Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 3806

1 Tuesday, 30 May 2000

2 [Open session]

3 [The witness entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.31 a.m.

5 [The accused entered court]

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good

7 morning, ladies and gentlemen. Good morning, technical

8 booth, interpreters, legal assistants, court reporters,

9 Mr. Harmon, Mr. McCloskey, and Mr. Cayley,

10 Mr. Petrusic, Mr. Visnjic, the expert witness. Good

11 morning, General Krstic.

12 And good morning to you too, Mr. Baraybar. I

13 hope you've had a good rest. Have you? Yes, very

14 well. Let me remind you that you are still on oath and

15 you are going to be answering some more questions put

16 to you by Mr. Cayley.


18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Cayley,

19 the floor is yours.

20 MR. CAYLEY: Good morning, Mr. President,

21 Your Honours, Mr. Petrusic, Mr. Visnjic.

22 Examined by Mr. Cayley: [Cont'd]

23 Q. Good morning, Mr. Baraybar.

24 A. Good morning.

25 Q. Just to remind you where we had left off

Page 3807

1 yesterday, you had explained, in generic form by way of

2 a model, how you come, as a forensic anthropologist, to

3 calculate the minimum number of individuals, the MNI.

4 Now I'd like to show you Exhibit 232, which

5 is, in fact, the minimum number of individuals which

6 you calculated from the anthropological examination

7 from human remains which resulted from the Srebrenica

8 investigation. The graves concerned are listed, and

9 indeed in the footnotes of this document, you have

10 given credit where you have obtained data from sources

11 other than your own, such as Dr. Haglund, who testified

12 yesterday.

13 Mr. Baraybar, if you could move it down the

14 screen towards the public gallery, the credits at the

15 bottom. That's better. If you could explain this

16 table to the Judges, please.

17 A. Yes. The first thing I would like to say is

18 that as it reads there, this is an addendum. There was

19 a miscalculation in the original report submitted in

20 1999. The error -- with an arithmetic error in the

21 calculation of the total MNI, and the variation was

22 between 866 in the original report to 1.883. It's a

23 miscalculation of .9 per cent.

24 Q. Mr. Baraybar, just to absolutely clarify

25 that, you're talking about a simple addition problem

Page 3808

1 within this table. The errors had nothing to do with

2 the work you did in the field in the sense of counting

3 bones.

4 A. That is correct.

5 Right. I explained yesterday how we

6 constructed the age intervals that we can see in this

7 table. We have three age intervals, the 8 to 12 one,

8 13 to 24, and 25 plus. I also explained to you

9 yesterday that it was necessary, in order to account

10 for all individuals in primary and secondary sites,

11 that it was to merge the minimal number of individuals

12 between the primary sites and the linked secondary

13 sites.

14 This table shows all the calculations done

15 for the whole season, meaning from 1996 to 1999. I

16 have been using all the data available to create these

17 calculations. Therefore, the sites of Branjevo Farm

18 that were excavated in 1996 were linked to the sites of

19 Cancari Road 12 that were excavated in 1998. There is

20 a secondary site, and therefore a minimal number of

21 individuals was calculated.

22 Q. Mr. Baraybar, if I could interrupt you, as

23 you speak about each of these individual locations,

24 could you use the pointer to indicate the particular

25 primary grave that you're speaking of or the primary

Page 3809

1 and secondary linked grave that you're speaking about?

2 A. Sure. The first site, the site of Kozluk, we

3 have heard yesterday on Professor Wright's testimony,

4 is a primary site. It happened to be linked to the

5 secondary site of Cancari Road 3 that was excavated by

6 Professor Wright in 1998. The total minimal number of

7 individuals for the merged sites, for the primary and

8 secondary sites, is 506 individuals. Again, I would

9 say at least 506 individuals are represented between

10 what was left in Kozluk and what was extracted from

11 Kozluk and disposed of in CR-03.

12 We proceed with the site of Glogova that I

13 excavated last year. That is linked to the site of the

14 [indiscernible] 5. That is a secondary site that was

15 excavated by Professor Wright in 1998. Further

16 clarification for the Glogova sites will be given when

17 I present that information. However, the minimal

18 number of individuals would be 187.

19 Glogova 5, that is an undisturbed primary

20 grave in the Glogova area. Again, I will discuss that

21 further when I talk about my horology report. It has a

22 minimal number of individuals of 90.

23 And then the Nova Kasaba sites that were

24 excavated in 1999, there are other ones obviously

25 excavated in 1996. That is why we got Nova Kasaba 4.

Page 3810

1 That is where we left it in 1996, three sites with a

2 fourth site and so on. It had 19 individuals. Nova

3 Kasaba 6, two; Nova Kasaba 7, one; Nova Kasaba 8, 33.

4 All these sites were excavated by myself last year.

5 From there we move to other primary graves.

6 All these graves are primary. Konjevic Polje number 1,

7 that was excavated by me last year with nine

8 individuals; Konjevic Polje 2 with three. Hodzici road

9 5 that was excavated by Professor Wright in 1998 as a

10 secondary site has 57 individuals. This specific site

11 has not been linked to any primary site because the

12 apparent source has not been excavated yet.

13 We move then to Hodzici 3 and 4. That's two

14 secondary sites that have been linked between each

15 other based on soil evidence provided by Professor

16 Brown, and it has 127. These two secondary sites, 3

17 and 4, again have not been linked to a primary site as

18 yet because we do not have the evidence for that.

19 The Pilica dam site, that is a primary site

20 again, excavated by Professor Wright in 1998, and was

21 linked to another secondary site dug the same year by

22 Professor Wright that give us 219 individuals.

23 We proceed to Branjevo Farm, excavated by

24 Dr. Haglund in 1996. That is linked to Cancari Road

25 12, a secondary site dug in 1998 by Professor Wright,

Page 3811

1 283.

2 The total of the Nova Kasaba sites dug in

3 1996 by Dr. Haglund give us 33 individuals.

4 The Lazete site dug by Dr. Haglund in 1996

5 give us 164.

6 Finally, the Cerska site dug by Dr. Haglund

7 in 1996 give us 150.

8 This basically means that the total minimal

9 number of individuals recovered at the moment, between

10 1996 and 1999, adds up to 883 [sic].

11 Again, I would like to stress to the Court

12 that this is only a very conservative estimate, meaning

13 no less than 1.883 individuals are to be represented by

14 all the bones, the thousands and thousands of bones we

15 have recovered since then.

16 Q. Mr. Baraybar, you stated that Hadzici sites

17 3 and 4 have not been linked to a primary site, but am

18 I right in saying that they are, in fact, linked to

19 Orahovac?

20 A. That is correct. The problem at the moment

21 is that the soil analysis done by Professor Brown

22 refers to a site in Orahovac that has not been

23 excavated yet, that is, what we know as Lazete 1.

24 MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, there's a slight

25 problem for the figure of minimum number of individuals

Page 3812

1 is 883 and it is, in fact, 1.883.

2 Q. Now, Mr. Baraybar, of these individuals

3 who -- this minimum number of individuals that you've

4 identified, what proportion of them did you establish

5 as male and what proportion as female?

6 A. I will consult my report. I don't recall the

7 numbers offhand.

8 One thousand six hundred and fifty-six have

9 been determined to be male; one has been determined to

10 be a female, recovered from the site of Konjevic

11 Polje 1; and 212 are of indeterminate sex.

12 Q. What was the predominant age that you

13 established from the mortal remains that you examined?

14 A. The majority of the remains in this case,

15 1.547 are individuals of 25 or more at death. I have

16 created a breakdown of this 25-and-more category using

17 some specific indicators like the pubic bone I

18 mentioned yesterday.

19 That information still tells us that most of

20 the people are still clustered between the third,

21 fourth and fifth decade, that the majority of the

22 24-and-more individuals cluster around those ages.

23 Q. Now, when Mr. Manning put together his

24 summary of all of the experts, he relied on your

25 original report which had the arithmetical error in it,

Page 3813

1 did he not?

2 A. That's correct.

3 Q. And this Exhibit 232 replaces page 4 of your

4 anthropological report; is that correct?

5 A. That is correct.

6 MR. CAYLEY: One final point, Mr. President,

7 for the benefit of the Court and indeed the public,

8 this part of Mr. Baraybar's evidence has been agreed by

9 the Defence. The reason that we have gone through it

10 is to explain what within the report appears very

11 complex to lay some foundation. So this is an

12 abbreviated form of what his evidence might have been

13 if the report had not been agreed to by the Defence.

14 Q. We can now move on to the part of your

15 evidence which is not agreed by the Defence, which is

16 the exhumations report which you completed in 1999,

17 which is Exhibit 234.

18 A matter that arose yesterday with another

19 witness in terms of the composition of your team, from

20 what areas of the world were your members of staff

21 drawn?

22 A. From Europe, North America, Central America,

23 South America. That is, yes, pretty much it, yes.

24 Q. These were both anthropologists like

25 yourself, scenes-of-crimes officers, anthropological

Page 3814

1 assistants; is that correct?

2 A. That is correct.

3 Q. Could you explain to the Court which sites

4 you examined between August and October of last year?

5 It might be helpful if you place the map -- that map on

6 the ELMO.

7 A. We investigated a number of sites in the

8 location of Nova Kasaba, very close to the area where

9 Dr. Haglund conducted his exhumations in 1996 that I

10 point to there. So it would be Nova Kasaba 4, 5, 6, 7,

11 and 8.

12 Not so far from there, up the road, close to

13 the intersection that goes on the road that goes to

14 Bratunac is the site of Konjevic Polje 1, also

15 indicated there. Up the road going to Bratunac is the

16 road -- the site of Konjevic Polje 2. And right past

17 the village of Glogova that is not on this map, again

18 on the road going to Bratunac, there's a number of

19 sites known as Glogova 2, but they include many other

20 graves I will discuss later.

21 Q. So although that site is known as Glogova 2,

22 it's actually a multiple, complex grave site; that is

23 correct?

24 A. That is correct.

25 Q. If we could move on to the first site, which

Page 3815

1 is Nova Kasaba 4. When was that site exhumed by you

2 and how did you come to know of its location?

3 A. Nova Kasaba was exhumed between the 18th and

4 the 21st of August last year. I was made aware by

5 investigators of the existence of alleged graves in the

6 area of Nova Kasaba after being shown an aerial

7 photograph of the area.

8 Q. How many bodies did you assess were present

9 in that grave?

10 A. Nineteen.

11 Q. What was the sex of those individuals?

12 A. Males. All of them were males, if I'm not

13 mistaken. Let me check my notes again. Yes, they were

14 all males.

15 Q. What was the age range of these individuals?

16 A. They were all adults, again on the 25-plus

17 range, but two of them were about 17 years of age.

18 Q. If the first photograph could be placed on

19 the exhibit [sic], and in order to save exhibit

20 numbers, we're going to use the report. It's on page

21 10 of your report, and I refer to the number in the

22 bottom right-hand corner.

23 Could you explain to the Judges what this

24 represents and the significance of your findings in

25 this part of grave?

Page 3816

1 A. The most instructing feature in this grave

2 was the presence of two litters or stretchers that we

3 can see here. There is one here, and the other one

4 goes here. Only one branch is depicted in the

5 photograph. The other arm of the stretcher is under

6 some of the bodies.

7 These ones were made with tree branches and a

8 blanket between the two, tied with rope, makeshift

9 stretcher or litter. I'm leaving the term open,

10 because I do not really know if it was a stretcher or

11 litter. However, there are some other significant

12 findings that may define this more clearly.

13 Three individuals showed some kind of

14 dressing, wound dressing, and one of them specifically

15 had a splint on the lower -- on the lower leg.

16 Therefore, the term "stretcher" in this -- at least one

17 of the occasions would be most appropriate.

18 Q. Did you find any items of clothing or luggage

19 in this grave?

20 A. There's quite a lot of it, as a matter of

21 fact. Pretty much what you're seeing in this

22 photograph, these items here are items of clothing.

23 There was quite a lot of items of food, like

24 humanitarian aid food, canned food of all sorts, tuna,

25 canned tuna, and crackers, and all those kinds of

Page 3817

1 things. A lot of the clothing was folded. I would not

2 say pressed but it was folded as if it was part of

3 somebody's luggage.

4 Q. Did you find any items of identification on

5 this grave site?

6 A. There were nine, nine items of

7 identification, various items of identification, all of

8 them reported in the ICRC missing persons book.

9 Q. So in essence, you linked the pieces of

10 identification with individuals who had been reported

11 as missing --

12 A. That is right.

13 Q. -- by the International Committee for the Red

14 Cross?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. If you can place the photograph that is on

17 page 9, so it's one page back, which is of a

18 skeletonised body lying in a grave, and if you could

19 explain to the Judges the significance of this

20 photograph.

21 A. This photograph shows an individual lying on

22 his back with both feet close to each other and the

23 arms hyperextended over his head. That's one, and

24 another one there. However, it's important to notice

25 that the wrists -- both wrists are almost converging

Page 3818

1 close to each other, so to speak. They're forming

2 almost like a circle.

3 These individuals, together with some others

4 that are not shown in this photograph, made us think

5 that some of them at least could have been balanced

6 manually in the grave by holding the feet and holding

7 the arms and just throwing them to the grave.

8 Q. Did you find any military paraphernalia in

9 this grave?

10 A. We did not find any items that made us think

11 of any -- of anybody dressed -- dressed in terms of

12 clothing with military uniforms like camouflage

13 fatigues or anything of the kind. However, we did find

14 an individual that may have been carrying, it was close

15 to him, a 54 live round of 7.62 millimetre ammunition.

16 That is the Kalashnikov family ammunition.

17 Q. Lastly, on this particular grave, if you

18 could show the photograph on page 11. You mentioned

19 earlier you found an individual within the grave who

20 had a makeshift split attached to his leg. This is a

21 photograph, is it not, that was taken shortly after the

22 body was removed from the grave?

23 A. That is correct. In order to preserve

24 anything that could be lost due to transport when the

25 body is transported to the mortuary, we took a picture

Page 3819

1 after lifting the body from the grave. Just for

2 orientation purposes, this is the foot here and this is

3 the lower leg. This is a tree branch. This is another

4 tree branch, and there is some kind of bandage joining

5 this or keeping these tree branches together.

6 Subsequent examination at the mortuary shows

7 that it is a fracture in this area. So this is

8 basically a splint to stabilise the fracture.

9 Q. If we could quickly move on to Nova

10 Kasaba 6. Do you have it in front of you,

11 Mr. Baraybar?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. How did you become aware of this site?

14 A. Again, this alleged grave was indicated to me

15 by investigators based on an aerial photograph.

16 Q. When did you exhume it and how long did it

17 take to exhume?

18 A. It was exhumed only one day, on the 25th of

19 August, 1999.

20 Q. What type of grave was this and how many

21 individuals did it contain?

22 A. This is a very different grave than the one

23 previously shown. This grave was dug by hand, most

24 likely by shovels or spades, and contained the remains

25 of two people.

Page 3820

1 Q. What was the sex of these two individuals, if

2 that could be ascertained?

3 A. Male.

4 Q. And were you able to assess their ages?

5 A. One of them was young, was between, I would

6 say, 14 to 24 years of age, and the second one was

7 again 25 plus, between, let's say, 22 and 50 years of

8 age.

9 Q. If you could show the diagram on page 14,

10 which I think is produced from the survey that

11 Professor Wright demonstrated to the Court was taking

12 place on every grave. Can you explain to the Judges

13 how this image is produced and the significance of it?

