Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 37910

 1                           Tuesday, 18 August 2015

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.34 a.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone in and around this

 6     courtroom.

 7             Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  This is case

 9     IT-09-92-T, The Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

11             No preliminaries were announced.  We're waiting for the witness

12     to be escorted in the courtroom.

13                           [The witness takes the stand]

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning, Mr. Dosenovic.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we continue, I'd like to remind you again

17     that you are still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the

18     beginning of your testimony.  Do you hear me well?

19             THE WITNESS:  My paper.  My book.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  That's your report --

21             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  -- in hard copy.

23             Mr. McCloskey, if you're ready, please proceed.

24             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Thank you and good morning, every one.

25                           WITNESS:  MILE DOSENOVIC [Resumed]

Page 37911

 1                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

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

 3        Q.   Good morning, sir.

 4        A.   Good morning sir, to you too.

 5        Q.   And how are you this morning?

 6        A.   Excellent.

 7        Q.   I just want to go back briefly to what's been MFI'd as P7503.

 8     And, sir, that -- you'll remember from yesterday that we showed you a

 9     document and there was some discussion on whether or not it was a

10     teletype and whether it had the complete order on it or not.  And we had

11     the original of that, that we received from the Drina Corps collection

12     which I'd like you to take a look at.  I had a chance to go over that a

13     bit with Mr. Ivetic this morning.

14             But there's the first page of the document and we might as well

15     go to the last page.  I think we'll recall that that was the part that

16     there was some things that appeared to be missing from the other

17     document, the signed version of this, if everyone remembers.

18             And I think if you look at the last part of that, you can see

19     that it looks like the keys have typed away for the last couple of lines,

20     but for some reason it doesn't look like there was ink on it.  Is that

21     what it looks like to you?

22             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Could we go to the page 3 of this document so

23     that -- we can see what we're talking about on the screen.

24        Q.   And, for the record, it was yesterday at page transcripts 37882

25     that you thought that this was a typewriter.

Page 37912

 1             In any event now that you've had a chance to look at that, what's

 2     your view?  Is this a teletype?

 3        A.   I still maintain that this is typewritten and it seems the tape

 4     had run out or was -- or has faded, the ribbon has faded.  And it says

 5     Milovanovic in the signature, and it was transmitted via communications

 6     that it was SR, which means signed personally, so there must be a

 7     handwritten document somewhere in the archives.  I cannot say anything

 8     about the content because that's not my area of competence.

 9        Q.   Okay.  On that point, you remember you rightfully pointed out us

10     that the first document I showed you had a signature on it and,

11     therefore, would not have been sent over the teletype.  So that's the

12     original you were speaking of; correct?

13        A.   No, I cannot relate these two documents in any way.  I would have

14     had to have both of them in front of me to see.

15        Q.   All right.  I'm not sure we need to do that.

16             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Your Honours, are you at all interested in seeing

17     the original?

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, perhaps it's good to see it.  You mean the

19     original of this one?  Yes, I'd like to have a look at it.

20             And could the witness explain why he is convinced that it's

21     typewritten and not teleprinted?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Teletype machines do not use

23     ribbons, the modern ones used in the VRS; and typewriters do use a

24     ribbon.  That's the difference.  And based on that, I see that this was

25     typewritten.

Page 37913

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  May I put the following to you:  If a typist sees

 2     that what he types doesn't appear due to a lack of a ribbon or whatever,

 3     would that person using a typewriter, would they continue for lines and

 4     lines to type without anything appearing on paper?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm convinced that the operator of

 6     the teletype, when receiving, would have noticed it and then he would

 7     have replaced the ribbon, so I don't understand, regardless of whether it

 8     was a telegraph -- a typewriter or a teletype.  I have no explanation.

 9             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  And how do you explain that this piece of paper

10     bears an original stamp with some handwritten entries?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, that lends a very strange

12     aspect to this document.  And the person placing the stamp would --

13     should be the chief of -- the chief of clerks or somebody like that.

14     It's strange that this stamp is here.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Does the stamp indicate, as far as you're concerned,

16     that this message was sent?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this is a received

18     document.  So, de facto, according to the stamp, it was received.  You

19     see the initials of the person who signed for the receipt.  We could

20     probably find that person based on the initials.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  And now is it your position interpreting that

22     someone received this text and typed that out and that it was not more or

23     less automatically put on paper by a machine?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I cannot give you any

25     comment.  Both the operator and the chief of clerks would notice that

Page 37914

 1     something is not right with this document.  I have -- I cannot explain

 2     it.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Only one question in addition to that.

