so as to know where their command posts were, as designated here.

19     I can only tell you that I see the former Viktor Bubanj Barracks.  I

20     don't know whether you meant that.  I am really not familiar with this

21     question.

22        Q.   Do we have the artillery and howitzer positions?  Yes, we do.  Do

23     you see the tank?

24        A.   Yes, I see there is a tank.  Yes, I see it.

25        Q.   Can you see that in the TV building, there was a company command?

Page 11057

 1        A.   As anyone else in the courtroom, I can only read to you what the

 2     map says.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we zoom in on the company

 4     command and the TV building.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, I don't see any point of pursuing this

 6     line of questions further, given the witness's answer that he doesn't

 7     know about these positions, Mr. Karadzic.

 8             But, by the way, has this been provided to the Prosecution, this

 9     programme?

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, we provided that.  However, it

11     can be joined with other material.  We are still awaiting further

12     documents.  There is nothing here that is not based on certain documents.

13     And here you can see, for example, what document is referred to when we

14     designated the company command post in this particular location.

15             MR. GAYNOR:  I understand we do have the programme.  We don't

16     have the underlying material upon which this is based or any indication

17     as to methodology.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

19             Please conclude your cross-examination very soon, Mr. Karadzic.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I'll be -- I'd be happy to.

21             Could we please have the 111th Brigade.  We need to zoom out for

22     that.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Can you see that the 111th Brigade went all the way up to the

25     Muslim part of Vogosca?  You can see their positions and headquarters

Page 11058

 1     there.  Were you aware of it?

 2        A.   I was not.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 4             We won't be tendering anything as yet.  I just wanted to show you

 5     what the things looked like.

 6             Let's have a look at the military-purpose industry facilities,

 7     and that will be my last topic.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Can you see the facilities I mentioned?  The entire industrial

10     area was geared towards production for the war.  Were you familiar with

11     that?

12        A.   I was not.

13        Q.   Did you know that a transformer station you marked provided

14     electricity to these ammunition and weapons factories behind the TV

15     building?

16        A.   I wasn't aware of that.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Witness.

18             This concludes my examination.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Karadzic.

20             Mr. Gaynor, before you re-examine the witness, the Chamber has a

21     question for the witness.

22             Judge Baird.

23                           Questioned by the Court:

24             JUDGE BAIRD:  Witness, in testifying about your investigations in

25     respect of the incident in Nehru Street, you stated that you did not deal

Page 11059

 1     with the horizontal plane in your report, you dealt with the vertical

 2     plane.  Do you recollect this?

 3        A.   It had to do with the incident when Jasmina Tabakovic was killed.

 4     In that case, an investigating judge was with me on the team, and he was

 5     in charge of the investigation.  I was only determining the height, in

 6     terms of the location where the damage was, and later on we brought these

 7     points together and we determined the line.  However, that line was not

 8     measured in the room, itself.  However, on the basis of these points, we

 9     were able to tell from which position the bullet had come.

10             JUDGE BAIRD:  I thank you.  But Dr. Karadzic asked you, at

11     page 12, lines 16 to 18, words to this effect:

12             "All these things being done -- being what they are, the

13     horizontal plane and the horizontal inclination are decisive in

14     determining where the bullet came from?"

15             Now, we didn't quite follow the answer you gave.  Are you in a

16     position to tell us, Witness, would the horizontal plane and the

17     horizontal inclination be decisive in determining where the bullet came

18     from?

19        A.   Horizontal measures were not included in the report.  However, on

20     the basis of the vertical ones that we did do, we determined only the

21     direction from which the bullet had arrived.  However, this was not

22     included in the report, not my report or the reports of my other

23     colleagues who were on the scene.

24             JUDGE BAIRD:  So am I correct in assuming that you would not be

25     able to comment on that question by Dr. Karadzic, whether the horizontal

Page 11060

 1     plane and the horizontal inclination -- whether they are decisive in

 2     determining where the bullet came from?

 3        A.   At this moment from this position, I am not in a position to do

 4     so on the basis of the horizontal one.  But on the basis of the vertical

 5     one and the photographs I have from that period, I was in a position to

 6     confirm from which position the projectile had come.

 7             JUDGE BAIRD:  Thank you very much.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor, do you have re-examination?