14 A. Well, as Professor Wright has shown before,

15 we take a lot of care in recording the position of

16 every artefact and body found in the grave by means of

17 electronic survey. That data from this machine can

18 then be downloaded into a computer in order to produce

19 a map or a sketch. That is what you see at the moment

20 and is basically a schematic representation of the two

21 bodies, the position in which they were lying, and a

22 number of artefacts that were recovered in association

23 with these bodies.

24 Q. Can you explain the particularly significant

25 points in this diagram?

Page 3821

1 A. Individual number 2 -- or under, rather,

2 individual number 2, a number of bullets were

3 recovered, and by "bullets" I mean fired

4 rounds, slugs. A total of basically five were

5 recovered from under this individual. This one here

6 labelled "9A" and this one here labelled "4A" were not

7 in direct association with the body, and 8A as well

8 as. They were very close to the body. However, number

9 7 and number 5 were literally under the body. In all

10 these cases, the bullets were embedded in the soil.

11 They were not lying on the surface. They were at least

12 an inch or less between -- let's say half an inch and

13 an inch embedded in the soil. An interpretation we

14 draw from this is that this individual was most likely

15 shot while lying in the grave.

16 MR. CAYLEY: Just for the purpose of the

17 record, the witness has been referring to figure 3 on

18 page 14 of Exhibit 234.

19 Q. Mr. Baraybar, if you can now move on to Nova

20 Kasaba 7, and I'll give you a moment to find the

21 relevant page in your report. How was this grave

22 notified to you?

23 A. Again, this is one of the graves that was

24 shown to me as to be present in an aerial photograph.

25 The important feature regarding this site was that in

Page 3822

1 the photograph shown to me that is dated 27th of July,

2 1995, the site of Nova Kasaba 7 looks to be an open or,

3 rather -- "open" would be the right word, trench, an

4 unfilled trench, simply an open trench.

5 Q. When did you exhume this site?

6 A. This was exhumed on the 22nd of August, 1999.

7 Q. And how many people did you find in this

8 grave?

9 A. Only one.

10 Q. And what was the sex of that individual?

11 A. It was a male between 31 and 65 years of age.

12 Q. Did you find anything of significance, apart

13 from the body, within that grave?

14 A. Yes, we did. We recovered two 30-millimetre

15 cartridges, spent cartridges. That is, there seemed to

16 be some part of cartridges of a large weapon, most

17 likely anti-aircraft or something of that kind, that

18 were at the bottom of this trench.

19 In order to clarify what I mean by "trench",

20 this was basically a trench excavated by a front

21 loader, so it was a trench with a ramp. So on the ramp

22 at the bottom, there were two large shell casings. One

23 of them was smashed, as a matter of fact, by something

24 very heavy that ran over it. We also recovered a

25 number of shell casings of smaller weapons, as well as

Page 3823

1 bullets.

2 Q. How are you able to conclude that this grave

3 had been dug by a front loader?

4 A. A feature of front loaders when digging

5 basically any trench, whether the trench is to be used

6 as a grave or not, is to create a ramp. Otherwise,

7 they could not dig in.

8 Q. And this feature is apparent when you exhume

9 the grave?

10 A. That's correct. We also -- sorry to

11 interrupt you. We also recovered parts of tracks of

12 the machine, wheels of the machine, so it was quite

13 apparent.

14 Q. If we could now move on to Nova Kasaba 8.

15 How were you made aware of this site?

16 A. Again, this site, the alleged grave at the

17 time was shown to me in this aerial photograph I

18 already mentioned.

19 Q. And when was this site exhumed?

20 A. Between the 27th of August and the 6th of

21 September, 1999.

22 Q. And how many individuals did you recover from

23 this grave?

24 A. Thirty-three.

25 Q. Were you able to establish the sex of these

Page 3824

1 individuals?

2 A. Thirty-two of them were male, and one remains

3 indeterminate.

4 Q. Now, I think in this grave there were a

5 number of clusters of individuals, and if you turn to

6 page 20 of your report, there's a photograph which

7 represents this very clearly. Can you explain this to

8 the Judges, please?

9 A. We recovered in this grave three clusters of

10 bodies. The clusters were labelled in the same order

11 they were placed into the grave. Cluster 1 was the

12 first at the bottom of the grave. As a matter of fact,

13 you actually see that the grave again is one of these

14 trenches dug by some kind of front loader with a ramp.

15 You see the ramp here and the tooth marks of the

16 machine, of the blade of the machine. The cluster 1 is

17 this one [indicates]. Cluster 2 is the one in the

18 middle.

19 You see that between cluster 1 and 2 there is

20 spoil, so we have excavated this as a cake, so to

21 speak, to show you the way in -- the position of each

22 of the clusters in relation to each other. So if this

23 [indicates] was not excavated, the dirt that we see

24 between the two clusters was covering the whole of

25 cluster 1, so it's basically literally a layered

Page 3825

1 grave. And cluster number 3, that is the last to be

2 deposited into the grave, that is basically there

3 [indicates]. You see in each instance there is an

4 amount of spoil placed between each of the clusters.

5 Q. What is the significance of the turf or spoil

6 between the clusters?

7 A. It indicates pretty much two things. The

8 first is that there is a time difference between the

9 disposal of the clusters of bodies. By "time", I'm not

10 referring here to absolute time, because I cannot

11 actually time the time elapsed between each disposal.

12 I cannot say whether it happened in a matter of hours

13 or days. I can't really say.

14 And the second element is that for the length

15 of the grave and the amount of sediment between each of

16 the clusters, that could have not been placed there by

17 hand, but rather, again, through mechanical means. It

18 also implies that the bodies themselves could have been

19 lifted mechanically from another location and

20 transported to this place, and they came with a lot of

21 dirt, as a matter of fact.

22 Q. And, lastly, did you find anything else of

23 significance in this grave which I think will become

24 relevant later on in your testimony?

25 A. Yes, I did. The first important thing is

Page 3826

1 that in cluster 1, meaning here, these bodies had a

2 number of branches and leaves from a willow tree. The

3 branches were between two and four millimetres of

4 thickness. They were quite thick branches. They were

5 completely entangled -- commingled with the bodies.

6 We also discovered that in cluster 1, meaning

7 the ones I just showed you, at least again some people

8 could have been shot while in the grave. Again we

9 recover bullets embedded in the soil under them. And

10 in the last cluster to be placed there, number 3, we

11 also recovered bullets under some of the bodies

12 embedded in the sediment.

13 I will discuss the issue of the willow leaves

14 when I discuss Nova Kasaba 5.

15 Q. And I think the clusters are, in fact,

16 clearly numbered by marks that have been placed in the

17 graves. If you could just point those out for the

18 reference when people come back to look at this.

19 A. Number 1 [indicates], number 2 [indicates],

20 and number 3 [indicates].

21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Baraybar. If we could now

22 move on to Nova Kasaba 5, and again I'll give you a

23 moment to find your place.

24 MR. CAYLEY: If the witness could be provided

25 with Exhibit 14/10, please.

Page 3827

1 Q. What, if anything, did you find in Nova

2 Kasaba 5? And please remember that it's not actually

3 marked on this photograph, so if you could actually

4 identify the location of Nova Kasaba 5 on this

5 particular photograph.

6 A. This is Nova Kasaba 5, this area here. That

7 is an area of lighter soil, an elongated area of

8 lighter soil, some narrow lanes parallel to each

9 other -- two, as a matter of fact, here -- and then a

10 small area of lighter soil again.

11 In this area, literally immediately adjacent

12 to this small area of lighter soil, is a willow tree

13 that cannot actually be seen in this copy, but there is

14 a tree, as a matter of fact. It is visible in the

15 original photograph, I think, if I see it here.

16 Q. Could you use a marker and mark Nova Kasaba

17 5? Otherwise, I think we're going to lose this. And

18 we'll provide a new exhibit to the Court and we'll

19 re-mark this exhibit.

20 A. [Witness complies]

21 Q. And if you could mark that as "NK-5".

22 A. [Witness complies]

23 Q. Please continue, Mr. Baraybar.

24 A. So all the other Nova Kasaba graves we have

25 discussed a moment ago already marked in this

Page 3828

1 photograph. The only one that was not marked was

2 NK-05.

3 Then as these areas here of soil disturbance

4 were interpreted to be graves and, as a matter of fact,

5 proven to be graves later on, we assumed that this area

6 here was also a grave. We conducted a series of

7 trenches across this area of lighter soil [indicates].

8 However, the place did not show any features of a

9 grave. There was no grave whatsoever. So this

10 basically was interpreted as to be only a scrape of the

11 soil exposing lighter soil. So from the air, it would

12 look as an elongated area of lighter soil. That is

13 what we see at the moment.

14 However, a significant feature is that from

15 this scrape, that is quite regular in terms of width

16 and length, emerged two areas of, again, lighter soil,

17 thin lanes parallel to each other such as tracks, and

18 you can see them here. One is here and the other one

19 is here. Both of them are leading to this small mound

20 of, again, freshly-scraped soil most likely from here,

21 in here at the foot of the willow tree.

22 So once we discovered this was not a grave

23 and we assumed, therefore, it was a scrape, we

24 remembered the willow leaves we found in NK-08. And

25 then we got to formulate the following hypothesis: If

Page 3829

1 people were shot in this area close to the road and

2 then were removed mechanically from there, and if these

3 bodies were, by whatever reason, in contact with this

4 willow tree that, as a matter of fact, is the only

5 willow tree to be found in this area, in that area, and

6 in all this area here the only willow trees that exist

7 are actually interspersed along the stream we can see

8 here, some 20 metres away from NK-08, it would be

9 impossible that branches and leaves from the tree, once

10 it has been shaken, would fall on the bodies and then

11 would end up in NK-08. So we did two things in order

12 to try to ascertain this. It's still a hypothesis. We

13 then tried to validate our hypothesis.

14 The first thing is that if people were shot

15 in this area of lighter soil, we would need to find

16 shell casings of some sort. However, we assume again

17 that the scrape was caused by bodies being removed from

18 there. Therefore, the shell casings should not be

19 there, but at least some shell casings should be in the

20 small mound at the foot of the willow tree. So we

21 excavated the small mound, and indeed we found five

22 shell casings from 7.62-millimetre ammunition.

23 Then we compared the leaves and branches from

24 NK-08, from cluster 1, in order to ascertain whether

25 they were indeed willow, and they were. Therefore, we

Page 3830

1 also reproduced the same movement with our own small

2 backhoe, and after shaking the tree we obtained some

3 thick branches and leaves. This basically means that

4 the probabilities of branches and leaves flying around

5 this area and arriving in an area of over 200 metres

6 from the tree close to the road to the grave are highly

7 unlikely. Therefore, NK-05 has been preliminarily

8 interpreted as a possible excavation site maybe linked

9 to NK-08, at least to the first cluster of individuals

10 buried there.

11 Q. If we could now move on to KP-1, Konjevic

12 Polje site 1. Do you have your report in front of you?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. When was this site notified to you?

15 A. This site was notified to me at the same time

16 that the Nova Kasaba sites were shown to me in this

17 photograph. Actually, it's through another

18 photograph.

19 Q. And when you speak of photographs, you're

20 speaking of aerial --

21 A. That is correct.

22 Q. How long did it take to exhume this site?

23 A. We exhumed it between the 7th and the 9th of

24 September of 1999.

25 MR. CAYLEY: And if Exhibit 15/2, Mr. Usher,

Page 3831

1 could be placed on the ELMO.

2 Q. And so as not to waste any time, I'll

3 continue asking you questions.

4 How many bodies were exhumed in this site?

5 A. Nine.

6 Q. Were you able to establish the sex of these

7 individuals?

8 A. There were eight males and one female.

9 Q. What were the age ranges of the males?

10 A. Seven of them between 25 and 65 years of age,

11 and one between 16 and 23.

12 Q. Were you able to establish the age range of

13 the female?

14 A. Yes. Between 16 and 30.

15 Q. Now, this exhibit in front of the Judges at

16 the moment, this is, in fact, the site of KP-1. Can

17 you explain to the Judges the layout of this particular

18 grave?

19 A. This grave, again, was -- contained two

20 clusters of people. Eight individuals in the first

21 cluster and only one in the last one.

22 Q. What items of significance did you find

23 within this grave?

24 A. We recovered, again, one bag with quite a lot

25 of items of clothing. Inside the bag was somebody's

Page 3832

1 luggage, pretty much. And we also recovered a Seiko

2 automatic watch that was marking the date as Saturday,

3 the 15th at 12.35.

4 Q. Did you consult an expert on that watch?

5 A. Yes, I did.

6 Q. And what conclusions did he come to?

7 A. Based on the expert report of Mr. Mills, a

8 horologist, it seems that that combination of date and

9 time lead us to a time between 32 and 36 hours before.

10 That would be the 13th. And if I may correct, I said

11 Saturday, but it was actually Friday the 15th at

12 12.35.

13 Q. Now what you're saying is the expert

14 concluded that the watch had stopped 32 to 36 hours

15 before?

16 A. That is correct. The oscillation of the

17 wrist stopped 32 to 36 hours before.

18 Q. If you can place photograph 11, which is on

19 page 28, on the ELMO.

20 Is this exactly as you found the watch?

21 A. That is correct. This is a picture taken.

22 The watch is there. The person is lying face down.

23 That is the picture we took before cleaning any further

24 or altering the scene.

25 Q. Were you able to conclude how the bodies were

Page 3833

1 brought to this grave site?

2 A. Again, the individuals placed in the first

3 cluster, meaning the first eight individuals, may have

4 been brought by mechanical means, pretty much by a

5 front -- a front loader. There was some turf, some

6 grass under the bodies pretty much as it was being

7 scraped or taken off the topsoil.

8 We also found some white powder. I was

9 actually forgetting that. Some white powder such as

10 lime on top of some of the bodies and a stretcher.

11 There was a stretcher.

12 Q. Why would lime be placed on the bodies?

13 A. In other -- it's my experience, at least in

14 other settings, that there is an association between

15 quenching the smell of rotting bodies and placing lime

16 on top of them.

17 Q. In essence, to conceal their presence in the

18 grave.

19 A. That is correct.

20 Q. If we could now move to the last site?

21 Konjevic Polje, which is Konjevic Polje 2. That is on

22 page 29 of your report. Do you have that in front of

23 you?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Was this site identified to you through

Page 3834

1 aerial imagery?

2 A. That is correct.

3 Q. When was it exhumed?

4 A. On the 10th of September, 1999.

5 Q. How many bodies did you find in this grave?

6 A. Three in two graves. One grave with one and

7 another one with two.

8 Q. What was the sex of these individuals, if you

9 were able to determine that?

10 A. Male.

11 Q. And what were their ages?

12 A. In grave 1 was a male between 31 and 71 years

13 of age. In grave 2, two young males between 15 and 21.

14 Q. Were you able to establish whether or not

15 they'd been placed by a mechanical digger into the

16 grave?

17 A. Yes. In grave 1, the body most likely was

18 placed, again, through mechanical means. There was a

19 pedestal of branches; turf, meaning grass; flowers,

20 literally scooped with the topsoil where he was lying.

21 And in grave 2, at least one of the two may have been

22 again pushed in by scraping quite a lot of topsoil and

23 vegetation into the shallow grave.

24 Q. Do you have any other comments on that

25 particular site?