 5             You said it was received, that is what we can see from the stamp;

 6     that's correct.  Received by whom?  Was it on the sender or receiver side

 7     of the transmitter system?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it's obvious that

 9     this is on the part of the receiving party.

10             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  What makes you certain about that assumption?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's not my assumption.  I see it

12     on the stamp.  It says "received," and logically that means that it was

13     done or stamped by the receiving party and there should be the stamp, the

14     signature we here should be the signature of the person who received it.

15     We see "Manojlo Milovanovic," but there is no rank.  We don't see an

16     indication of whether he signed it or not.  So the fact is that this is

17     on the side of the receiving party.

18             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  What makes you believe that's no rank in the badly

20     legible part?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Neither below nor above the

22     lettering where we see "OJLO" - because the beginning of that word is

23     punched through - there is no trace that anything else was omitted as the

24     other few lines were omitted.  Maybe the tape -- the ribbon had

25     completely run out.  But how could that be if it managed to type

Page 37915

 1     Manojlo Milovanovic and not the rest of the lines if they had been

 2     present?

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  The parties are invited to look at the original,

 4     whether the word "Potpukovnik" ^ is appearing.  That's one.

 5             Second -- now, if something is typewritten and it runs out of

 6     ribbon, when restarting or when typing legible text again, you would

 7     start where it became illegible and do it again, wouldn't you?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If the operator should notice that

 9     the ribbon is not useable anymore and if he were a professional at

10     typing, looking at the text, he would not be looking at the machine and

11     the paper he is typing on.  That could be an explanation.  And if he then

12     saw there was no writing and then changed something to the signature,

13     that, I could find no explanation for that.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  A person typing a text would resume at the spot

15     where the ink is running out and therefore complete the text; whereas, a

16     machine can't resume, can't repeat what is done already.  Would you agree

17     with that or would you have any comment on what I just said?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If he should notice that he could

19     go back to the line that was not well typed, if it were a person, but,

20     still, you would -- it would be noticeable that the operator had gone

21     back on the typewriter.  But just more likely is the scenario that he

22     would take the whole paper out and re-type the whole thing again.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But a machine couldn't type down again what

24     was lost meanwhile, isn't it?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, electrical typewriters could

Page 37916

 1     not do that.  At least I haven't seen electrical typewriters with a

 2     memory.  If they existed, I know that they were not used at that time.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  My -- you may have misunderstood my question.  I

 4     compared a person typing a text with a tele-writing machine, which

 5     receives signals and puts it on text.  Once a portion is lost there, the

 6     machine can't go back and repeat what is missing, isn't it.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, a machine cannot do

 8     that alone.  However, teletype machines also have a ribbon that goes

 9     along with the paper and it's perforated and if something is amiss, it

10     turns the perforated ribbon or tape back and re-types what was missing;

11     whereas, a machine cannot do that alone.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. McCloskey, please proceed.  The original will be

13     returned.

14             MR. McCLOSKEY:

15        Q.   Sir, you know, and -- does a -- the teletype machine used by the

16     VRS have an ink ribbon or not?

17        A.   Teletype machines used by the Army of Republika Srpska did not

18     have ribbons.  Some old teleprinters received a long time back from the

19     US had them, but those were obsolete even then.  They were not in use,

20     especially none with this font.

21        Q.   So you're the chief of communications, you would have seen the

22     teletype machines and the teletype paper.  Do you remember the name of

23     one of the machines that was in common use at the time as an ETL-1?

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You said -- yes, thank you.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I remember.

Page 37917

 1             MR. McCLOSKEY:

 2        Q.   Well, sir, maybe you'll remember that and this court has heard

 3     with Mr. Jevdjevic, as a matter of fact, who went over several teletyped

 4     intercepts and the Court has seen a very unique narrow printer that comes

 5     out of a teletype, an ETL-1.  There's another printer that the

 6     Drina Corps had that they went over with Jevdjevic and it was a bit

 7     wider.  And they've also seen typed documents from the Rogatica Brigade

 8     which was regular typing size paper, A4.  So, and we don't need to worry

 9     too much about this, but just think back, this is the narrow teletype

10     printer from an ETL and an ETL that uses ribbon, as I'm showing you in my

11     right hand, that we just pulled out of our ETL upstairs.

12             So just think back.  This -- this is a teleprinter; right?  This

13     is a teleprinter document?

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you allow for the possibility that it's from a

15     teleprinter, Witness?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that is a teleprinter

17     ribbon, 160 millimetres.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  The question was a different one.  Do you allow that

19     the original you just had in your hands comes from a teleprinter, yes or

20     no?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  [Previous translation continues] ... thank you.

23             Please proceed, Mr. McCloskey.

24             MR. McCLOSKEY:  And just for the record we have an image of the

25     ribbon that we'll -- so we can have the record clear.