 9             MR. GAYNOR:  I do, Mr. President.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, please.

11             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you.

12                           Re-examination by Mr. Gaynor:

13        Q.   Witness, I'd like to stay on the same incident that His Honour

14     has just been asking you about.  And prior to discussing that incident, I

15     want to ask you a few questions about the methodology of investigating

16     sniping incidents, specifically.

17             Now, when you use the string that you describe, could you explain

18     exactly where you put the two ends of the string?

19        A.   The investigation team always consisted of a minimum of

20     two members.  It was necessary to establish the way in which the bullet

21     had entered a particular facility.  When assessing the damage that was

22     caused by the bullet, we were following the trajectory and looking for

23     traces in the said facility.  Only when we would find the second point

24     that could be linked up to the first one, in terms of the damage caused

25     by the bullet, it was only then that we could stretch the string.  We

Page 11061

 1     called that "viziranje."  So that string or that twiglet that was used to

 2     show where the bullet went, that could only be done if we had two or more

 3     points.  If we had just one point, if we had just a single piece of

 4     damage on a window, for instance, it would not be possible to do that,

 5     and it would not be possible to establish the origin of the gun-shot.

 6     Then we would have to talk about a wide range of possibilities, in terms

 7     of where that bullet could have come from.

 8        Q.   Before we get to the specifics of this particular incident:  Is

 9     it the case, yes or no, that sometimes an optical device is used, as well

10     as a string, in the investigation of sniping incidents?

11        A.   Nowadays, that is a perfectly normal thing.  But at the time when

12     I investigated these incidents, our technical abilities were very

13     limited.  We did not have the resources that are used today when carrying

14     out these investigations.

15        Q.   Turning to the specific incident, the killing of

16     Jasmina Tabakovic, you say in your statement that the bullet entered

17     through a plastic sheet.  And we can bring up the photographs, if you

18     want, but could you describe to Their Honours approximately how big the

19     penetration hole would have been?

20        A.   Well, since these are plastic sheets that were used instead of

21     glass, because glass had been shattered during the shelling, damage on

22     that plastic sheet could have been 1 centimetre, at a maximum.  It's been

23     a long time now, but I think that the photo file shows this,

24     1 centimetre, maximum, unless the plastic sheet was completely torn.  But

25     I think that the circle was up to 1 centimetre in diametre.

Page 11062

 1        Q.   Turning now to the impact point of the bullet on the wall,

 2     approximately how big was that impact point?

 3        A.   Since it's a hard surface, I think - it's not that I think; I'm

 4     sure - the damage would have to be bigger, because when the wall is hit,

 5     then mortar crumbles, and also the concrete that was behind the wardrobe

 6     that the bullet had hit.

 7             MR. GAYNOR:  Could I bring up the exhibit, not to be broadcast,

 8     D973.  I'd like to go to one of the photographs that you took of this

 9     incident which shows the size of one of the penetration points, and I'd

10     like to see photo number 7.  That should be the 10th page of this.

11             If we could just hone in on the lower photograph, please.

12        Q.   Could you describe which of the points this is?

13        A.   The caption shows that the damage was caused by the bullet

14     hitting the wardrobe, and that is marked with the number 6.  It's a

15     terrible photocopy, but I think that there is a dark area above the

16     number 6 that actually shows the damage done by the bullet.

17        Q.   Now, could you explain for Their Honours the process of taking a

18     string and taking it from this point to the point of penetration in the

19     plastic sheeting?  Is that what you did, or could you just explain

20     exactly what you did?

21        A.   When we entered the room where the incident occurred, the room

22     was visually observed.  What was observed was that on the plastic sheet,

23     there was damage caused by the bullet.  As we further investigated in the

24     room, we realised that the wardrobe was damaged as well.  Before the

25     wardrobe was moved, and that was done subsequently, this measurement was

Page 11063

 1     taken.  Only when the wardrobe was removed, and it was against the wall,

 2     not exactly against the wall, there were a few centimetres in between, we

 3     saw that there was damage on the other side of the wardrobe and in the

 4     wall, itself.  As far as I can remember, and that is contained in my

 5     report, the bullet stopped in the wall, and that's where we actually

 6     found it.

 7             So all of these points, starting from the penetration point on

 8     the plastic sheet, and then hitting the wardrobe, and the other side of

 9     the wardrobe, and then the wall, all of that is along a single line; how

10     the bullet went through that room, that is.