Page 3835

1 A. Yes. In grave 2, at least one of the two

2 individuals may have been shot while in the grave. He

3 sustained a number of shots and a number of bullets,

4 again, when recovered from under the body. I think the

5 pathologist will -- Dr. Clark will clarify this issue

6 even further.

7 Q. Now, the last site, which, I think, is the

8 most complex site, that at Glogova. Was this site

9 notified to you through aerial imagery?

10 A. That is correct.

11 MR. CAYLEY: If the witness could be shown

12 161/1, Prosecutor's Exhibit. You may have it there.

13 It's the aerial imagery of Glogova.

14 Q. Mr. Baraybar, which site did you supervise

15 the exhumation over?

16 A. The area marked as GL-2.

17 Q. Now, has it been -- has the site GL-1 been

18 tested for the presence of human remains?

19 A. Yes, it has.

20 Q. And what did that test reveal?

21 A. A positive. There are human remains in the

22 location.

23 Q. Now, how long did GL-2 take to exhume?

24 A. We started on the 11th of September, and we

25 finished on the 15th of October.

Page 3836

1 Q. So it was a very large site.

2 A. Yes, indeed.

3 MR. CAYLEY: Now, if the witness could be

4 shown 161/5, and that is the large crater.

5 Q. You might wish to put these two photographs

6 on the ELMO at the same time, Mr. Baraybar, to

7 demonstrate the point that you're making, if that's

8 possible.

9 Perhaps the lower exhibit could be moved up

10 and tucked under the upper exhibit. Yes. That's

11 fine.

12 Mr. Baraybar, if you could explain to the

13 Judges the significance of the differences between

14 these two photographs.

15 A. In this photograph labelled as 27th of July,

16 1995, we see a large area of disturbance on either side

17 of the road. In this second photograph of the 30th of

18 October, 1995, we see a large crater in the area marked

19 as GL-2. We do not see anything similar, at least in

20 GL-1, but it is quite clear there is a large hole in

21 the area of GL-2.

22 Also, it is indicated in the photograph the

23 shape, according to the photograph, of a front loader,

24 but what is really clear to my eyes is that there is a

25 large hole in this area.

Page 3837

1 MR. CAYLEY: So let the record show that on

2 161/5, the witness has indicated that a large crater is

3 present at the site marked GL-2, which is not present

4 on the same site represented in Exhibit 161/1.

5 Q. Mr. Baraybar, how many graves were there at

6 site GL-2?

7 A. We estimate that at the moment we may have

8 between six and seven. There's still a section of that

9 area to be excavated this year.

10 Q. Now, the simplest way to represent this to

11 the Judges, I think, is to do a sketch of the various

12 grave sites, and I've put some paper and a pencil in

13 front of you. I think that a sketch is actually

14 clearer than the diagram in your report. So if you're

15 able to do that on the ELMO, that would be helpful.

16 A. What I will draw here is the position -- the

17 relative position of the grave we found before the

18 crater that we have seen in this other photograph was

19 made, and I will explain all the details regarding the

20 crater later.

21 The first -- and the other thing I want to

22 say is that the order in which I will draw these graves

23 is not necessarily the order in which the graves were

24 originally dug, because I cannot demonstrate when each

25 one of them was dug, in which order, which one came

Page 3838

1 first and so forth.

2 So GL-03 is a trench, again, dug with a front

3 loader. It's one of these graves with a ramp. Then we

4 have the remains of a grave. We don't really know how

5 this grave was because the grave may have been

6 something like this, that is, GL-06 -- I'm going to

7 mark it here -- and this GL-03.

8 Then we have another grave that was a trench

9 that was opened in this case with a backhoe, a large

10 excavator with -- a backhoe with teeth. We found, as a

11 matter of fact, the teeth marks on it. It was roughly

12 like this. This is what we call GL-02 grave.

13 Also we found, isolated from this, a series

14 of two graves that happened to be expanded. So this

15 one was expanded like this. That is what we call

16 GL-05. This is section "A" and "B." Basically this

17 was a grave at some point, and then they expanded it

18 and created a big one. So the two graves coalesced.

19 So for the sake of clarity, I'll refer to GL-05 all the

20 time.

21 Right. In the picture of the 27th of July

22 that we just have seen, we see an area of disturbance

23 marked as GL-1 on one side and GL-2 on the other side.

24 In the second photograph of 30th of October we see a

25 crater. I will explain what I found.

Page 3839

1 What we found, basically, was indeed a large

2 crater that crossed in this fashion. The grave of

3 GL-03 was sectioned pretty much by its middle part.

4 However, an area of it, meaning this one here, was left

5 untouched, and in this untouched area, we recovered a

6 number of 11 bodies.

7 The bottom of this area I'm calling GL-02

8 grave, and again was left untouched, and we found seven

9 bodies. In this area of GL-06, we did not find

10 anything in its original position. Everything was

11 mixed up. In this large crater, we found the remains

12 of some 32 individuals. Making a minimum number of

13 50 found in the whole area.

14 So this area of the crater, we're going to

15 call it GL-02 crater. A number of items of clothing,

16 again of canned food, stretchers, and things of the

17 like were found in this large crater.

18 In the area of GL-05, we detected an

19 undisturbed primary grave. We recovered from there

20 90 individuals. This again would be a minimal number,

21 estimate number of 90 individuals.

22 And between GL-05 and all this large crater,

23 we have seen an area that has not been excavated yet

24 that we're going to term GL-07, that is pending to be

25 finished this year. And area here again may have been

Page 3840

1 robbed, but I cannot really give any assurance of that

2 at the moment.

3 MR. CAYLEY: If that exhibit could be given a

4 number, please.

5 Q. Were you able to establish the sex of the

6 individuals who you've identified were exhumed from

7 this grave?

8 A. I will give you the data in a minute. I have

9 to check in my notes. From -- yes. Some 20 found in

10 this area of the crater were determined to be male.

11 Q. And the other 12?

12 A. I'm almost sure they were also male. I do

13 not have the specific data in front of me. No. As a

14 matter of fact, yes.

15 Seven of these ones were male. So seven of

16 GL-03 were male. And from these other ones, 20 were

17 male as well.

18 Q. And that's from the GL-02 crater?

19 A. That's correct.

20 Q. And in GL-05?

21 A. In GL-05, 82 of the 90 were male.

22 Q. Were any of these individuals established to

23 be females?

24 A. No.

25 Q. So the remaining numbers are of indeterminate

Page 3841

1 sex?

2 A. That's correct.

3 Q. If you could place page 39 of your report --

4 THE REGISTRAR: Excuse me, Mr. Cayley. His

5 drawing will be 161/2/A.

6 MR. CAYLEY: Thank you.

7 Q. If you could briefly explain this photograph

8 to the Judges.

9 A. This is GL-03. We are observing the ramp in

10 the first plain here. So we are basically standing at

11 the entrance, so to speak, of the grave. This is the

12 ramp. You can see on this area here the tyre marks of

13 the excavator.

14 This area here clearly shows that the grave

15 was robbed, was sectioned pretty much into two parts.

16 The crater I just drew is here, and this is a section

17 that was left untouched and the bodies are still in

18 situ there.

19 Q. Now, by inference, it is obvious from what

20 you're saying about the crater is that there was this

21 major disturbance. What conclusions did you reach

22 about this crater? What had happened to this grave?

23 A. Well, although we cannot say what is the

24 order in which the graves, with the exception of GL-05,

25 were excavated, we can say for sure that all the graves

Page 3842

1 that were excavated, meaning GL-03, 6, and 2, were

2 robbed simultaneously, because the crater is basically

3 the linking factor between all those graves.

4 And we have to say as well that we do not

5 sort of discard the possibility that in the middle part

6 of the crater there was still another grave because

7 it's simply a crater. The crater went beyond the

8 existence of any grave, up to the sterile soil. It was

9 a big, deep hole. So we don't really know whether

10 there was something else in there. We cannot prove it.

11 Q. If you could turn to the photograph on page

12 36 of your report, which is GL-02, and I'd like you to

13 comment upon the tooth marks that you've identified on

14 that photograph.

15 A. As I drew a moment ago, the GL-02 grave is a

16 trench primarily, so the boundaries of it would be from

17 here to here coming down. You see the dark soil. That

18 shows the outline of it, and continues like here and

19 goes there.

20 In this area here, obviously the photograph

21 doesn't show much, the tooth marks in the wall of the

22 grave from the machine who actually originally

23 excavated the grave. So this is nothing to do with

24 robbing in this case. These are the marks of the

25 machine who opened the grave in the first place, who

Page 3843

1 dug the hole. So basically the trench opened by a

2 backhoe type or class of excavator.

3 Q. Were there any particular items of interest

4 that you found in this grave, such as ID cards?

5 A. Yes, there were. An important thing, since

6 we are discussing the GL-02 grave, is that all over

7 this area here again we found a tremendous amount -- I

8 would say close to half a cubic metre that is quite a

9 lot of lime or a lime-like substance. We also

10 recovered, in addition to that, a watch -- an automatic

11 watch in the crater, in the GL-02 crater, in the

12 robbing area, marking again Friday the 15th at 8.15.

13 And we recovered a second watch on the ramp of GL-03

14 that I just showed you a moment ago marking "Saturday,

15 15", but no times, just "Saturday, 15".

16 Q. Were these watches examined by an expert?

17 A. That is correct. We -- Mr. Mills -- based on

18 Mr. Mills' report, we conclude again that the time

19 we're referring to is 32 to 36 hours prior to this

20 date, around the 13th again.

21 Q. Now, as a final matter on these graves, there

22 was a sediment in GL-03 and GL-05, and if you could

23 place your drawing that you did back on the ELMO and

24 explain this to the Judges.

25 A. Professor Brown again took some soil samples

Page 3844

1 to make some comparisons between these sites and some

2 other sites, so some samples were taken from here from

3 under the bodies in GL-03. Some other samples were

4 taken from GL-05 in different locations of the grave.

5 Then the conclusions of this soil analysis,

6 including pollen and mineralogical analysis, is that

7 the sediment of GL-03 and GL-05 are identical and the

8 sediment is foreign to this area and should come from a

9 meadow type of environment that was cultivated in the

10 past for cereal, including maize. He also found that

11 those sediments were identical to those recovered in

12 GL-05.

13 Q. Are you aware as to whether or not the

14 Sandici area had been cultivated for maize production?

15 A. I do not know.

16 MR. CAYLEY: Finally, if the witness could be

17 shown this, rather than getting him to search for it,

18 Mr. Usher.

19 Q. Now, Mr. Baraybar, the sites that are shaded

20 in green are exhumed sites?

21 A. That is correct.

22 Q. And the unshaded sites are sites which have

23 been identified but not yet exhumed; is that correct?

24 A. Yes, sir.

25 Q. And do all of those sites, based on the

Page 3845

1 preliminary examination, contain human remains?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. And based on your experience, would you

4 expect to find at least a number of bodies in all of

5 those graves?

6 A. Yes, sir.

7 Q. So the figure that you have given as the mean

8 number of individuals which, as you acknowledge, is

9 very conservative, is going to significantly increase

10 as these graves are exhumed?

11 A. Absolutely.

12 MR. CAYLEY: Your Honour, I have no further

13 questions for the witness, so I can offer him for

14 cross-examination.

15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think

16 that this is a good time for a break before we continue

17 with the cross-examination, so let us have a 20-minute

18 recess now, after which we will resume.

19 --- Recess taken at 10.43 a.m.

20 --- On resuming at 11.10 a.m.

21 MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, if I could --

22 excuse me, Mr. Visnjic. It's just housekeeping. The

23 last exhibit that Mr. Baraybar was referring to was

24 Prosecutor's Exhibit 140, which was not placed on the

25 record. And earlier the court deputy informed me that

Page 3846

1 when I was referring to Exhibits 161/1 and 161/5, it

2 should have been 161/1 and 161/2. I put it in the

3 record now so that in future months, when people come

4 to read it, they are aware of what I was referring to,

5 indeed what the witness was referring to.

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Very

7 well, Mr. Cayley.

8 Mr. Baraybar, you're now going to answer

9 questions put to you by Mr. Visnjic.

10 Mr. Visnjic, your turn.

11 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you,

12 Mr. President.

13 Cross-examined by Mr. Visnjic:

14 Q. Mr. Baraybar, good morning.

15 Mr. Baraybar, the first group of questions we

16 have for you has to do with the Nova Kasaba 04 grave

17 site. In this grave, according to your report, 19

18 bodies were found. However, you isolated two bodies of

19 males, and you determined that on average they were

20 17 years old. Is there any particular reason for this?

21 A. What I have written in the report is that we

22 have 19 adult males. Two of them, however, were or had

23 mean ages of 17 years of age, not that all the 19 have

24 mean ages of 17 years. Only two.

25 Q. There may be an error in the translation. My

Page 3847

1 question was: Was there any particular reason why you

2 separated out those two males from the rest?

3 A. If -- I do not know if I understand the

4 question correctly. Two individuals have been classed

5 as to have a mean age of 17 years of age, meaning they

6 fall in the range 13 to 24 because of specific

7 features, pretty much -- I presume -- I don't have the

8 specific anthropology report in front of me regarding

9 those two, but my assumption would be that a number of

10 traits in those individuals, basically in their bones,

11 would show that they were still in the process of

12 growth. Therefore, they have been ascribed to that age

13 range.

14 Q. Mr. Baraybar, the growth phase that you have

15 mentioned now continues until what age?

16 A. Most individuals stop -- I would not say

17 "growing", because that gives the impression that

18 people grow like plants forever and ever, in a way.

19 Most processes regarding the fusion of some parts of

20 the bone to another part of the bone end on average at

21 age 21, on average. That's just a very generic

22 explanation. We could go and refer to specific bones.

23 But the average, let's say it stops about 21.

24 Q. In your previous report, when describing

25 several age groups, you said that you combined the age

Page 3848

1 groups of 13 to 17 and the next group of 15 to 24, that

2 you combined these two groups. Could you explain to us

3 the reasons for doing this?

4 A. The reason is simply a mathematical reason.

5 In my archaeology report, I am dealing with a level of

6 detail I am not dealing with in the anthropology

7 report. The anthropology report refers to the whole

8 set of numbers that have been collected over all these

9 years. Therefore, in order to depict the distribution

10 of age of hundreds of individuals, I have to be able to

11 include or to fit individual ages into wider ranges.

12 That is why if I am referring only to 19 individuals,

13 it makes much more sense, in my opinion, when reading

14 the report of 19 individuals, to specify or to be more

15 specific regarding the ages defined for each of these

16 individuals.

17 If I see these 19 bodies in the -- as part of

18 the whole of the 1.800 bodies, of course I cannot be as

19 detailed with that and I need to just merge them. That

20 is why.

21 Q. When you were working on this global

22 estimation, in a part of your report you stated that

23 the method used to determine the age was modified by

24 certain standards for the Bosnian population.

25 A. That is partly correct. The standard has not

Page 3849

1 been modified. In other words, the standard remains

2 the same. What has been modified are the age ranges

3 associated to the standard.

4 So for example -- just for the sake of

5 clarity, I will expand on this, if I may. If, for

6 example -- let's assume that technique "A" is composed

7 by the observation of four different features of the

8 pubic bone or the hip bone. The characteristics that

9 define each phase, meaning what I'm observing, remain

10 the same. What changes, however, is the number of

11 individuals that share that characteristic. So if the

12 original sample used to develop that technique was, for

13 example, a North America population, I might expect the

14 North Americans of age, let's say, 20 to 30 to show

15 characteristic "A."