Page 37918

 1        Q.   All right.  Let's go to another topic, the last topic we

 2     mentioned --

 3             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. McCloskey, the document was MFI'd.  Are you

 4     tendering it?

 5             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yeah, I think it was MFI'd because of the issues

 6     yesterday.

 7             MR. IVETIC:  It was MFI'd because of a lack of a translation,

 8     counsel.

 9             MR. McCLOSKEY:  And, yes, and we were going to work out the last

10     part so I guess we need to get it --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  May I take it that having looked now at the original

12     that the party also be able or find someone a technician who is able to

13     also reproduce the text where apparently the ink is missing but where the

14     imprint is pretty clear could be reproduced so as to compare the whole of

15     the document with the other version.

16             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes.  Mr. President, we have a person that is

17     very good at that, who will be back soon and we'll get that sorted out.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

19             MR. McCLOSKEY:

20        Q.   Last topic.  You remember I asked you a bit about Ljubisa Beara

21     yesterday and you answered you knew who he was.  And I want to take you

22     back to 1994 and 1995.  I know that's a long time to remember, but do you

23     remember Ljubisa Beara sending out a document that went to your corps

24     where he was rather concerned about the sloppy radio communications over

25     the air, and also attached to that document an intercepted conversation

Page 37919

 1     that his -- that the -- that the Intel Department of The VRS had actually

 2     intercepted from VRS communications and he used it as an example of what

 3     not to do.  Do you remember that rather unique situation?

 4        A.   Sir, I don't remember.  Maybe it reached the corps command, but I

 5     was often on field missions in the so-called IKMs, forward command posts

 6     of brigades at the foremost front line, spending a few days there on each

 7     stint.  I -- I don't think I've seen it.  I just don't remember such a

 8     document.

 9        Q.   And I correct myself.  It was actually sent to the security

10     Department of Your -- of the 2nd Krajina Corps, so you may have heard it

11     from your own security officer.

12        A.   Sir, the chief has a department for intelligence and security and

13     then he has an assistant chief for security and another assistant chief

14     for intelligence.  So I don't know which one was involved here.  And they

15     usually do not present documents that they receive to others.

16        Q.   Okay.  Let's look at 65 ter 25184, and that's the document that

17     Naval Captain or Colonel, as we know, Ljubisa Beara sent out to the

18     security units, the corps.  And I won't read it all, but as we -- wait

19     until that English comes up.  We'll see that it's from the Main Staff.

20     And let's just flip over to the second page in English so we can confirm

21     that I've got my people right.  Yeah, there's Naval Captain Beara.  Okay,

22     so let's go back to the first page, and let's see the bottom of the

23     Serbian so that we can see... sorry.  We must need to go to the second --

24     the second page of the Serbian.

25             Yeah, there's Mr. Beara.

Page 37920

 1             Okay.  So going back to the first page of the Serbian.  And we

 2     see that just in that first paragraph, he says:  "As everyone is aware

 3     and since the Main Staff ... and lower commands have point the out many

 4     times, military secrets are constantly being leaked via communications

 5     equipment (radio relay devices and radio stations)."

 6             Then he talks about operations to take away some of these smaller

 7     radios that were a problem.  And then he talks about, in the third

 8     paragraph, that they've learned from electric -- excuse me, electronic

 9     reconnaissance.

10             And this is a -- he's referring to a VRS communication here,

11     isn't he?

12        A.   Electronic surveillance by the enemy vis-à-vis the Army of

13     Republika Srpska.

14        Q.   Well, he says here in the last sentence:  "We have learned only

15     by accident about the negligence in the use of our communications."

16             Then he says:  "Here is the latest example of careless use of

17     communications equipment."  And then he gives a segment - and we can go

18     to the next page in English - of a conversation on the 29th of

19     August between a certain Djukic from the Ozren Tactical Group to his

20     superior and it's mentioning Kelecevic.

21             Do you know who a Kelecevic was perhaps from the Ozren Tactical

22     Group or from Doboj, the --

23        A.   I know many Kelecevics in war.  I know that the Chief of Staff of

24     the 1st Krajina Corps was a Kelecevic.  Now whether he is the person

25     meant here or some other Kelecevic, I cannot tell on the basis of this.

Page 37921

 1        Q.   Well --

 2             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. McCloskey, where can I find the name

 3     Kelecevic?

 4             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I'm sorry, we have to go back to the first page.

 5             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.  I see it now.

 6             MR. McCLOSKEY:  All right.  And if we --

 7        Q.   So we see here what -- what Colonel Beara is -- is doing, and if

 8     we try to remember a bit about this conversation, I want to show you now

 9     65 ter 32091.