11        Q.   And just tell us how you came to the conclusion that the bullet

12     had come from Dobrinja on the basis of the observation of those points.

13     How exactly did you come to that conclusion?  From Dobrinja 1, I should

14     specify.

15        A.   On the basis of all of these points, we established that these

16     were fresh traces.  It's only when we removed the wardrobe and when we

17     saw the damage on the wall, itself, that is, the final destination of the

18     bullet, and we also saw the penetration point on the plastic sheet, that

19     was the original point of damage.  So when we brought those two together,

20     and when we looked at the string stretched between the two, we saw the

21     building that we had discussed.  So after the visual protection was

22     removed - I'm referring to the blinds that were there - that building

23     showed up.  A photograph was rapidly taken, of that location, that is.

24     Because of safety reasons, we could not establish the exact area,

25     although this was quite sufficient to determine the roof of the building,

Page 11064

 1     or a window on the building, or some other location.  However, in

 2     agreement with the other members of the team, it was deemed sufficient to

 3     take a photograph of the building from which the bullet had come into

 4     this room.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  And now I just want to deal with a second point

 6     dealing with this incident.

 7             Mr. Karadzic drew your attention to the fact that the trajectory

 8     of the bullet was upwards.  So the initial point of entry was at

 9     116 centimetres, you measured, and the point of impact on the wall was

10     132 centimetres, which means it travelled a vertical distance of

11     16 centimetres while it was in the room.  Do you recall that?

12        A.   Yes, I do recall that.  It is true that all these measurements

13     are not in my report.  That is to say, from the moment when the bullet

14     went through the plastic sheet until it stopped in the wall, it was

15     moving upwards.

16        Q.   Yes.  Your report is actually quite specific on this.

17             Now, Witness, could you tell us how long, approximately, the room

18     was from the point of impact -- from the point of entry to the point of

19     impact, to the best of your recollection?

20        A.   Up to five metres, maximum.

21        Q.   Very well.  Now, Witness, I won't take you or the Court through

22     this in great detail, but if I were to say to you, and I'll invite the

23     Defence to agree this, if the length of the room was five metres and the

24     bullet travelled a vertical distance of 16 centimetres, then the angle of

25     the bullet's trajectory was 1.83 degrees, that was the upward movement of

Page 11065

 1     the bullet, Witness, I won't necessarily ask you to agree with that, but

 2     do you have any reason to disagree with it?

 3        A.   I think that the angle was a very small one.  Now, how big it

 4     actually was, I cannot say exactly.  However, in terms of the height at

 5     where the bullet entered, and if we take into account how big the room

 6     was, say five metres, the angle was quite small.  It went upward, and the

 7     angle was small.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. President.  No further questions.

 9             Thank you, Mr. Witness.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I?  May I just put one question

11     to the witness?

12             JUDGE KWON:  If you could tell us what the question is in

13     advance.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, in view of the housing

15     situation in our part of the world, there were never bedrooms that were

16     five metres long in our part of the world.  A living-room could be

17     five metres long, but not a bedroom.  A bedroom would contain one or

18     two beds, and that would be it.  And it's very important to see how big

19     this angle is, to see that it did go upwards.  And if there were to be a

20     difference of only 2 degrees, the picture obtained is quite different.

21             JUDGE KWON:  It's not for you to give evidence, Mr. Karadzic.

22             Mr. Gaynor, what --

23             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, I quite agree, Mr. President.  And, simply so

24     the Defence might be able to agree something on this, if the room was as

25     short as three metres, the angle would have been 3.05 degrees.  If it had

Page 11066

 1     been four metres long, the angle would have been 2.29 degrees.  Thank

 2     you.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Do you have any comment, Mr. Witness, as to the size

 4     of the room?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've already said that the maximum

 6     was up to five metres.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr. Witness.

 8             That concludes your evidence, and on behalf of the Tribunal and

 9     the Bench, I thank you very much for your coming to The Hague to give it.

10     So now you are free to go, and please have a safe journey back home.  But

11     before that, please wait until we draw the curtain.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

13                           [The witness withdrew]

14             JUDGE KWON:  Shall we open up the curtains.

15             Given the time, it would be impractical to call the next witness.

16             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  That's correct, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE KWON:  There are three matters to deal with before we

18     adjourn for today.