16 However, if I now turn to a Bosnian

17 population or a Balkan population, an European

18 population, maybe the same characteristics of phase "A"

19 will be shared by people between 30 and 40. So I am

20 observing still the same things; however, the age

21 ranges associated to those things have changed.

22 So the standards have not changed, just the

23 number of individuals who share those features have

24 changed.

25 Q. The standard you used for the Bosnian

Page 3850

1 population was established in 1999. Am I right in

2 saying that?

3 A. Yes. The results of the study have been

4 published or presented, rather, in an international

5 meeting in 1999. I presume that this investigation was

6 done through 1998.

7 Q. Bearing in mind large population migrations

8 in Bosnia until that time, are you aware that there was

9 a certain standard for the Yugoslav population or for

10 the population of Bosnia prior to the outbreak of the

11 war?

12 A. I am not aware of any Yugoslav standards

13 referring to this specific technique, meaning the

14 techniques, rather, we have used in this study.

15 Q. Generally speaking, bearing in mind the

16 standard established by this investigation in 1999 and

17 the standards that you refer to in your studies -- I'm

18 not quite sure whether they are American standards --

19 anthropologically speaking, can it be said of the

20 Bosnian population that they develop earlier or

21 quicker. Or let me put it this way: What is the

22 difference between the two standards? Is it of

23 substantive significance?

24 A. I will explain to you directly -- I will read

25 to you the differences. We are dealing, in these

Page 3851

1 questions, only with the standards for adults, and we

2 are, just for the sake of clarity, referring to two

3 techniques that are the techniques we have used for

4 aging adults, that is, the so-called Suchey-Brooks

5 pubic symphysis age estimation system, and the

6 Iscan-Loth sternal rib age estimation system.

7 The two techniques were developed indeed in

8 multi-ethnic North American population. The pubic

9 symphysis one was developed, as a matter of fact, in

10 Los Angeles at the office of the chief medical

11 examiner, and the rib technique was developed in

12 Florida.

13 I would like to read to you some examples of

14 the point I'm trying to make. For example, in American

15 or North American males, phase one of Suchey-Brooks, or

16 the technique regarding the hip bone, has a range,

17 meaning the people that share the characteristics of

18 that phase, that spans between 15 until 23 years of

19 age. In Bosnian males, based on this study I'm

20 referring to, there is a study by Simmons and

21 Associates from 1999, the same range spans between 13

22 and 25.

23 If we go to other phases that speak -- for

24 example, phase number 4, the range for the North

25 Americans would be between 23 and 57, and in Bosnians,

Page 3852

1 between 15 and 71.

2 So in both cases, there are certain

3 differences in the ranges, but what will change, as a

4 matter of fact, in each case, will be the mean of each

5 of the phases. But we are really not dealing with

6 means but with ranges.

7 It is quite difficult to say whether Bosnians

8 or anybody from the Balkans ages quicker or evolves

9 quicker or slower, because these techniques relate to

10 changes in shape, integrity -- shape and integrity

11 mainly or some aspects in bones. These techniques are

12 not linked to anything such as growth of children, for

13 example. This is only for individuals past a certain

14 age, for fully developed individuals.

15 Q. Can you please tell me the standard that you

16 have adopted, and which is based on Simmons and

17 Associates investigation, how large was the sample used

18 and how many cases do you need to establish such a

19 standard?

20 A. Two criteria are important in order to

21 establish a standard. Firstly, a sample size, of

22 course. But besides a sample size is the number of

23 individuals represented in each age range. I may have

24 1.000 individuals between 20 and 30. I will not be

25 able to predict anything about individuals between 30

Page 3853

1 and more; obviously not. I would need to have them --

2 let's say 100 individuals with ten people in each

3 ten-year range category, ten in 20 to 30, ten in 30 to

4 40 and so on, would be much easier.

5 So this collection that seems an associate

6 assembled is substantially and statistically large

7 enough for that and fills the criteria of a

8 distribution within the sample of ages. So this male

9 sample is 242 individuals. All these individuals were

10 recovered at autopsy room conditions, so these are not

11 war casualties nor anything of the kind. They are

12 people that went into the medical examiner's office for

13 a medical autopsy. The sample for the females is much,

14 much smaller. It's only 52 individuals. That is for

15 the pubes. Now, for the ribs we have 233 males and we

16 have 52 females, again a small sample.

17 But if I may call your attention on a very

18 important factor. In the case of the pubes of the hip

19 bone, the original sample collected in Los Angeles was

20 739 individuals, and the Bosnian one is literally a

21 third of it, 242. However, in the rib technique, the

22 American sample is 118, while the Bosnian one is twice

23 as large; 233. From a scientific point of view, I

24 think that it is quite sound evidence that this

25 technique is reliable, the sample taken is quite, quite

Page 3854

1 reliable.

2 Q. According to your report, in which you

3 provided in groups the ages for all graves, in this

4 particular grave site, Nova Kasaba 04, it is stated

5 that five persons were in the age group between 13 and

6 24 and 14 in the group over 25 years of age. That is

7 page 9 of your report. My question is: Does that mean

8 that your report on exhumations is far more precise

9 regarding certain graves as compared to the report on

10 the investigation of human remains?

11 A. Maybe the term is not "precision", but I

12 would call it "emphasis". It is certain that more

13 details regarding individual graves and, therefore,

14 individuals recovered in those graves will have much

15 more emphasis in the archaeology report than in the

16 anthropology report. If I were to use the same

17 emphasis in the anthropology report, my report will be

18 hundreds and hundreds of pages long in the case of the

19 anthropology report. That is one factor.

20 The second factor, I think, is that the

21 emphasis of the anthropology report is not to detail or

22 to discuss individual cases but rather to discuss it

23 globally. It's a global presentation of how many

24 people have been examined over these last years.

25 Q. Mr. Baraybar, does that mean that in the Nova

Page 3855

1 Kasaba 4 grave site, there were no persons who were

2 younger than 17?

3 A. There were individuals, let's say using now

4 the anthropological term, no younger than 13. Those

5 people would be classed in the 13 to 24 age range. So

6 it would be correct to say there were no younger than

7 13.

8 Q. How many individuals were there in the group

9 between 17 and 25?

10 A. In what grave?

11 Q. In Nova Kasaba 4.

12 A. I can actually pick up the specific data, if

13 you give me just one moment.

14 I see what you're getting at. When we

15 assembled the age ranges, the age ranges of 13 to 24

16 and 25 plus, and I said that earlier, we were combining

17 a number of data that was coming from different

18 sources, the 1996 report and all the other reports done

19 before. As you rightly said, in 1998, for example, the

20 13-to-24-year interval was divided into two, into two

21 parts, one between 13 and 17, 18 to 24, and so forth.

22 In order to be more inclusive, we have merged them in

23 the range 13 to 24 to be just simply more inclusive.

24 So according to this, in Nova Kasaba 4, the range 13 to

25 24 has or contains five individuals out of the 19.

Page 3856

1 Q. Does that mean that this group cannot be

2 determined more closely as being a group ranging

3 between 17 to 24 years?

4 A. That is correct.

5 Q. In your report relating to the Nova Kasaba 04

6 grave site, you state that traces were found of

7 bullets?

8 A. In number 4 -- could you tell me what page,

9 please?

10 Q. On page 7, paragraph 2, last sentence.

11 A. No. What I'm saying here is that in a few

12 cases the presence of shotgun pellets was recorded in

13 addition to other gunshot injuries. That refers to

14 injuries and has been extracted, as indicated

15 previously, from the pathologist's report.

16 Q. I didn't understand. So did you find shotgun

17 pellets or traces of them? Did you actually find the

18 shotgun pellets themselves, the buckshot, or traces of

19 them?

20 A. According to the pathologist's report, as I

21 raise in my report here, 11 individuals died of gunshot

22 wounds, while the cause of death of the eight others

23 was unascertained. In a few cases, the presence of

24 shotgun pellets, and that links to the bodies not in

25 the sediment or anywhere else, was recorded in addition

Page 3857

1 to other gunshot injuries. I would refer this

2 information to the chief pathologist.

3 Q. Do you have an explanation for these traces

4 of shotgun pellets?

5 A. No, I don't.

6 Q. In this grave site, you also came across an

7 individual who had 54 bullets of a calibre of 7.62.

8 Did this individual, if you can tell us that at all --

9 that is to say, was that person wearing civilian

10 clothing?

11 A. I can tell you that information. Give me a

12 moment. This information is extracted again from the

13 pathologist's report. The individual was dressed in

14 blue jeans, and let's say blue denim trousers -- that

15 would be the appropriate way to put it -- and a blue

16 jacket, so jean-type jacket.

17 Q. In the Kasaba 04, you also found some

18 personal documents scattered around. Does that mean

19 that the bodies were searched or is there some other

20 explanation?

21 A. I don't have any explanation. I can just

22 tell you that documents were found in the grave fill,

23 in most of the cases, as well as many other items of

24 clothing and artefacts. There were quite a lot of

25 artefacts found.

Page 3858

1 I stated in my report, regarding the

2 artefacts found loose in the grave, that the two

3 stretchers that we found were covering some of the

4 bodies, and the stretchers were -- for the shape in

5 which they were found, were basically found turned

6 inside out, so as if they had been stuffed with things

7 and then just simply emptied in the grave. That is to

8 be found in paragraph 1 on page number 10 of my

9 report.

10 Q. Mr. Baraybar, do you perhaps have information

11 on the following, although I don't think that was part

12 of your job: The identification of individuals from

13 that grave site? Were most of them identified, do you

14 happen to know?

15 A. No, I don't.

16 Q. In keeping with everything that you found in

17 the grave site, do you exclude the possibility that the

18 bodies in this grave site, in this grave, had been

19 casualties during combat activities in an attempt to

20 cross the asphalt road and that they were buried in

21 this grave later on, subsequently?

22 A. I cannot exclude the possibility. In my

23 opinion, however, if I may add, there's two things

24 important to remember. The first one is that the

25 documents found either on bodies or lose in the grave

Page 3859

1 fill are of people reported missing by the ICRC, the

2 International Committee for the Red Cross, and appear

3 in the book of the missing of the ICRC.

4 The date of -- in which these people were

5 reported as missing spans roughly, according to those

6 documents, between the 11th and the 18th of July,

7 1995. That's, again, point number one.

8 Second, in my opinion, it is quite

9 difficult -- it would be very difficult for me to

10 imagine that people carrying stretchers or litters, for

11 that matter, could be engaged in some kind of

12 confrontation.

13 The third point, in my opinion, again, it

14 would be -- that would be even more difficult

15 considering one of them had a fracture caused,

16 according to the pathology report, by gunshot to the

17 leg and has a splint and dressing.

18 Those basically would be the three points

19 which, in my opinion, would sort of preclude that

20 explanation. However, the answer to your question

21 originally would be no.

22 Q. Mr. Baraybar, the stretchers -- we're talking

23 about a grave with nine individuals and only two

24 stretchers were found; is that correct?

25 A. Nineteen.

Page 3860

1 Q. I'm sorry. Yes, nineteen.

2 A. But, yes, that's correct, two stretchers.

3 Q. And also found were three -- a maximum of

4 three individuals who had had previous wounds or

5 injuries.

6 A. That is correct.

7 Q. Did any one of the individuals -- that is to

8 say, on how many individuals did you find traces of

9 shotgun pellets?

10 A. I do not know. You would need to refer to

11 the pathology report.

12 Q. In keeping with your conclusion that at least

13 19 persons, 19 persons and at least 4 were carried --

14 were carrying the stretcher and that 3 were injured,

15 12 people were, nonetheless, capable of engaging in

16 combat operations. Do you agree with me?

17 A. Yes. The answer is yes. However, I

18 cannot -- I have no evidence whatsoever to make such a

19 conclusion, but presented in that way, yes.

20 Q. Mr. Baraybar, I'd like to talk about the next

21 grave site, Nova Kasaba 06, now, please.

22 In this grave, a male individual was found,

23 ages ranging between 14 and 24.

24 A. That is correct. Yes, sir.

25 Q. Bearing in mind your previous testimony where

Page 3861

1 the standard was 13 to 24, can you explain the

2 difference in this concrete case?

3 A. Yes. There is no difference, as a matter of

4 fact. In my previous testimony, what I have stated is

5 that the range we are using for calculations of the

6 overall number of cases goes between 13 and 24. In

7 this specific individual, the emphasis, again, in the

8 archaeology report is much more in the description of

9 individual cases. And according to the standards we've

10 been using and the evidence we've been finding in this

11 case, this individual happened to be between 14 and

12 24. For calculation proposals, this individual will

13 adapt to the 13 to 24 category.

14 Q. You also state that four bullets were found

15 below the body of an individual, which lead to the

16 conclusion and confirmation, according to you, that he

17 was shot in the grave itself. My question is the

18 following: At what depth did you find these

19 projectiles?

20 A. In general -- in general, as I said earlier,

21 the projectiles were found in various depths in the

22 sediment and under the body, which could range between

23 half an inch and an inch. In this specific -- in this

24 specific case -- I am looking through the report to see

25 if I have stated that. Maybe I have not stated how

Page 3862

1 many millimetres under the body the projectiles were

2 recovered, and I don't think I have. As a matter of

3 fact, no. They were simply in the sediment under the

4 body, but the norm has been pretty much between half an

5 inch and an inch. Sometimes less, sometimes more than

6 that. Doesn't mean ...

7 Q. In your opinion, how far would a 7.62-calibre

8 metre lodge -- be lodged in the earth, having passed

9 through a body? Have you got an orientation as to

10 that?

11 A. I don't have a precise orientation because,

12 in my knowledge, the factors influencing this would be

13 the compaction of the soil. Obviously, it would be

14 very different if somebody shot through a concrete

15 floor than if he shot through mud or if he shot through

16 some kind of clay soil that is very compacted.

17 The only evidence I have is based on our

18 findings in recovering a slug of a projectile embedded

19 in the soil.

20 Q. You also find 14 casings, 14 shell casings.

21 Do you know whether these casings were identified, as

22 well as the projectiles in this concrete case, although

23 I know that that was not your job?

24 A. I do not know.

25 Q. Mr. Baraybar, according to your overall

Page 3863

1 impressions for the Nova Kasaba 06 grave site, do you

2 exclude the possibility that on a dead body lying in

3 the grave, a burst of gunfire was fired?

4 A. I definitely cannot explain nor draw such a

5 conclusion. I have only bones. I don't think that

6 anybody could really determine whether the person was

7 dead or alive while being shot in the grave.

8 Q. As an anthropologist, did you take part in

9 determining the character of the injuries that were

10 inflicted, whether they were ante-mortem or

11 post-mortem?

12 A. As anthropologists, we do assist the

13 pathologist in the reconstruction and assessment of

14 injuries. However, it is the pathologist's

15 responsibility and prerogative to give an opinion about

16 the nature of those injuries.

17 Q. Thank you. My next group of questions

18 relates to the Nova Kasaba grave site 07.

19 In your report, you state that in this grave

20 you also found projectiles.

21 A. That is correct.

22 Q. During your examination-in-chief, you also

23 stated that this grave had the character of a trench,

24 that is to say, like a defence position.

25 A. That is correct.

Page 3864

1 Q. In keeping with the ammunition that was found

2 in the grave, can we assume, therefore, that there were

3 high-calibre weapons there, 30 millimetres, for

4 example?

5 A. I would say it's correct.

6 Q. Does your overall image of the grave site

7 exclude the possibility that in this trench at this

8 position with the heavy-calibre weaponry, that there

9 was shooting going on during combat operations and that

10 the ammunition that was found in fact represents part

11 of those activities and operations?