10             And, sir, what you're seeing here is a handwritten notebook of

11     intercept operations of a group of Bosnian army intercept operators from

12     an area called Tesanj.  And this is -- I have another document that shows

13     that this is it from August 29th, and we see that it's at 1145 hours.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  August 29th of what year, Mr. McCloskey?

15             MR. McCLOSKEY:  That is 1995.

16             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

17             MR. McCLOSKEY:

18        Q.   And -- well, the time is slightly different than the other one

19     that I said.  If we look at this, we see that Kelecevic is mentioned.

20     And if we go to the next page, and if we compare the intercepts in the

21     Beara document and the text on this intercept minus the part that is in

22     brackets here, which is apparently another conversation that came in

23     between the main one, we'll see that it's the same conversation.  And if

24     we go back to the front page of this document, we see that it's 762.  And

25     that would be a reference to the frequency of a RRU-800; correct?

Page 37922

 1             We need the first page of the -- excuse me.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  I've got the right page in front of me where the

 3     second -- the lower part of the page is the Arsic-Djukic.

 4             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes thank you.

 5        Q.   As the president said, take a look at the lower part of the page

 6     you'll see the Arsic-Djukic intercept we're talking about.  And you'll

 7     see it says 762 and then in (80).

 8             And my question is that reference in 762 (80), that's a reference

 9     to the frequency; correct?

10        A.   Sir, I don't see that this pertains to a frequency at all.  I

11     believe that, rather, this has to do with some kind of numbers documents.

12     762 megahertz, it is a frequency or, rather, it is -- I mean, well, on a

13     RRU-800 but not 80, even not with single channel equipment, so I cannot

14     link this to that.  I believe that this has to do with some kind of

15     numbering of theirs as regards the writing of these documents, taking

16     notes et cetera.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  And would have you an explanation as why, then, all

18     the documents on this page all bear the same number?  Which may be

19     confusing.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Probably this could be deciphered

21     if we look at the next note and see whether that's that numbering or not.

22     However, regardless of everything, I'm convinced that it has nothing to

23     do with frequency because 762 and 80 cannot be linked up at all.  762

24     megahertz, that's a RRU-800 and as for 80 megahertz that's not a single

25     piece of equipment in the VRS that operated using that.  So ...

Page 37923

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Is there any chance that 8-0 stands for the 800?

 2     The RRU-800.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, Your Honour.  It would have

 4     said 8, as was customary, for RRU-800s, or it would have said 800, but it

 5     wouldn't have been only 80.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  [Previous translation continues] ...

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's my conclusion.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Were you familiar with -- with the way in

 9     which they jotted down this by the other armed forces?  Or is it just

10     speculation that you say, We would do it differently?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there is a rule on

12     station diaries --

13             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  Could all other

14     microphones please be switched off.  Thank you.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Where it says where, at what time,

16     and at which frequency somebody received something so it's not

17     particularly coded.  It's all written down.  So there are regulations.

18     If they deviated from that, then one could not say anything here that

19     it's a frequency or some kind of internal numbering of their own or

20     whatever.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. McCloskey.

22             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Let's go to 65 ter 32890.  Should be under seal.

23        Q.   And, sir, as you will be able to see that this is a document from

24     the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the 2nd Corps, dated

25     26 August 1995.  And in that first paragraph it notes:  "The following

Page 37924

 1     information on radio relay links of the aggressor relating to the Ozren

 2     Tactical Group and the Doboj Operation Group has been obtained:  The

 3     quality of the signal and the traffic on the said frequencies has been

 4     checked and a special report will be sent on this."

 5             And if we look down and we get to the section or multi-channel

 6     RRU, we see that 762.100 says Ozren and Doboj.  So that would indicate

 7     that 762 in the previous intercept was actually 762 is the first three

 8     digits of a RRU-800 frequency; correct?

 9        A.   In this column everything is RRU-800 and FM-200 and the other one

10     up there is RRU-1.

11        Q.   And the 762, that's the same number we saw on the notebook

12     regarding the intercept that we just looked at; correct?  An intercept

13     that happened to be between the Ozren Tactical Group and ...?

14        A.   Again, this can, quite simply, overlap.  This numbering of theirs

15     with some kind of frequency or whatever else.  So I cannot accept that

16     this is that.

17        Q.   All right.  And let's go to 65 ter 32889.

18             And this is just the page in the notebook that indicates the date

19     of 29 August 1995 that I'm sure we'll all agree is on the front of this,

20     helping us with the date.  It's page 40.  That's the first page of the

21     notebook that we have on the screen now.  But we should go to page 40 in

22     e-court for the date.  There we see it.  All right.  And ...