19             Who will be leading evidence of Mr. Hogan?

20             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  This will be Mr. Hayden.

21             JUDGE KWON:  I looked at his 92 ter statement briefly, which is a

22     document of only two pages to which are attached two schedules, which

23     seem to be a kind of result of his investigation as regards the F and

24     G incidents, and I take it he's going to produce several exhibits.  So I

25     wonder whether he needs to be classified as a 92 ter witness.  As a

Page 11067

 1     matter of fact, there will be no difference between leading him viva voce

 2     in its entirety and introducing him as a Rule 92 ter witness.

 3             Yes, anybody could answer the question.

 4             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  The only thing is that in the statement, he

 5     may refer and give already details in relation to certain exhibits.  But

 6     you are correct, Your Honour, it will not make a big difference.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  So he can introduce that exhibit as a live witness.

 8             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  So that witness will be lead live, viva voce.

10             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Thank you, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

12             And the next issue is related to the request of Mr. Karadzic to

13     have Dr. Subotic during his evidence.

14             We considered the matter, and, in conclusion, we do not consider

15     it necessary or appropriate for Mr. Karadzic to have the assistance of

16     someone with Dr. Subotic's expertise during that testimony of Mr. Hogan,

17     given the nature of his anticipated evidence.

18             We note that an intended assistant to Mr. Karadzic in relation to

19     this witness, Mr. Hogan, is not as an expert, and that Mr. Karadzic has

20     other options available, such as requesting OLAD to bring Mr. Sladojevic

21     back from his trip early so that he can provide the accused with the

22     support that he normally receives.  Should Mr. Karadzic wish to replace

23     Mr. Sladojevic or one of his other Defence team members with Dr. Subotic,

24     that is a matter for Mr. Karadzic to discuss with OLAD.

25             Therefore, we will, on an exceptional basis, permit the presence

Page 11068

 1     of Dr. Subotic in the courtroom for Mr. Hogan's evidence, but on the

 2     understanding that this creates no additional financial implications for

 3     the Tribunal's Registry.

 4             For the next matter, we need to go into private session.

 5            [Private session] [Confidentiality lifted by order of  Chamber]

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Tieger, the next issue relates to Dr. Zecevic.

 7     I take it you received the information which is contained in the

 8     memorandum of service.

 9             MR. TIEGER:  Yes, Your Honour, we did.

10             I'd also note that Mr. Gaynor is present, who has also dealt

11     directly with that, so we have -- and Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff -- are in the

12     best position at this point to answer the Court's inquiries.

13             JUDGE KWON:  At this moment, we find it helpful to hear from the

14     Prosecution, what you consider should happen next, in light of the

15     development; in particular, the information in the memorandum of service.

16             Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

17             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Your Honour, the two issues that are very

18     distinct is, first, the health issue that he raises.  I think that can be

19     easily overcome by granting the video conference request that we have

20     made.  Although the medical documentation is from April last year, people

21     know that back problems are long-lasting, and, therefore, I think that

22     can be overcome by the videolink -- granting a videolink.

23             In relation to the dissatisfaction that he was -- in relation to

24     the fact that he has to testify yet again before this Tribunal, we have

25     tried to explain to him why that is necessary, and that his earlier

Page 11069

 1     testimonies cannot replace that entirely, but he did not seem to be open

 2     to our remarks on this topic.  Therefore, my -- I have a very practical

 3     solution, I think, whether that's at all possible.

 4             If the President of this Trial Chamber would write to him a

 5     personal letter, explaining it to him again why it is necessary that the

 6     Trial Chamber hears from him in person, it may be that Mr. Zecevic

 7     changes his mind.  Otherwise, I see no other option as to enforce the

 8     subpoena.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  By writing a letter, do you mean that this Chamber

10     exploring of the possibility of him coming as a Chamber witness?