12 A. I would say yes and no. If I may explain the

13 no part of it that would be in my opinion. I do agree

14 with the fact that to fire a 30-millimetre round, you

15 cannot do that from a handgun or a rifle. It has to be

16 a quite substantially large gun. Therefore, those

17 shells found at the bottom of the trench, one of which

18 was smashed, as a matter of fact, could be linked to

19 the fact that whenever this gun in transport or

20 carrying this gun or whatever was moving this gun may

21 have smashed some shell casings left behind.

22 However, I do not see what would be the use,

23 in my opinion, to fire a 30-millimetre weapon together

24 with a 7.65-millimetre pistol bullet. If I was firing

25 a 30-millimetre weapon that would have a very long

Page 3865

1 range, I presume, I would not expect my pistol to reach

2 as far as the other weapon. That is my first, in my

3 opinion, objection.

4 The second one is that why would I have then

5 a body lying in a gun emplacement? We do know two

6 things regarding this. In the picture that was shown

7 to you that is Exhibit number -- if I can find it

8 here -- OTP Exhibit 14/10 of the 27th of July, we see

9 that the site labelled as NK-7 is still open, is very

10 much an empty -- an empty trench. So the point is that

11 we know that whatever happened there has to happen,

12 according to this photograph, after the 27th of July.

13 The problem with the shell casings is, just

14 to summarise this, is that 30-millimetre shell casings

15 and a handgun, in my opinion, are not something that

16 are really compatible in terms of, let's say, fighting

17 of some sort.

18 Q. Perhaps the interpretation was not the proper

19 one, but on page 17 of your report, we don't mention a

20 shell casing but just a bullet. No mention is made of

21 a shell casing, which means that somebody dropped a

22 bullet in the trench.

23 A. I do not follow you. You may repeat your

24 question, please.

25 Q. On page 16. I'm sorry. On page 16 of your

Page 3866

1 report. I see that it is page 16 now. You make no

2 mention of the shell casing of a pistol, of a

3 7.62-millimetre pistol, but the complete bullet, which

4 leads me to conclude that somebody lost the bullet in

5 the trench rather than having shot from the trench with

6 a pistol.

7 On the other hand -- to round off my

8 question, on the other hand, you found shell casings of

9 7.62-millimetre automatic weapons, which leads me to

10 conclude that if somebody did, in fact, fire, were

11 using weapons other than heavy weapons, he fired only

12 from an automatic weapon of the 7.62-millimetre

13 calibre.

14 A. In your first point, the 7.65-millimetre

15 pistol bullet is, indeed, a bullet, and is not a live

16 round, is a fired bullet; otherwise, it would be

17 referring to a round. It is a bullet and therefore has

18 been fired.

19 Then we have, on top of it, three shell

20 casings of 7.62 millimetres, and we've got two bullets,

21 again fired rounds, of 7.62 millimetres and a jacket

22 fragment, the part of the bullet that encases the core

23 of the bullet, that we cannot determine from where it

24 came.

25 Q. In view of the fact that the body was found

Page 3867

1 next to the place where the projectiles were

2 uncovered -- at least that is what is shown on your

3 sketch on figure number 5 -- does that exclude the

4 possibility of the fact that it was a body which had

5 previously been hit and later on introduced into the

6 trench?

7 A. I have really no, again, opinion about it.

8 The answer again could be "yes". However, by the same

9 token, I could, in my opinion, question why then those

10 fired bullets are in the sediment in close proximity to

11 the body. But the answer to your question would be

12 "yes".

13 Q. Thank you. My next question relates to the

14 next grave site, Konjevic Polje. I'm sorry, Nova

15 Kasaba 08, that is the next grave site. In this grave,

16 you explained to us that you found 33 individuals who

17 were buried in three groups, so to speak?

18 A. That is correct.

19 Q. Your conclusion in paragraph 3 seems to

20 indicate that the groups -- that the individuals in the

21 first and third groups were shot in the grave itself?

22 A. That is correct, yes, sir.

23 Q. Also, your conclusion in paragraph 4

24 indicates that clusters 1 and 2 were mechanically

25 removed from an unknown location and disposed of in the

Page 3868

1 grave?

2 A. That is correct too.

3 Q. It seems to me that there is something

4 illogical there. If cluster 1 was mechanically removed

5 from an unknown location and then buried in the grave,

6 why was that same cluster shot at in the Nova Kasaba 8

7 grave itself?

8 A. Well, I have not stated the answer to that

9 question because it will be too much to speculate. But

10 in my opinion, if I may, I would speculate regarding

11 this in order to answer the question.

12 There are two things that need to be taken

13 into account. If I'm saying that the bodies were

14 transported mechanically, it's because we have physical

15 evidence linking turf, meaning grass, under the bodies

16 as if they've been scooped. That is a fact. There is

17 no interpretation linking that fact to anything else.

18 So my interpretation goes, then, to the mechanical

19 removal of the bodies. That is number 1.

20 Number 2, I have never said in any point in

21 time whether the people were scooped alive or dead

22 because I cannot make that interpretation. Again, if

23 somebody has bullets under the body embedded in the

24 ground, I am only saying that the person may have been

25 shot while in the grave. I am not saying whether the

Page 3869

1 person has been killed while in the grave, nor whether

2 the person has been killed elsewhere and then

3 transported to the grave. That is something I cannot

4 extract, assess, nor answer based on the evidence I

5 have recovered.

6 So the facts basically are that the

7 mechanical removal is one thing, primarily supported by

8 the fact of the grass and the turf and the sediment

9 under the bodies. And the second element is that

10 through all those sediments, there are bullets, and on

11 some occasions I stated in the report -- not in this

12 specific case, I believe -- there has been an

13 association between injuries recorded by the

14 pathologist and the position of the bullets. So I'm

15 leaving all this here very purposely vague in order not

16 to over-interpret my findings.

17 Q. Mr. Baraybar, at what depth below the bodies

18 were the projectiles found? Do you have that fact?

19 A. Let me look for it in the report. It only

20 says here that three to four bullets and one jacket

21 fragment -- that's referring to cluster 1 -- were found

22 embedded in the bottom of the grave. Again, I would

23 say that by "embedded", I mean the bullet was literally

24 stuck in the ground, in the soil, below the depth of at

25 least half an inch or over a centimetre to an inch.

Page 3870

1 Q. Mr. Baraybar, one more question relating to

2 this grave. As we're in the area of speculation, there

3 is something one might call a custom, a rather strange

4 one. In wartime, it has been recorded on many

5 occasions that bodies that have died and that are

6 thrown into a grave, a burst of fire, a round of fire,

7 is fired in order to confirm I don't really know what.

8 And bearing in mind, in particular, the conclusions you

9 make regarding grave site Nova Kasaba 8 -- and my

10 question is related to the previous graves -- could

11 this possibility be excluded, in your opinion?

12 A. Let me rephrase, only for the sake of

13 understanding, to see if I understand your question.

14 What you suggest is that in wartimes, a burst of fire

15 may be open against an individual that is already

16 placed into a grave for some reason. I just need

17 clarification on that.

18 Q. Yes, yes.

19 A. The answer would be, no, I am not acquainted

20 with that information you have produced. However, in

21 my opinion again, I would say that if somebody opens a

22 burst of fire against a body lying on a grave, it is

23 because that person suspects that the individual may

24 still be alive.

25 Q. My next question relates to the Konjevic

Page 3871

1 Polje 1 grave site. Within the framework of this

2 grave, you registered the presence of a white powder?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. The existence of this white powder, could it

5 be an indication that it was scattered in order to

6 prevent possible disease from spreading?

7 A. It is, in my opinion again -- I cannot answer

8 this question if I don't give an explanation for it.

9 It is, in my opinion again, lime, in general, is placed

10 in graves in any country in the world primarily to

11 quench smell more than to prevent disease, as far as I

12 know. I don't really see what disease-preventing

13 capabilities lime has for that matter.

14 Q. Does lime itself have a smell?

15 A. Lime, in itself, does not have a smell such

16 as the one that it's trying to quench, no.

17 Q. In that connection, is it a fact that most of

18 the bodies were transported mechanically, by mechanical

19 means? At least that is what I gather from your

20 report.

21 A. That is correct, at least those to be buried

22 first, the first eight.

23 Q. One of the reasons -- I'm not just referring

24 to this grave but the others too. Most of the bodies

25 were transported mechanically to the grave sites; is

Page 3872

1 that correct?

2 A. We have evidence that in some instances, as I

3 have put in my report, some bodies or some groups of

4 bodies were transported mechanically to the location

5 where they were buried, that is correct.

6 Q. Could one of the reasons be fear of infection

7 or -- could one of the reasons be fear of infection, or

8 the unpleasant stench, could that be one of the

9 explanations?

10 A. That would be one of the explanations for

11 burying the bodies, not for them being transported

12 mechanically, if I understand correctly.

13 Q. My next question -- just a moment, please.

14 There's another question I have to ask.

15 Does lime, in contact with water, emanate a

16 particular smell?

17 A. Yes, it does.

18 Q. Thank you. My next question relates to the

19 Konjevic Polje 2 grave site. According to your

20 finding, this grave was dug by hand?

21 A. That is correct. Both graves were dug by

22 hand.

23 Q. But still there are traces that the body was

24 mechanically put into the grave?

25 A. That is correct for grave 1 and maybe for one

Page 3873

1 individual in grave 2.

2 Q. Is this grave an instance of the kind of

3 speculation we referred to earlier on as to the reasons

4 for putting bodies into the grave by mechanical means?

5 A. I do not know. However, I would like to

6 clarify this issue a bit more.

7 In my report, I say that the grave in grave

8 1, for example, was dug by hand, and that individual

9 may have been placed there through mechanical means

10 because it was lying on a pedestal of turf, branches

11 and some flowers. What I'm not saying in my report,

12 however, is when the hole in which the body was placed

13 was open -- in other words, a hole becomes a grave by

14 putting a body in it. I do not know and there's no way

15 I can know whether the hole was simply a hole and has

16 been there for a long time and then a body was placed

17 in it later. So that just helps to clarify, in that

18 specific case, that I'm not trying to infer when -- or

19 why, rather, or to speculate why, if I open a grave by

20 hand or I dig a grave by hand, why I put in a body

21 mechanically. I cannot really speculate on that.

22 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President,

23 I have several more questions for the witness, but I am

24 looking at the time. I don't know whether it might be

25 advisable to have a break now.

Page 3874

1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes,

2 Mr. Visnjic. Do you have any idea how much more time

3 you need to finish your cross-examination?

4 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Another ten

5 minutes or so, Mr. President.

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ten minutes

7 or so? I think we should have a break then.

8 So we're going to have a 20-minute break

9 now.

10 --- Recess taken at 12.17 p.m.

11 --- On resuming at 12.37 p.m.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation]

13 Mr. Visnjic, you may continue, please.

14 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you,

15 Mr. President.

16 Q. Mr. Baraybar, let us go on to the next grave

17 site, Glogova. In view of the global impression you

18 have of this grave site, would you agree that there

19 were several burials in that grave?

20 A. That is correct. Yes, sir.

21 Q. Do you have any idea as regards the time when

22 those burials took place?

23 A. No. No, I don't. From the direct

24 examination of the graves, I do not have an impression

25 of the time. Having said that, I do have an impression

Page 3875

1 of the time based on the photographs showed to me by

2 the investigators, that have already been presented to

3 the Court.

4 Q. Regarding this grave and in view of the

5 bodies recovered, can it be said that bodies were

6 brought to this grave from several locations?

7 A. That is actually possible for any grave,

8 including this one, yes.

9 Q. In your report, you said that a person was

10 found with a Baretta pistol on him.

11 A. Yes, that is correct.

12 Q. Could you tell us how that individual was

13 clothed?

14 A. Yes. Based on the pathology report again --

15 it's in my notes -- he was dressed with a black leather

16 jacket, green tartan shirt, olive-green T-shirt, and

17 brown trousers.

18 Q. Could this be described as civilian

19 clothing?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. In this grave, a group of bodies was found

22 with traces of scorching. Is that correct?

23 A. It is correct. I think that we should tell

24 the Court that we're referring to GL-05 specifically,

25 yes.

Page 3876

1 Q. Do you have an explanation for that?

2 A. No, I don't. I guess that that matter will

3 be dealt with when the pathologist -- with the

4 pathologist's testimony.

5 Q. In this grave, a certain quantity of lime was

6 also found, as was the case in the previous graves.

7 A. That is correct.

8 Q. Would you say that there was a particular

9 reason for this?

10 A. I do not know what is the reason of putting

11 the lime there. I just know that there was quite a lot

12 of it, as much as -- I would say almost a cubic metre.

13 Quite a lot of lime.

14 Q. Mr. Baraybar, within the framework of your

15 studies and investigations, you managed to obtain a

16 global overview of virtually all the graves.

17 A. That is correct.

18 Q. If the existence of lime could be a reason

19 for concealing a grave, how would you explain that in

20 the case of secondary grave sites lime is mostly

21 absent, with the exception of Zeleni Jadar 5?

22 A. I would need to answer your question in my

23 opinion, because I have never discussed that issue in

24 any of my reports.

25 In my opinion, lime is not a means of

Page 3877

1 concealing a grave. I would conceal a grave by

2 backfilling it with something else less visible from

3 the surface. And as a matter of fact, in the report, I

4 said that at least 75 centimetres of the area where the

5 grave was supposed to be, 65, sorry, centimetres, was

6 disturbed. So when we arrive to the area, the only

7 visible thing would have shown in photograph 15 in my

8 report, page 34, was basically an overgrown area.

9 When digging that, we have to remove 65 or

10 more centimetres of soil that had been just ploughed

11 over and over. Even after that, when we recovered the

12 cut or the area, the extent of the grave, we found the

13 lime. Therefore, the lime was part of the grave but,

14 in my opinion, was not to be used to conceal anything.

15 It was simply there for whatever other reason.

16 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President,

17 I have no further questions. Mr. Baraybar, thank you

18 for your detailed answers.

19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you

20 very much, Mr. Visnjic.

21 Mr. Cayley.

22 MR. CAYLEY: I have only a few questions,

23 Mr. President.

24 Re-examined by Mr. Cayley:

25 Q. First of all, Mr. Baraybar, in your

Page 3878

1 examination-in-chief you were referred -- and indeed in

2 your cross-examination -- you were referred to Exhibit

3 232, which is the addendum to your report and sets out

4 the minimum number of individuals and their age groups

5 from the various sites on which you reported.

6 MR. CAYLEY: If the witness could be shown

7 Exhibit 140, and specifically page 00950927.

8 Q. Mr. Baraybar, I want you to concentrate on

9 the diagram on the extreme right of that page, which is

10 the Orahovac/Lezete 2 and then linked to Hodzici Road

11 3, Hodzici Road 4 and Hodzici Road 5.

12 When you wrote your report in December of

13 1999, were you aware that examination of shell cases

14 and blindfolds and ligatures had linked Orahovac/Lezete

15 2 with the secondary sites at Hodzici Road 3, Hodzici

16 Road 4, and Hodzici Road 5?

17 A. No. The only evidence that I have used for

18 those links, as called in my report, have been the

19 pollen and soil analysis.

20 Q. So you were not aware of that subsequent

21 evidence that's been discovered since your report?

22 A. No, sir.

23 Q. I'm sorry. Since the writing of your report,

24 you're not aware of that new evidence?