23             MR. McCLOSKEY:  So at this point, Mr. President, I would offer

24     the document from Colonel Beara, which was 65 ter 25184 into evidence.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, the number would be?

Page 37925

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 25184 receives exhibit number P7504,

 2     Your Honours.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Admitted into evidence.

 4             MR. McCLOSKEY:  And also if I could have the Muslim army

 5     intercept which was -- we saw that is 65 ter 32091.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Is that the -- just the pages you referred to or is

 7     it the whole of that book?

 8                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

 9             MR. McCLOSKEY:  The whole -- the -- that 65 ter is just three

10     pages so that's just the intercept, according to Ms. Stewart.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Madam Registrar.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 32091 receives exhibit number P7505,

13     Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Admitted into evidence.

15             MR. McCLOSKEY:  And then the document that we saw that noted the

16     frequencies, another document from the BiH command and that was 65 ter

17     32890.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit number P7506.

20             MR. McCLOSKEY:  And that is under seal, please.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  P7506 is admitted under seal.

22             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It should be 7506.  Now it's correct on the

23     record.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  I think that I said that it was admitted under seal,

25     but ...

Page 37926

 1             MR. McCLOSKEY:  And lastly, just that one page with the 29 --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, do we need --

 3             Mr. Ivetic, is there any dispute as to what we looked at in this

 4     book that that follows the 29th of 8, that's 29th of August, is the last

 5     entry for the date?

 6             MR. IVETIC:  If that's what we have on our screen, that's what we

 7     have on our screen.  I have not looked at the entire notebook to say

 8     anything beyond that.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we hear from you whether there's any dispute

10     whether what was admitted into evidence follows immediately by this date?

11             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes.  Thank you.  In that case I won't offer that

12     last one -- well, the one with the date on it, of course, is -- I just

13     noticed is the entire notebook.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  The one with the date on is the entire

15     notebook and I think the entire notebook -- could the parties after the

16     break inform the Chamber whether there's any dispute as to the entries we

17     looked at are following an indication of the date being the 29th of

18     August, 1995.  We'd like to hear from you after the break.

19             Mr. McCloskey.

20             MR. McCLOSKEY:

21        Q.   And, lastly, Witness, along with that, that packet of material

22     that we just showed you that we got from the BiH army, they provided us

23     an audiotape that contained this intercept, and I recall you testifying

24     about whether or not the ABiH could hear both sides of a duplex

25     conversation, and I would like us to listen to some of this conversation

Page 37927

 1     which, in the Prosecution's position, is a duplex conversation, and --

 2             MR. IVETIC:  Which one is it?  Is it with the Drina Corps or with

 3     some other unit?  Are we going beyond?

 4             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I would love to take the witness-stand but I'm

 5     sorry, I don't understand.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  This intercept.  I do understand the intercept that

 7     we looked at 29th of August.

 8             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  The one we looked at.

10             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Same subject, same intercept.

11             MR. IVETIC:  Yes, but he's referring to the witness as saying

12     whether or not the ABiH could hear both sides of a duplex conversation,

13     which was in relation to the Drina Corps as I recall and the set-ups of

14     the two listening posts so ... I'm wondering if we're going beyond that.

15             MR. McCLOSKEY:  If the Defence agrees that other units of the

16     ABiH could listen to both sides of the conversation, I may not need to

17     play this tape.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Well --

19             MR. IVETIC:  I'm focussing on the units that are being listened

20     to, not who is doing the listening.  Let him play the tapes and let him

21     ask the questions.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, perhaps that's the best way to proceed.

23             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Thank you.

24        Q.   And the tape is about five minutes, which we don't need five

25     minutes of.  I think Ms. Stewart informs me she can play about the last

Page 37928

 1     one minute and there is no transcript but we're just listening to try

 2     to -- see if we can distinguish the parties and the way they're speaking

 3     to each other.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And have -- has the transcript -- there's no

 5     transcript at all.

 6             MR. McCLOSKEY:  No.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Which means that ...

 8                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  We're then just listening to voices, to sound,

10     rather than to text at this moment and we don't expect - because our

11     interpreters are usually not in a position to interpret immediately

12     something they have not been prepared for.  So, therefore, let's see

13     whether it makes any sense to listen to it by listening to the last

14     minute.

15             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Thank you.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  And should we move to the B/C/S channel in order to

17     follow it, Mr. McCloskey?  How is it organised?

18                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

19             MR. McCLOSKEY:  We should be fine on our regular channels.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  So we hear the B/C/S on the English channel

21     as well, without interpretation.