11             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  That would probably change his mind, that's

12     correct.  But I was actually thinking about explaining to him, in a

13     letter, why it is necessary that the Trial Chamber has to hear from him,

14     and that he has to give testimony again, and why, at this point in time,

15     nobody can actually grant him the requests that -- the conditions that he

16     has imposed.  You may remember that he has asked for 180 minutes'

17     testimony altogether, actually allowing him to do that now, already

18     granting it now, and we have tried to explain to him that this is not an

19     option that we have, as the Prosecution, but we would inform the

20     Trial Chamber of his request.  But he still seems to maintain that the

21     Prosecution is unwilling to follow his requests, and I think that may be

22     one of the reasons why he is so dissatisfied.  And it seems that we

23     cannot reach him with our arguments any longer.  That was actually the

24     thinking that I had.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Having heard his submission, that he was minded to

Page 11070

 1     come to The Hague, but he would give his evidence only for three hours,

 2     why not call him to come over to The Hague instead of hearing him via

 3     videolink, given the opposition from the Defence?

 4             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  I only noticed that he again stressed the

 5     fact that he can only sit for 20 minutes at a time, and travelling here

 6     would definitely include a longer sitting time.  That was only my concern

 7     about his health issues.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  What did he say?  He could sit for 20 minutes and he

 9     needs 60 minutes walking or practice exercise?

10             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Yes, that's what he says here in the letter

11     that was attached to the filing, 20 minutes sitting at a time and

12     afterwards a need for a 60 minutes' walk.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Robinson, do you have any observation to make on

14     this?

15             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. President.

16             With respect to the request for a letter, we don't have any

17     objection to that.  We note that the Chamber has written letters on our

18     behalf on a few occasions to Mr. Tudjman and even before this Chamber

19     came on, Judge Bonomy wrote a very strong letter to Carl Bildt which

20     encouraged him to meet with us.  So it has worked in the past, and if it

21     can work this time, short of other enforcement methods, we don't have any

22     problem with the Chamber doing that if it's minded to do that.

23             With respect to the videolink, we are very strongly opposed to

24     that and we'd prefer that their other options be explored, such as

25     bringing him to The Hague or postponing his testimony until his back is

Page 11071

 1     better, because we still have another year of Prosecution witnesses to

 2     hear.  And this witness, given the importance of his testimony, we really

 3     feel that this is a situation where videolink would disadvantage us on a

 4     very practical level.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  I'm just putting this hypothetically.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The transcript doesn't say that we

 7     are strongly opposed to videolink.  Please.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  We understood that.

 9             In case the witness refuses every option, it is still the opinion

10     of the Prosecution that it would be useful to arrest him and bring him to

11     The Hague or to the Liaison Office?

12             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Yes, Your Honour, but Mr. Gaynor spoke to

13     him, actually, recently.  Perhaps he can add one issue in relation to the

14     videolink conference.

15             JUDGE KWON:  By all means.  But we have to go out of the

16     courtroom very soon.

17             Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.  Simply to put the point that he is

19     simultaneously putting forth the position that he does have serious

20     health concerns and that he is willing to travel to The Hague if his

21     demands, as he describes them, are met.  So he has not, himself,

22     expressed a great enthusiasm for the concept of a videolink, but that

23     is -- that, to me and to many of us, has seemed to be the logical answer.

24     But he has spoken, himself, about travelling to The Hague.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you for that information.

Page 11072

 1                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 3             JUDGE BAIRD:  In point of fact, Mr. Gaynor, not only has he

 4     spoken about travelling to The Hague, but he tended to play down his

 5     illness, didn't he?  One formed the impression that it wasn't -- the

 6     illness wasn't that important, but isn't that your impression?

 7             MR. GAYNOR:  Well, it's one of the reasons he puts forth now as

 8     to exactly which is the determining reason for his lack of co-operation.

 9     To be honest, we haven't been able to fully establish that ourselves.

10             JUDGE BAIRD:  Which one.

11             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  We go back to open session.

13             Yes, Mr. Robinson, in the private session or open session?

14             MR. ROBINSON:  Open session.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

16                           [Open session]

17             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we are now in open session.

18             Mr. Robinson.

19             MR. ROBINSON:  Mr. President, just for one second to advise you

20     yesterday we filed simultaneous documents with respect to Venezuela, and

21     we will withdraw our request for a hearing in light of the

22     Trial Chamber's third invitation.  Thank you.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  That's done.

24             So we'll hear tomorrow Mr. Rechner's evidence, tomorrow at 9.00.

25             So the hearing is now adjourned for today.

Page 11073

 1                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.48 p.m.,

 2                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 2nd day of

 3                           February, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.