25 A. No, I'm not.

Page 3879

1 Q. If I could now refer you to the Nova Kasaba 4

2 site and specifically your exhumation report that is on

3 page 7, you state, in the second paragraph of your

4 summary and conclusions, that there were two adult

5 males with mean ages of 17 years. Now, you're not

6 stating in this report that those two individuals were

7 actually 17 years of age, are you?

8 A. No, I'm not.

9 Q. Can you explain what you mean by "mean age of

10 17"?

11 A. "Mean" is a measure of a central tendency. In

12 other words, if I have an individual that, according to

13 my analysis, is between -- let's just take a

14 hypothetical example -- between 20 and 30, I would say

15 that its mean age is 25. I am not saying, however,

16 that he is 25. He is somewhere between 20 and 30. The

17 problem is that in terms of writing a report, if I am

18 to explain or refer to ranges all the time, it would be

19 extremely confusing. In that case, it's basically why

20 I'm using a mean age of 17 years of age.

21 Q. So am I right in saying that explains why, in

22 your anthropological report, you used age ranges, but

23 in order to make a more realistic presentation in your

24 exhumations report, you used a mean age of 17?

25 A. That is correct, and the mean age -- the mean

Page 3880

1 of 17 is roughly the mean of the range 13 to 24.

2 Q. Thank you. If I could refer you to page 11

3 of your report, and this is simply a clarification, you

4 state that a young adult male, in the second paragraph

5 of that page of your report, was found with 54

6 7.62-millimetre live rounds. Were they actually found

7 on his person or were they found nearby to the body?

8 A. As far as I recall, they were in close

9 association to the body. I'm not making any reference

10 here, although I can check my notes if you give me a

11 minute.

12 Yes. The bullets were in close association.

13 There's no mention of a pouch, there's no mention of

14 anything. They were not, let's say, a metre or ten

15 centimetres away from the body. They were on the

16 body. Therefore, they are associated to the body. I

17 am not saying, however -- that's why I have not stated

18 here -- that the body was carrying that, because there

19 was found no carrying case or bag or anything. It was

20 simply associated to the body.

21 Q. Since you've been asked in your

22 cross-examination to exclude a number of possibilities,

23 and I don't want you to speculate, can you exclude the

24 possibility that those rounds of ammunition were thrown

25 on top of the body after the body was put into the

Page 3881

1 grave?

2 A. I cannot.

3 Q. If we could now move to Nova Kasaba 8 and

4 page 20 of your report, you were asked a number of

5 questions about bullets -- deformed bullets that were

6 found under a number of bodies, and you state in your

7 report that the three bullets, the 7.62-millimetre

8 bullets, were found in the soil deformed.

9 Question: Is it right that when bullets pass

10 through bodies and hit flesh or bone, that they deform

11 or flatten?

12 A. In general, yes.

13 Q. And by deforming or flattening, does that

14 reduce the distance that they can travel once they have

15 left the body?

16 A. In most cases, that is correct.

17 Q. You were asked -- and this is really my final

18 question in respect of Nova Kasaba 4 -- whether you

19 could exclude the possibility that the individuals in

20 that grave were killed in combat, and your answer was,

21 in essence, that you could not but that there were a

22 number of factors which went against drawing that

23 conclusion. Do you recall?

24 A. Yes, I do.

25 Q. Based on your knowledge of that grave,

Page 3882

1 equally can you exclude the possibility, Mr. Baraybar,

2 that the individuals in that grave were summarily

3 executed and then placed in that grave?

4 A. No, I can't.

5 MR. CAYLEY: Thank you.

6 Mr. President, I have no further questions

7 for the witness.

8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you

9 very much, Mr. Cayley.

10 Judge Fouad Riad has the floor.

11 Questioned by the Court:

12 JUDGE RIAD: [Interpretation] Thank you,

13 Mr. President.

14 [In English] Good morning, Mr. Baraybar.

15 A. Good morning, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE RIAD: I've been listening very

17 carefully to your testimony. I have a general

18 question, in fact, related to the cross-examination and

19 to what our Prosecutor has just asked you.

20 When you were asked by the distinguished

21 Defence counsel if some casualties could have happened

22 during combat, your answer was, "No," and you gave

23 reasons. You said that some carried stretchers, some

24 were reported missing by the ICRC, some had dressings

25 of previous wound shots. Does this apply to all the

Page 3883

1 mass grave sites, or were there some which indicated a

2 battle connected with it, or were some traces of

3 military clothes, weapons, around or in the grave?

4 A. Your Honour, regarding the first example,

5 that is, Nova Kasaba 4, as I said, we recovered 19

6 individuals and two stretchers. Three individuals were

7 with some kind of dressing. One of them specifically

8 had a splint. They wear different items of clothing

9 and other objects.

10 In this specific case, the only military

11 element, if I can call it in another way, although I'm

12 speculating because we would need to define what

13 military items are, the obvious military item would be

14 the live rounds that were found in the grave.

15 In the grave of Glogova as well, we found a

16 pistol, a loaded pistol being directly carried, not put

17 in the grave but carried by an individual.

18 In general terms, I do not recall any other

19 obviously military elements such as camouflage

20 fatigues, khaki trousers, gun holsters or other

21 elements of military paraphernalia that were found in

22 the graves, helmets. The range would be limited.

23 So the answer is, basically, we have only --

24 we can not exclude -- I cannot exclude to a hundred per

25 cent the fact whether they would be military casualties

Page 3884

1 or not. My evidence does not allow me to

2 over-interpret beyond what I have. But in sort of

3 physical evidence, we have only those two instances I

4 have referred to as the most military things that could

5 have been found, rounds and a loaded pistol.

6 JUDGE RIAD: You also mentioned that one of

7 the bodies had bullets almost on the body. Now, if a

8 body is thrown in a grave dug, would he fall with the

9 bullets over him?

10 A. No. The 54 bullets we were referring to in

11 the case of Nova Kasaba 4 were four groups of bullets

12 placed on a -- on a clip. So it was a package of

13 bullets in there. I do not know -- the bullets were

14 not, let's say, spread all over the body. There was a

15 tight package of bullets, because bullets were in these

16 clips, held in a clip. So they were not thrown, they

17 were in a package.

18 The issue is whether the body was carrying

19 those bullets. I cannot say for sure. What I have

20 said is there was no bag, there was no suitcase, no

21 backpack, no nothing in which the bullets were found.

22 So the body was here, and the bullets were literally

23 attached to the body.

24 JUDGE RIAD: With a belt?

25 A. No.

Page 3885


2 A. No.

3 JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much.

4 A. You're welcome.

5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you

6 very much, Judge Fouad Riad.

7 Judge Wald has the floor.

8 JUDGE WALD: Thank you. Mr. Baraybar, you

9 mentioned that in one of the graves, I think it was

10 Konjevic Polje 1, there was a body of a woman, and I

11 believe that was the only identified woman found in all

12 of the graves that you included in your report.

13 Was there anything at all unusual or

14 anything, from your point of view, that would explain

15 the presence of that lone woman in the grave?

16 A. Your Honour, there is no -- again, my

17 evidence does not allow me to speculate as to why she

18 was there. However, there's something I can definitely

19 comment upon, and it's the fact that from the remains

20 that have been classified as undetermined by different

21 causes, either, because they were very fragmented,

22 there were tiny pieces, none of them, the ones that

23 were more or less complete, showed female features or

24 obvious features of a female.

25 The interesting factor here is that during

Page 3886

1 the exhumation, all the field team, upon having a close

2 look at the body said, "This is a woman." I was the

3 most skeptical person, maybe influenced by the fact

4 that in the past we have been dealing with hundreds and

5 hundreds and hundreds of male victims to actually

6 accept that this was a female.

7 Well, it was a female. We had a cursory look

8 in the field, and then I was able to re-examine the

9 body in the mortuary. It was a full skeleton, and

10 indeed it was a female.

11 On top of it, as far as I can recall, it had

12 some pink trainer shoes, and I can't really recall the

13 rest of the clothing, but it was quite a striking

14 element for other people than me, so to speak. They

15 just saw it and said, "This is a female. It is a

16 female." My impression was maybe it's not. Maybe it

17 was a dressed as a male, but it was definitely a

18 female.

19 Q. Was there anything in that relatively small

20 grave site to suggest that the female had been -- had

21 met her death in any different way than the males?

22 A. I again would leave comments on the cause of

23 death of the female to the chief pathologist. I am

24 going through my report. Well, apparently she was

25 shot. The pathologist would be able to explain that

Page 3887

1 better.

2 JUDGE WALD: Okay. My second question deals

3 with the phenomenon that's been so extensively

4 discussed of those bodies that you found in a few

5 different sites where at least you said in the

6 beginning they would be consistent with the person

7 having been shot when they were already in the grave,

8 although other possibilities were discussed.

9 Could you tell, from the evidence that you

10 look at, if that were true, if that possibility that

11 you first mentioned were true, that the body was shot

12 while in the grave, that these bodies had been tossed

13 into the grave and then shot or that they had actually

14 been, as it were, ordered into the grave and then shot

15 while they were still active and upright?

16 A. Your Honour, one of the individuals in

17 grave 2 in the site of Konjevic Polje 2, KP-02, may

18 answer this question. This body happened to have three

19 7.62-millimetre bullets embedded in the grave floor

20 under the body. One was below the waist, at the chest

21 level, and the right shoulder. In both cases, the

22 second body in the same grave has also a bullet under

23 the chest.

24 I wrote in my report here that according to

25 the pathologist's report, the cause of death of both

Page 3888

1 individuals was multiple gunshot wounds. The

2 pathologist will explain this in detail.

3 However, the interesting fact is, and this is

4 extracted from the pathologist's report, so this is not

5 my examination but the pathologist's examination, in

6 both cases the location of the bullets matched the

7 injuries recorded during the post-mortem examination.

8 So up to there, I can say that in this

9 specific case, I have a link, an independent link

10 between the bullets being found under the bodies and

11 the pathologist's examination. It is a separate

12 examination from the one I did when I recovered the

13 bodies and the locations have both matched.

14 Whether the person was forced in there or not

15 is something very difficult to ascertain, extremely

16 difficult to ascertain. However, if some people, such

17 as the Defence counsel asked me previously, where a

18 burst of gunfire was opened on them while in the grave

19 and they were transported mechanically, well, I would

20 not like to draw the conclusion of that, but it seems

21 to me very obvious that if somebody does that, it's

22 because the person is not dead.

23 JUDGE WALD: Okay. My last question to you

24 is: In the final part of your direct-examination, you

25 were shown Exhibit 140, which showed the sites that

Page 3889

1 have already been exhumed and those that have not yet

2 been exhumed.

3 Do you know of any schedule or what the

4 schedule will be? In short, how much longer it is

5 likely to be, number of years before those sites, if

6 they are going to be exhumed, can be exhumed?

7 A. I do not know.


9 A. I could not comment on that.

10 JUDGE WALD: All right. Thank you.

11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you

12 very much, Judge Wald.

13 Mr. Baraybar, I also have a few questions for

14 you, at least five brief questions, in actual fact.

15 You talk about -- you talked about American

16 standards, Bosnian standards for calculating age. Now,

17 even for the American standard, does it require -- how

18 shall I put this? -- continuously examines in order to

19 maintain the viability of the standard?

20 A. Up to a certain extent that is correct.

21 Beyond that, I would tell you that if a sample is large

22 enough and representative -- more than large -- large

23 and representative, that would be the right

24 combination. The standard can stand on its own. Some

25 adjustments would need to be made if the sample is

Page 3890

1 under-represented in some parts, but otherwise, the

2 technique itself will be standing on its own.

3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] These same

4 statistical operations, are they applied to perform the

5 adaptations of the American norm to the Bosnian

6 standard or are there different operations to do this?

7 A. No. It is the same -- it is basically the

8 same operation. As I explained, the features to be

9 observed remain the same. What changes is the number

10 of individuals that share those features.

11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] In applying

12 the standard, let us say Bosnian, have you maintained

13 the same criteria throughout, for numerous observations

14 or did you change the criteria?

15 A. No. When we made -- we were made aware in

16 1999 of this study, what we have done is we have

17 changed the ranges, not the observations, of the

18 previous years. Well, not the previous years. I

19 correct that. Only of 1998, because 1996 was already

20 presented as a report. So we have left the

21 observations, and we have just changed the age ranges

22 to make them more accurate, more close to reality.

23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] With

24 respect to the age groups, these ranges that you

25 adopted, do they have any connection with the stages of

Page 3891

1 human development, that is to say, children,

2 adolescents, younger people, adults, the elderly,

3 something along those lines?

4 A. No. The standards we have discussed are only

5 to age -- adult individuals in a post-development time.

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I have

7 another question for you.

8 You compiled your report, and of course you

9 make a report in order to answer certain questions

10 posed. You don't do an academic report, but you do a

11 report according to the needs. Now, can you tell me

12 what the questions were that guided you, that the

13 people seeking answers asked you? That is to say, what

14 was the objective of your answers and response either

15 in the report itself or the research applied?

16 A. It primarily was to establish a demographic

17 profile of the population we were dealing with. So the

18 questions asked, basically, by the investigators would

19 be how old they are, how many they are, and what sex

20 they are. Other things have also been performed, such

21 as stature estimation. However, stature is something

22 less linked to the Prosecution than to humanitarian and

23 identification matters.

24 We have also been recording, in addition to

25 that, any other features; for example, if somebody may

Page 3892

1 have an old fracture or things of the kind that could

2 assist in the identification of these individuals. But

3 again those things are not part of the report primarily

4 because they are not pertinent to the matters we're

5 dealing with here.

6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We have

7 made a series of speculations, which is quite

8 acceptable in my mind if you have an expert witness, of

9 course. It is a little difficult to distinguish the

10 result of the observation and the opinion of the expert

11 himself, and entering into that realm, I should like to

12 ask you the following question.

13 We have already associated mechanical

14 resources used, and the smell, and possible disease.

15 Can we associate the use of mechanical resources to

16 rapidity, the need to be quick, and organisational

17 needs and requirements?

18 A. In my opinion, I think we can, and I'll give

19 you some examples.

20 In every -- take the issue of the lime or the

21 alleged lime, the white substance. At least on two

22 occasions, meaning the Glogova sites, the amount of it

23 has been far beyond what one person can actually

24 carry. A cubic metre is a substantial amount. So

25 again unless we have 1.000 people bring a small bag, it

Page 3893

1 has to be brought in a big lump and just left there.

2 The fact that some or many -- or the

3 majority, for that matter, of graves -- not the ones

4 that contained one person or two people -- were dug

5 mechanically and the fact that some of the bodies were

6 also collected, it seems, mechanically, I would say, in

7 my opinion, they are associated and involve definite

8 logistics, because by experience, from my own

9 operations, I know that it requires logistics to bring

10 a machine. Even for us to do the work, it involves

11 logistics. An element of time is definitely present,

12 because if I need to bury 33 people and I have a

13 shovel, it will take much longer than if I have a

14 mechanical excavator, and organisation, in a way,

15 because in my opinion I would need to know where to

16 dig. I don't want to go to a place where there's

17 already a grave and open it up and the bodies may have

18 been lying there for a week, and it will be very stinky

19 and very unpleasant. So those things, I think, are

20 linked.

21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you

22 very much, Mr. Baraybar. I think that you have

23 answered all our questions and queries from the Bench,

24 the Prosecution, and the Defence, and this concludes

25 your testimony, I think.