22             MR. McCLOSKEY:  It's 32888a.

23             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  And we start at 3 minutes and 30 seconds.

24                           [Audiotape played]

25             MR. McCLOSKEY:  All right.

Page 37929

 1        Q.   Sir, as -- just so you know that the end of that intercepted

 2     conversation and then the -- it's the Prosecution's position that the

 3     tape continued to record and we heard that last part.  Can you -- as --

 4     tell us, was that the sounds of some telephone or some piece of equipment

 5     ringing and being picked up when the person said, Allo?

 6        A.   Sir, as regards audibility perhaps I'm an elderly man and I

 7     cannot hear very well but others have been listening to and can judge it.

 8     I barely understood anything.  At the very end, you see that somebody is

 9     automatically dialling a telephone, an automatic telephone, and on the

10     other end there is a micro telephone conversation and this person is

11     answering the phone and saying hello.  I really cannot conclude anything

12     whether it is two channels, one channel, cable, and so on.  It could have

13     happened in every conceivable way so this does not show in any way that

14     it was a duplex.

15             Secondly, if a duplex communication is being intercepted, you can

16     never hear both participants in the same way.  I already spoke about

17     electromagnetic waves and how they go through the atmosphere.  It's not

18     always the same.  It's different.  So automatically the tones are going

19     to be different.  So --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I put the following to you.  When listening to

21     the first part of the conversation I heard sometimes someone speaking

22     very clearly and sometimes, then, part of the conversation was where I

23     heard a voice which was with a lot of rumble around it, less audible,

24     which gave me the impression - but I'm not drawing any conclusions - that

25     the one person, which I could clearly hear, was one of the interlocutors

Page 37930

 1     whereas the rumbled voice was the other one so that I gained the

 2     impression that I was listening to the both sides of the conversation.

 3             That is my personal impression.  Do you have any comment on this

 4     impression?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there is something

 6     here called strong fading so I would not say that the other one was not a

 7     wire communication.  The other one was a wire communication.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  What do you mean by that?  "The other one was a wire

 9     communication."

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, because what could be

11     heard was the dialling of a dial on an automatic telephone.  So it wasn't

12     that somebody was pressing buttons, but, rather dialling.

13             Secondly, it rang a few times and that could be heard quite

14     clearly and when the other person said hello that was heard quite

15     clearly.  There wasn't this fading effect, this noise.  That appears only

16     in wireless communication, not in wire communications.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  My question was about the first portion I listened

18     to, and you apparently are commenting on the last portion on which I did

19     not give any impression.

20             Please proceed.

21             MR. McCLOSKEY:

22        Q.   And that was my question, which he answered it the way he did.

23             MR. McCLOSKEY:  So I have nothing further, Mr. President.  Though

24     I would offer this portion -- well, the full five minutes of that tape,

25     four-plus minutes of that tape into evidence and we will provide a

Page 37931

 1     transcript and perhaps we will be able to distinguish, for someone

 2     listening to the tape and looking at the transcript, where we think the

 3     people changed, so you can, when hearing, you can see if there's two

 4     people or not.  But no new evidence, just perhaps an exhibit that will

 5     help the non-Serbian speaker sort it out.

 6             MR. IVETIC:  Then it should be MFI'd until we get that transcript

 7     and make further submissions.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I think, as a matter of fact, the audio in

 9     itself, that is just the sound not interpreted in terms of text, that's

10     what we listened to.  That gives the Chamber an opportunity to have

11     observed personally by listening what it heard.

12             Now, if anything to further clarify that is text, et cetera,

13     would be added, I would agree with you, Mr. Ivetic, that we can't decide

14     on that at this moment.  We can, however, decide on just the audiotape as

15     such.

16             MR. IVETIC:  If you heard the whole thing.  But you only heard

17     one segment and he is offering five minutes.  So I think we still have to

18     see what's the rest of that to see whether it's something.  I mean, we

19     don't know what it is.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could you -- could you just limit it to the

21     portion we heard, Mr. McCloskey?

22             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I would prefer in that case to play the whole

23     thing.  It's an important topic, we spent God knows how many days on it.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And you can't off the part that we listened

25     to?

Page 37932

 1             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Well, I'm sure technically we could.  But it was

 2     pretty short.  You get a better feel for it when you hear the whole

 3     thing.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Since ...

 5                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll listen to after the break.

 7             Witness, we'll take a break.  We'd like to see you back in 20

 8     minutes.  You may now follow the usher.

 9                           [The witness stands down]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, could you give us an impression as to

11     how much time you would need in re-examination?

12             MR. IVETIC:  I think about half an hour, give or take.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we'll take the break and resume at five

14     minutes to 11.00.

15                           --- Recess taken at 10.34 a.m.

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

17             MR. IVETIC:  While we wait, Your Honours, in relation to the big

18     book that we saw and the date of 29 August, 1995, the excerpt that has

19     been admitted as P07505 does come after the date.  If that's what

20     Your Honours had asked before the --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, with no other dates in between.

22             MR. IVETIC:  Yeah.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

24                           [The witness takes the stand]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  That's hereby on the record.

Page 37933

 1             Mr. Dosenovic, we're going to listen to the entirety of the

 2     intercept you have listened to before.

 3             Mr. McCloskey.

 4             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Thank you, Mr. President.  If Ms. Stewart could

 5     start that from the beginning and if we recall it was 32888a.  Than --

 6     when I say "the beginning," that should be the beginning of the four

 7     minutes we just heard the last-within-a-minute part.  So this will be

 8     more, starting from the beginning of the tape we have.

 9                           [Audiotape played]

10             MR. McCLOSKEY:  And, Mr. President, that would conclude the

11     cross-examination.

12             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  And now you are tendering the entire ... are you?

13             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes, thank you.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, any objections to the tendering of the

15     audiotape without having, at this moment, a text, just to enable the

16     Judges to personally observe or hear what -- that there is a kind of a

17     conversation and whether both interlocutors can be heard.  Because

18     that's -- Mr. McCloskey, I understood, is the main purpose of this -- of

19     this evidence?

20             MR. IVETIC:  And, again, it's relating to a different area, but

21     I'll get that in the cross -- in the re-direct.  But I think we still

22     need that marked for identification pending a translation to follow the

23     correct procedure.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  As a matter of fact we're not supposed to

25     listen to text at this moment.  Again, if that is added at a later point

Page 37934

 1     in time then, of course, we would need translation.  It's just to get an

 2     audio impression of a conversation, the content, whether it's the same or

 3     not, if Mr. McCloskey wants to argue that it's the same as one of the --

 4     one of the -- it's not the one of the same --

 5             MR. IVETIC:  It is.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  It is, Mr. McCloskey?

 7             MR. McCLOSKEY:  This audiotape reflects the intercept that upset

 8     Mr. Beara and that the Muslim army received --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay --

10             MR. McCLOSKEY:  -- the text of.  So we --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  So that's clear then.  If you want to argue -- I

12     mean, at this moment, I think we are at a point where the Chamber can

13     hear whether the full conversation of this intercept can be heard, yes or

14     no.  What it is, you say it's the same.  The Chamber doesn't know.  The

15     Chamber can't establish that.  So the probative value is limited to

16     hearing a conversation.  And if you want to draw conclusions that go

17     further and apparently you are, then have you to provide the Chamber with

18     further information about this exhibit.

19             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Understood, Mr.  President.  And the primary

20     purpose as I said before was so that you could listen to both sides of a

21     conversation, which is the Prosecution's position is a duplex

22     conversation.  It also goes to the authenticity of the intercept that we

23     saw, which is the -- not only as we now heard by the VRS but by the BiH.

24             So it's primarily one purpose but I don't want you to exclude it

25     for the other purposes as well.  And I think you're best off with the

Page 37935

 1     transcript so you can make that connection.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  So if you say it's a duplex then you link it to some

 3     document in which it is mentioned or suggested that this was a duplex

 4     conversation.  Of course, the only thing we know is that you can hear

 5     both parties and what kind of a connection it was from this document

 6     itself, we can't draw any conclusions.

 7             Now I leave it up to you, if you want, for the very limited

 8     purposes, tender it, and then we would admit it on that basis, or would

 9     you rather first prepare a transcription so that we can link the content

10     to any other exhibit you may want to -- that is in evidence?

11             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes, Mr. President.  The latter, I think it's a

12     good idea that we link it.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we mark it for identification for the time

14     being, awaiting further submissions, especially transcription and

15     translation.

16             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Thank you.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  65 ter number 32888a receives exhibit number

19     P7507, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  And is marked for identification.

21             Please proceed -- no, "please proceed," I should say this to

22     Mr. Ivetic.

23             Mr. Dosenovic, you'll now further be examined by Mr. Ivetic.

24             Mr. Ivetic, please proceed.

25             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you, Your Honours.

Page 37936

 1                           Re-examination by Mr. Ivetic:

 2        Q.   Good morning, Colonel.  Good morning, Colonel.

 3        A.   Good morning.

 4        Q.   You were asked about reflection of transmissions from bouncing

 5     off of mountains at transcript page 37840 and onwards.  I'd like to take

 6     a look at - but it should not be broadcast - 1D5847 with you.