Page 3894

1 Mr. Cayley, I think we have some documents to

2 tender into evidence before the witness leaves the

3 courtroom.

4 MR. CAYLEY: Yes, Mr. President. If I could

5 apply for formal admission of Exhibit 220, which is the

6 curriculum vitae of Mr. Baraybar; Exhibit 224, which is

7 a photographic copy of a male pelvic bone; Exhibit 225,

8 which is the female pelvis; 226, which is the skull;

9 227, which is the calculation of the minimum number of

10 individuals; 229 is the same diagram but where it

11 involves a primary and secondary site; 230, which is

12 the table of age distribution for long bones; 231, a

13 table of age distribution of long bones; 232 is an

14 addendum to the anthropological report; 233 is the

15 anthropological report; 234 is the exhumation report,

16 and then the final exhibit is the sketch that

17 Mr. Baraybar did, which is Exhibit 161/2/A.

18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation]

19 Mr. Visnjic, any objections?

20 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] No,

21 Mr. President. None.

22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] These

23 documents have therefore been admitted.

24 Now we should like to thank you,

25 Mr. Baraybar, for coming here, for your cooperation

Page 3895

1 with international justice, and we wish you every

2 success in your future work. And unfortunately there

3 is always scope for that work.

4 The usher will now escort the witness out of

5 the courtroom.

6 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you

8 too.

9 [The witness withdrew]

10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Cayley,

11 what are we going to do now? We have a problem. We

12 have had two breaks. Perhaps it's a bit much to go on

13 until 2.30, and perhaps we could now have a quarter of

14 an hour break and then go on working until 2.30.

15 What do you have for us, Mr. Cayley?

16 MR. CAYLEY: We do have another witness for

17 the Court, Mr. President. We have a forensic

18 pathology, as you could probably predict. His

19 examination-in-chief will be longer than an hour; not

20 much longer than an hour, but certainly longer than an

21 hour.

22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] In that

23 case, perhaps I could ask the registrar to have the

24 witness brought in. We will have a 15-minute break,

25 and then we will resume with the witness's testimony.

Page 3896

1 --- Recess taken at 1.20 p.m.

2 --- On resuming at 1.37 p.m.

3 [The witness entered court]

4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think

5 that we have Dr. John Clark with us. Good afternoon.

6 You're going to read the solemn declaration, which the

7 usher is handing to you, please.

8 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will

9 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the

10 truth.


12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please be

13 seated. Dr. Clark, I think you are familiar with

14 proceedings in the courtroom, so I'm sure you will be

15 quite at ease. For the moment, you're going to answer

16 questions put to by Mr. Cayley.

17 Mr. Cayley, your witness.

18 MR. CAYLEY: Thank you, Mr. President.

19 Examined by Mr. Cayley:

20 Q. Dr. Clark, before we begin your evidence,

21 something that we have spoken about, you and I are both

22 speaking English.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Between us are banks of highly-skilled

25 interpreters, but because we speak the same language,

Page 3897

1 it makes their task more difficult. If you can speak

2 as slowly as you can, and I will try and regulate the

3 pace, and also if you can take a pause after my

4 question before you answer and I will do the same.

5 That will make life easier for everybody.

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Your name is John Clark; is that correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You were born on the 5th of September, 1951?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. You're British. You're a Scotsman, in fact.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. You've a bachelor's degree in medicine and

14 surgery from the University of Aberdeen?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. You are, by profession and specialisation, a

17 forensic pathologist?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Now, I think you've lectured in forensic

20 pathology at the Universities of Aberdeen, Sheffield,

21 and Glasgow, and you're currently teaching at the

22 University of Glasgow.

23 A. That is correct, yes.

24 Q. Am I right in saying that the University of

25 Glasgow has one of the major academic departments in

Page 3898

1 the United Kingdom on forensic pathology and certainly

2 the largest?

3 A. Yes, that's right.

4 Q. You're a fellow of the Royal College of

5 Pathologists; is that correct?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Could you explain to the Court what that

8 means.

9 A. Essentially, any doctor in the United Kingdom

10 wanting to qualify as a pathologist has to pass an

11 examination set by the Royal College of Pathologists.

12 So I have passed that. After a certain period of time,

13 one is made a fellow of the Royal College.

14 Q. Indeed I think you're now the chairman of the

15 panel of examiners of the Royal College of

16 Pathologists. Is that correct?

17 A. In the speciality of forensic pathology, yes.

18 Q. You're also the secretary of the British

19 Association of Forensic Medicine. Can you explain to

20 the Judges what that role entails?

21 A. That's a national association of forensic

22 pathologists. It includes just about all forensic

23 pathologists in the United Kingdom. We also have many

24 members from other countries. We meet, have academic

25 meetings twice a year and other activities, and I'm the

Page 3899

1 general secretary of that.

2 Q. Now, apart from your academic duties, can you

3 describe to the Judges your profession obligations,

4 like how many autopsies you perform every year, the

5 geographical extent of your forensic pathology

6 specialisation?

7 A. Carrying out post-mortems is, in fact, the

8 largest component of my work. I carry out probably

9 350 to 400 post-mortem examinations every year. That

10 is involving a very wide range of deaths, from natural

11 disease but including a substantial number of homicides

12 and other suspicious deaths.

13 My work involves working for the legal

14 authorities in a large part of Scotland, the main

15 population of Scotland in the Glasgow region, and

16 occasionally elsewhere.

17 Q. Now, for the sake of the public -- the Judges

18 are familiar with the type of work that you do -- what

19 is a pathologist, first of all?

20 A. A pathologist is a medical doctor who,

21 amongst other things, carries out post-mortem

22 examinations on people who have died to try and find

23 out why they have died. A forensic pathologist, in

24 particular, is someone who deals with people who have

25 died in suspicious or criminal circumstances.

Page 3900

1 Q. Apart from your work at the International

2 Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, where else

3 have you worked? And I'm speaking now in the

4 international context.

5 A. Well, I have substantial work with the

6 Tribunal both in Bosnia and in Croatia. I have also

7 carried out a post-mortem examination in Pakistan on a

8 chief of the army general staff, and last year I was

9 briefly in Kosovo carrying out post-mortem examinations

10 on two Albanians who had been allegedly shot by British

11 soldiers.

12 Q. Now, Dr. Clark, I'm not going to go through

13 the whole of your curriculum vitae. It speaks for

14 itself in terms of your work, your publications, and

15 indeed your international work. I would simply offer

16 it to the Court as Exhibit 235.

17 Now, I think I'm right in saying that you

18 worked on the Srebrenica investigation in connection

19 with your autopsy work as a pathologist in 1996; is

20 that right?

21 A. No, not in 1996, 1998 for the first time.

22 Q. Sorry, in 1998. And then you assisted as a

23 pathologist?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. In 1999, I think you were the chief

Page 3901

1 pathologist.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Now, you have in front of you, I think, your

4 report from that season. We'll be referring to it.

5 It's going to be Prosecutor's Exhibit 236. Do you have

6 a copy in front of you?

7 A. I do.

8 Q. Very briefly, because it's a matter that has

9 arisen before, who worked for you and with you in the

10 mortuary in the 1999 season?

11 A. It was quite a large team of individuals,

12 pathologists, anthropologists, technicians, a

13 radiographer, scenes-of-crime officers, and other

14 assistants. They were drawn from many different

15 countries of the world. In fact, we had nineteen

16 countries represented.

17 MR. CAYLEY: If Exhibit 238 could be placed

18 in front of the witness.

19 Q. Or, indeed, if you have it, Dr. Clark, with

20 you.

21 Sir, these represent a pretty good

22 cross-section of member states of the United Nations.

23 Staff were drawn from all of these countries who worked

24 with you?

25 A. Yes.

Page 3902

1 Q. And did that work well, Dr. Clark?

2 A. It worked very well. Obviously, everyone had

3 their own medical-legal backgrounds and were used to

4 carrying out examinations in different ways. But we

5 had a fairly common standard, and everything did work

6 very well.

7 Q. Now, if we can move on to the operation at

8 the mortuary, and if you could -- I know it's covered

9 in your report, but if you could describe firstly to

10 the Judges briefly how you received bodies and parts of

11 bodies into the mortuary.

12 A. Well, I think the bulk of the evidence you've

13 heard so far has been related to the grave sites. The

14 bodies were removed from the graves and put in

15 individual body bags. These were then stored in a

16 refrigerator at the site. Regularly, that refrigerator

17 was brought down to the mortuary. The bodies were

18 transferred from it into a large refrigerated room in

19 the mortuary. This was all carefully logged, and the

20 bodies were stored in the room until the post-mortem

21 examination.

22 Q. To your knowledge, and if you're aware, was

23 the chain of custody or evidence in respect to the

24 bodies closely monitored by members of the staff?

25 A. Yes, including myself. We all took part in

Page 3903

1 that.

2 Q. If you could explain briefly to the Judges

3 how the mortuary operated, so the process that you went

4 through, and the pathologists that worked for you, in

5 actually examining the body and making a report on the

6 cause of death.

7 A. Briefly, the body would be removed from the

8 refrigerator and the numbers logged on various

9 worksheets.

10 The first step in examination was to

11 fluoroscope the body. This is a form of X-ray which

12 just scans over the whole body and is looking for

13 fragments of metal and particularly bullets. This has

14 two uses. It indicates that there are bullets present

15 in the body, which is -- and we can make a permanent

16 record of that on a printout, and secondly it assists

17 us knowing exactly where it is in the examination, and

18 we can then find it all the more easily. That's the

19 first step.

20 Then the bodies are taken to the examination

21 tables themselves, and various procedures are then

22 carried out, including photography, both at the start

23 and during the examinations. We removed the clothing,

24 and this was washed -- subsequently washed, and we

25 described it in detail later on. We removed any

Page 3904

1 blindfolds or ligatures on the body. We looked for any

2 possessions or any other identifying items such as

3 documents, jewellery, etc.

4 Then the main part of the examination, from

5 the point of view of the pathologist, was to examine

6 the body for various things, its state of preservation,

7 any parts missing, identifying features like hair

8 colour present, height, any old injuries, age, et

9 cetera. Then particularly we looked for injuries on

10 the body and made a careful record of these, and also

11 looked for any natural disease which was present.

12 In doing all this, we retrieved bullets and

13 any bullet fragments, and these were handed to the

14 scenes-of-crime officers, and we collected various

15 samples particularly for future DNA testing.

16 We were assisted in the work by technicians

17 and particularly by anthropologists, and they helped us

18 to establish identifying features like age, height,

19 sex, and also assisted in reconstructing bones and

20 interpretation of injuries.

21 And the final thing that we, as pathologists,

22 did was to look at the clothing again after it had been

23 washed.

24 This was all recorded on to a pro forma, a

25 post-mortem report form, so each pathologist completed

Page 3905

1 that in longhand and it was subsequently typed up into

2 a final autopsy report.

3 Q. Can you just place on the ELMO Exhibit 237.

4 Now, this is an example of an autopsy report that you

5 completed. We'll talk about it in more detail when we

6 come to the relevant site.

7 Did you review all of the autopsy reports

8 that were produced by pathologists working with you?

9 A. Yes. I should perhaps just say, because this

10 doesn't look particularly impressive -- there's a lot

11 of scoring out -- this is the rough copy which we

12 completed, and it comprises about eight or nine pages.

13 It's recording all the details, et cetera. And then

14 the final report typed up is what you see on the front

15 page, two- or three-page report. So that's how it ends

16 up. At the end of the season, I went through all the

17 reports and extracted various bits of information and

18 analysed them and put them into this final report,

19 which is presented here.

20 Q. So essentially your report is a comprehensive

21 summary of all of the autopsy reports from the 1999

22 season?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Now, Dr. Clark, in your report, you address

25 the limitations of pathology evidence in this type of

Page 3906

1 case, and I wonder if you could explain to the Judges

2 what those limitations are in a case such as this.

3 A. Obviously, we were not dealing with ideal

4 conditions and ideal bodies; certainly not the sort of

5 bodies that we, as pathologists, normally deal with.

6 Primarily, this was because these were bodies which had

7 been dead for a number of years, had decomposed very

8 badly, and had been disrupted for various reasons. So

9 that made things difficult, for a start.

10 If I can just concentrate on perhaps four

11 specific areas of difficulty and how we approached

12 them. The first one was actually recognising that

13 something that we found was an injury and that it was

14 an injury caused in life.

15 In a person who's died recently, when we

16 examine the body looking for injuries, we can tell that

17 injuries happened in life because of various reactions;

18 bleeding, swelling, bruising, et cetera, on the body.

19 And that allows us to say that that is an ante-mortem

20 injury. Clearly, when a body is decomposed or there

21 are no tissues left at all, then we don't have that

22 evidence. And in the vast majority of cases here, all

23 we were left with was the skeleton and just injuries to

24 bone.

25 Now, an injury to bone will look exactly the

Page 3907

1 same if it's caused before death as it is caused after

2 death, and it is really only by looking at these other

3 things like bruising and bleeding, et cetera, that we

4 can be sure that that is caused in life. So,

5 theoretically, given that these bodies were almost all

6 skeletonised, we could not 100 per cent say that any of

7 these injuries occurred in life. But we had to be

8 rather sensible about this. These bodies had huge

9 numbers of gunshot injuries, and if we were to suggest

10 that all these injuries occurred after death, then

11 we're suggesting that all these people died in some

12 obscure way that we had not detected and also that they

13 had been shot afterwards, systematically shot after

14 death.

15 So on that basis, finding that unbelievable,

16 we adopted the position that any injuries suggestive of

17 gunshot damage, we assumed, with the occasional

18 exception, we assumed had occurred in life.

19 The second area was that we knew that there

20 was damage -- there would have been damage to the

21 bodies, injuries to the bodies after death. This is

22 because these bodies were, a large number of them,

23 lumped in a grave, piled on top of each other. You

24 will get crushing effect. There may also have been

25 vehicles on top of the grave compacting the bodies. So

Page 3908

1 it was to be expected that we would find injuries

2 caused after death.

3 We could usually recognise for what they

4 were, because the sort of injuries we would expect

5 would be crushing injuries of the ribs, which are the

6 most brittle bones. Crushing injuries of the pelvis

7 because it splits open under pressure. And indeed many

8 of the bodies did have injuries like this. So we

9 interpreted these injuries as having occurred after

10 death. That may have meant that we missed genuine

11 injuries, blunt-force injuries, but we just had to

12 accept that. So we interpreted this crushing type of

13 injuries of the chest and pelvis as having occurred

14 after death.

15 The third area, and I'll be brief, given the

16 bulk of the evidence here, was gunshot injuries, how

17 did we prove that a particular damage to a bone was a

18 gunshot injury and not something else. And we worked

19 on varying levels of certainty that this was gunshot

20 damage. Clearly if there was a very typical bullet

21 entrance in the bone, that was classic evidence of a

22 gunshot injury, entrance and exit perhaps.

23 Alternatively, we may just have had a very

24 fragmented piece of bone. That, again, highly typical

25 of gunshot damage, high-velocity gunshot damage, and it

Page 3909

1 may have been backed up by finding, perhaps, some

2 bullet fragments with it.

3 The third proof of gunshot damage may have

4 been that we actually found a bullet or part of a

5 bullet in tissues in the body, and that, again, clearly

6 is proof that there's been a shot to the body.

7 Without that, without any of these three

8 categories, although we perhaps might suspect that a

9 particular injury was gunshot damage, we didn't call it

10 that because we didn't have the full proof it. So

11 again, we may well have underestimated the number of

12 gunshot injuries to the body.

13 The fourth area of limitation in our evidence

14 is accepting what is and what isn't a cause of death.

15 This was proving that a particular injury to the body

16 necessarily killed the person, because again, we're

17 left -- we just have the skeleton to deal with. People

18 don't die because of damage to the skeleton. You die

19 of the damage to the associated tissues round about,

20 the damage to the organs, to the blood vessels, et

21 cetera.

22 With decomposed bodies that evidence is gone,

23 so we're left just to speculate as to what damage there

24 would have been or there possibly could have been based

25 on what we found on the bones.

Page 3910

1 Now, I think it's reasonable to suggest that

2 a bullet going through somebody's skull is also going

3 to go through their brain. You don't die of the damage

4 to the skull, you die of the damage to the brain, but

5 we felt it was reasonable to assume that that would --

6 that there would have been damage, fatal damage, to the

7 brain.

8 Similarly, a bullet striking the chest, I

9 think that it's safe to assume that that would have

10 caused fatal damage to the major organs as blood

11 vessels in the chest, and it is highly likely that one

12 or more of them would have been damaged.

13 The difficulty came when all we had was

14 perhaps an injury to an arm or a leg, a gunshot injury

15 to the arm or leg. An injury like that would not

16 necessarily be fatal. It could be if it damaged a

17 large blood vessel in the leg, the person may bleed to

18 death, but we could not prove that. These are

19 potentially survivable injuries. So if that was the

20 only injuries we found on the body, by and large we

21 felt that we cannot, in all honesty, say that that was

22 necessarily the cause of death, so we tended to leave

23 these causes of death unascertained.

24 Q. Now, Dr. Clark, even taking into account all

25 of these limitations that you rightfully identify, how

Page 3911

1 did the vast majority of these people die, in your

2 professional opinion?

3 A. The vast majority died of gunshot injuries.

4 Q. If you could place Exhibit 195 onto the

5 overhead projector. That's correct. That's the one.

6 Just to orient the Court and the public, what

7 is represented by the orange shading on these

8 particular sites?

9 A. That is the grave site I was involved in. So

10 the main one was Kozluk, Nova Kasaba, the two Konjevic

11 Polje graves, and finally Glogova.

12 Q. And these are the sites on which you acted as

13 the chief pathologist.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Now, if we could move now to Kozluk, and you

16 might wish to turn to the relevant page in your report

17 to assist your recollection, how many whole or largely

18 complete bodies did you examine from this site?

19 A. We found 292 whole or largely complete

20 bodies, and there were an additional 233 body parts.

21 By "body parts," I'm meaning what it says really, part

22 of a body but perhaps a forearm or some leg bones or a

23 few ribs. Just a fairly small part of the body.

24 Q. I think the figure of 292 actually represents

25 the number of people that were originally in that

Page 3912

1 grave.

2 A. No. I'm sure there were more individuals,

3 yes. Two hundred and ninety-two is certainly a minimum

4 number, and most of my calculations are based on the

5 292, because it's only with the largely complete bodies

6 that one can make reasonable interpretations.

7 Q. Indeed, the anthropological conclusions on

8 the number of individuals would be different from the

9 figures that you have here, because you are the

10 pathologist dealing with bodies essentially?

11 A. Our main remit was to look, to examine the

12 bodies for injuries rather than count the numbers.

13 Q. The people that you examined from Kozluk, in

14 life what kind of people were they?

15 A. Well, we know that they ranged widely in age,

16 potentially from as young as 8 to potentially as old as

17 85. In Kozluk, the bulk of the people were over 25,

18 and as far as we could determine, all were male. They

19 were not a uniformly fit group of people, and a

20 significant number had physical disabilities or some

21 evidence of chronic disease.

22 For instance, and it's on --

23 Q. It's Prosecutor's Exhibit 239 is that

24 photograph, Dr. Clark.

25 A. This is a photograph of somebody's elbow

Page 3913

1 joint, upper arm here and forearm here. Now, the elbow

2 joint, as we all know, normally moves. This person is

3 completely rigid. The bones are just joined, fused

4 together, no movement whatsoever. This person would

5 have had a fixed -- fixed elbow joint.

6 Similarly, one man had a completely fused

7 knee joint. The two bones at the knee joint are just

8 stuck together. Whether that's from an old injury or

9 from disease it was difficult to say, but, undoubtedly,

10 he would have walked with a completely straight leg.

11 He wouldn't have been able to bend it.

12 MR. CAYLEY: And the witness, for the

13 purposes of the record, is referring to Exhibit 240.

14 A. There were other people. Somebody had a

15 glass eye. One man had a big plate inside his skull.

16 He'd obviously had previous surgery. Somebody had

17 evidence of open-heart surgery, coronary artery bypass

18 surgery. Several had old fracture -- bony fractures.

19 One man had an inhaler, Celbutimol [phoen] inhaler for

20 asthma and there were a number of other deformities and

21 illnesses.

22 Q. What other items did you find on the bodies

23 that you examined, Dr. Clark?

24 A. We found various personal possessions, simple

25 things, spectacles, cigarettes, cigarette lighters,

Page 3914

1 some documents, money, and various other items.

2 Q. If you could place Exhibit 241 onto the ELMO,

3 which is the next exhibit that you have in front of

4 you.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Can you describe to the Judges what this

7 represents, this photograph?

8 A. We found a significant number of the

9 individuals had blindfolds around their heads; and

10 more, even more had ligatures around their hands; and

11 some had both.

12 This is an example of somebody with a

13 blindfold. It's a skull. You can see the nose here,

14 the eye sockets here and here, and this cloth blindfold

15 tied around the head.

16 Q. What percentage of the bodies that were

17 examined by you and your team had blindfolds?

18 A. We found them in 44 individuals. That's

19 about 13 per cent of cases.

20 Q. Now, you also mentioned that a number of the

21 bodies had ligatures. And if you could place on the

22 ELMO the next Exhibit, which is 242.

23 What comments do you have about this

24 photograph, Dr. Clark?

25 A. Well, we found ligatures in 140 people.

Page 3915

1 That's 41 per cent of cases. This is an example,

2 typical example of a ligature. It's a bit of cloth

3 which has been tied, it looks around both wrists and

4 tied in the middle there. We found the ligatures of

5 two materials. The bulk were cloth which was all of

6 the same material, strips of cloth all cut from the

7 same material. Some people also had or instead had

8 string, sort of twine binding the wrists together, and

9 some people had both types.

10 Apart from one man, everyone had their hands

11 tied behind their backs. This one man had his hands

12 tied in front of him.

13 Q. Now, Dr. Clark, you stated earlier that the

14 vast majority of the bodies that were examined by you

15 and your team had gunshot injuries. What proportion of

16 the bodies at Kozluk had gunshot injuries?

17 A. We found definite gunshot injury in 89 per

18 cent of the victims.

19 Q. And could you establish from where those

20 individuals, from which direction those individuals had

21 been shot?

22 A. We could establish, in a certain proportion

23 of cases, which direction they had been shot in, and

24 particularly in looking at injuries to the head and the

25 trunk. And looking at that, we found most often people

Page 3916

1 had been shot from behind, then a significant number

2 from the front, some from the side and some from the

3 top, but mostly from behind. Having said that, in a

4 substantial number of cases we could not tell the

5 direction.

6 Q. Now, if you could place the next exhibit,

7 which is 243, and if you could explain to the Judges

8 what is represented in this photograph.

9 A. This is a very typical gunshot injury,

10 typical of many that we found. It's a gunshot injury

11 to the side of the skull. This is the front of the

12 skull, the eye socket here, the cheekbone going back

13 here, and the ear sits roundabout here. So this is a

14 gunshot injury. When one has a circular hole in the

15 skull, it is an entry hole. It has caused tremendous

16 structuring of the skull, these various lines you can

17 see going over here and up at the top. The skull has

18 been stuck together, glued back together again to

19 reconstruct it, but a typical gunshot injury.

20 Q. Could you and your colleagues establish the

21 type of weapon that had been used to create these

22 gunshot injuries?

23 A. To our view, all these injuries were typical

24 of high-velocity rifle weapons. We based that both on

25 the extent of the damage, the fragmentation of the

Page 3917

1 bones, and also by the finding of typical high-velocity

2 rifle bullets in the bodies.

3 Q. To give you an example of a high-velocity

4 weapon here, we're talking about military assault

5 weapons such as AK-47s or their variants?

6 A. Yes, that's right.

7 Q. What was the average number of shots per body

8 where you could actually identify that somebody had

9 been killed by gunshot injury?

10 A. In Kozluk, it was 2.3, so people had been

11 shot, on average, between two to three times.

12 Q. Were you able to establish in any cases that

13 people had been injured by something other than gunshot

14 prior to death?

15 A. We found two people with bandages along with

16 the skeleton, which did suggest previous injuries,

17 probably soft-tissue injuries. One of these was on

18 somebody's hand and one was on their legs.

19 Q. Was there any other evidence -- and I know

20 you've already stated that there are certain

21 limitations in this field -- of blunt-force injury to

22 any of the bodies that you saw?

23 A. Yes. Even allowing for these limitations and

24 expectation of crushing injuries in the grave, we found

25 some people with fractures of the face and the shoulder

Page 3918

1 blades, which did not really fit well with post-mortem

2 injuries, and they could well have been caused by

3 blunt-force kicking or blows from a weapon in life.

4 Q. If Exhibit 244, the next exhibit, could be

5 placed onto the ELMO. Could you explain to the Judges

6 what is represented on this exhibit?

7 A. Well, this is an interesting case. This is

8 the man, the same man who had the rigid leg, which I

9 showed you earlier, and who would have walked

10 undoubtedly with a limp with a very straight leg. He

11 only had one injury on his body, and that was a gunshot

12 wound to his other foot. Now, this was a relatively

13 intact body with all parts present and with the skin

14 still present, so we could say fairly surely that this

15 was the -- this appeared to be the only gunshot injury

16 on the body, and we would not say that he died from

17 that. It would be unusual for somebody to die from a

18 single gunshot wound to the foot. We could not find

19 out why he died, and one could only speculate as to

20 what may have happened.

21 Q. Is it possible, in your opinion, that he may

22 have been placed alive into the grave?

23 A. I think that's entirely possible.

24 Q. How would he have died in those

25 circumstances?

Page 3919

1 A. He would -- he could have died eventually

2 from blood loss, although it would take some time. He

3 could have died, if he was in the grave, from crushing,

4 suffocation under other bodies or other material.

5 Alternatively, he could have been killed in other ways

6 which we would not detect at post-mortem. Any cutting

7 injuries, perhaps stabbing or cutting throats, would be

8 difficult for us to see post-mortem.

9 Q. If now, Dr. Clark, you could place

10 Prosecutor's Exhibit 245, which is actually two

11 exhibits, first of all the photograph, and there's a

12 larger version of that next to you.

13 MR. CAYLEY: This is an exhibit, Your

14 Honours, that was previously addressed by Professor

15 Wright.

16 Q. Now, Dr. Clark, were you able to identify the

17 autopsy reports in respect of each one of these

18 numbered bodies in this grave?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. If you could go through each one, and if it's

21 possible -- I know you've done a little sketch which --

22 would it be easier for you to have that in front of

23 you?

24 A. Yes. I have it, yes.

25 Q. I think the bodies are numbered, so I think

Page 3920

1 it's quite clear if you just keep the paper in front of

2 you.

3 A. Yes. We're really speaking about these five

4 bodies here, here, here, here, and here. And if I deal

5 with them from right to left, it was interesting just

6 generally that these were all young men. No one was

7 over the age of 35, in our estimate, and some perhaps

8 as young as 12. So the age range in all of them was 12

9 to 35.

10 This one at the end, 65, he was found face

11 down, and he had a probable single gunshot wound to the

12 back of his neck, or to his neck, rather.

13 Number 61, he was found with a ligature

14 partly around his wrists. He had three gunshot

15 injuries, one to the back of the head and two to the

16 legs.

17 Body 81, he had no obvious bony injuries, but

18 we did find a bullet inside his ribcage, with staining

19 of the bone, suggesting that the bullet had been

20 genuinely lying there. And the pathologist felt that

21 that was sufficient evidence to suggest that he died of

22 a gunshot wound of the chest.

23 Number 82 had two gunshot injuries, one to

24 the upper chest and one to his left leg. The cause of

25 death there was felt to be a gunshot wound to the

Page 3921

1 chest.

2 And finally to body 83, the one lying along

3 the way, he had a single gunshot injury to the front of

4 his left arm. This was one of these cases in which the

5 pathologist felt he could not justifiably say that that

6 was the cause of death and left the cause as

7 unascertained.

8 Q. Dr. Clark, the autopsy report that we

9 previously put into evidence is, in fact, from the

10 Kozluk site. Is there anything that you would wish to

11 add from that report or there is nothing in it that --

12 A. No, it is a very typical example. I chose it

13 because it was fairly untypical -- because it was

14 typical, and there is nothing really more to say.

15 Q. If you could place page 12 of your report

16 onto the ELMO, and this is really for the benefit of

17 the public as well, and this gives quite a neat summary

18 of your findings.

19 A. I don't know if that's in focus or not.

20 Q. Yes, that can be clearly seen. Do you have

21 any particular comments on that summary?

22 A. No. I'll read it, if you wish.

23 MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, would you like it

24 read?

25 Q. If you could read out your summary of

Page 3922

1 findings.

2 A. It's a summary of findings from Kozluk. It's

3 a very large grave site. It had been extensively

4 robbed, but it still contained 292 bodies and 233 body

5 parts.

6 All the victims were apparently male, mostly

7 over the age of 25. Several had old injuries,

8 disabilities, and chronic disease. Blindfolds were

9 found in 13 per cent of bodies, and ligatures in 41

10 per cent. Eighty-nine per cent of the victims had

11 gunshot injuries, most having been shot either once or

12 twice, but some as many as seven times. The largest

13 number of shots were to the trunk, with the head and

14 legs next, although the commonest final cause of death

15 was gunshot injuries to the head.

16 There were bandaged wounds on two people,

17 suggestive of injuries suffered sometime earlier.

18 There was extensive cutting out, in fact, in many

19 bodies and parts missing. This is the post-mortem

20 damage we spoke about.

21 And the cause of death remained unascertained

22 in a substantial number of people. Some clearly died

23 from causes other than gunshot wounds.

24 Q. Dr. Clark, you're using a lot of medical

25 terminology, and I wonder, for the sake of the public

Page 3923

1 gallery, could you explain what you mean by

2 "post-mortem", "ante-mortem", and "pari-mortem"?

3 A. I use only two terms, "post-mortem" and

4 "ante-mortem". Others still use "pari-mortem".

5 "Post-mortem" remains anything occurring after death.

6 "Ante-mortem" is anything occurring before death.

7 MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, we're now going

8 to move to a new site, so I don't know if you want me

9 to continue -- I know the interpreters have been

10 working very hard -- or whether you wish to conclude at

11 this point. It is entirely up to you.

12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. I

13 think it is preferable, for it's almost 2.30, so it

14 would be a better idea to resume tomorrow so as to not

15 interrupt the sequence of the testimony. Therefore,

16 Dr. Clark, we expect you to come again tomorrow,

17 please.

18 So we'll be here tomorrow at 9.30.

19 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at

20 2.26 p.m., to be reconvened on

21 Wednesday, the 31st day of May, 2000,

22 at 9.30 a.m.