 7             And, first of all, on this first page, we see that the southern

 8     location is number 1 and the northern location is number 2?

 9             If we can now turn to page 14 of this document, also not

10     broadcasting the same.

11             And if we could perhaps zoom in to the actual diagram.

12             Sir, first of all, have you seen this particular diagram

13     previously?

14        A.   I have seen it, sir.  I had it in my possession.  From this, you

15     can see Vlasenica is 120 metres, at 120 metres distance, the first

16     obstacle is at 885 metres, as far as I can see -- no, no, no.  120 metres

17     is Vlasenica.  The first obstacle is at around 885 metres, which means

18     the difference in altitude is 50 or 60 metres, and I told the Prosecutor

19     that if there is a feature in Vlasenica higher than 50 metres, then you

20     could place a work station there for intercepting, and the Prosecutor

21     himself said that Major Jevdjevic said exactly in which building it was

22     in the centre of Vlasenica.

23        Q.   If I can ask you to --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. -- could you please, Mr. Ivetic, the question is

25     whether the witness has seen this particular diagram so he apparently

Page 37937

 1     has.  That was a yes or no question.

 2             Now the witness immediately went on 120 metres.  I don't see 120

 3     metres anywhere.

 4             MR. IVETIC:  That's what I was going do ask next.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  And therefore you should have intervened right at

 6     the beginning and take the lead and put specific questions.  That's the

 7     reason why I intervened.

 8             MR. IVETIC:  The B/C/S was one thing and the English was another

 9     that is what I was trying to do without directing it, Your Honours --

10        Q.   Witness, the English translation said that the Vlasenica at 120

11     metres.  Could you please comment on that.  Is that accurate or not?

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Where does the English say --

13                           [Trial Chamber confers]

14             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I have a hard copy of it that is much easier to

15     read than the screen.  It might help him.

16             MR. IVETIC:  I have no problem with giving him a hard copy.  But

17     I believe that he actually said something different because I do have one

18     ear off on my headset and can listen to the Serb that is spoken.  But if

19     we want to give him a hard copy, that's fine.  I have no objection.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

21             Mr. McCloskey, if you want to give it to the witness, that's

22     fine.  With the help of the --

23             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I have the map, but it's -- it's -- from a

24     different --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ...

Page 37938

 1             MR. McCLOSKEY:  [Overlapping speakers] ... location than the one

 2     he's got.  If you remember, it comes from different places.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  If you have no hard copy of this very document, then

 4     we'll just proceed.

 5             MR. IVETIC:

 6        Q.   Sir, if I can ask you just to repeat ...

 7                           [Defence counsel confer]

 8             MR. IVETIC:

 9        Q.   If I can ask you to repeat for us what you said the elevation of

10     Vlasenica was that you could see from this diagram.

11        A.   I said Vlasenica is at 820 metres.  The first obstacle closest

12     towards the southern station was --

13        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... the rest we have.

14             The question I have is in relation to the Prosecution's questions

15     about bouncing off -- transmissions off of mountains, given the placement

16     of the obstacles that you've identified that are closer to Vlasenica and

17     further away from the southern listening post, could such transmissions

18     be bounced off of those mountains or not, in the manner that the

19     Prosecution has indicated during their cross?

20        A.   The obstacle is such that electromagnetic waves cannot pass in

21     any way.

22        Q.   And if the parabolic antenna of the ABiH at the southern post was

23     intended to capture signals bouncing from obstacles on the ground, what

24     kind of angle would you expect that parabolic antenna to be set at?

25        A.   The basic thing is that electromagnetic waves just as the light

Page 37939

 1     reflects at an angle of 95 degrees so if the mask is in front and even if

 2     they bounce off and can be received, they could only be received at a

 3     place opposite of the receiving station at the southern installation.

 4        Q.   And now we see this diagram is a curved type.  Could you please

 5     explain for us what that curvature indicates.

 6        A.   This is a complete diagram for the verification of radio

 7     visibility in the first bottom curvature in the middle is marked with

 8     zero.  The middle, between two posts that should have communication.  The

 9     next one is above 5 kilometres to the left and 5 kilometres to the right.

10     The next full line is 10 kilometres to the left, 10 kilometres to the

11     right.  That means the points connected with this curvature are on the

12     same plane.  That's the essence of this diagram.

13        Q.   Now, earlier in your cross-examination, you mention that you

14     checked certain optical visibility points to confirm whether there was or

15     was not a line of sight and you used string.  Could you please explain

16     for us on what you would use string to perform the type of test that you

17     said you performed.

18        A.   It's a topographic map of any scale and for such calculations you

19     must usually take 1 to 100.000 and a ruler and simply on a map you draw a

20     line between these two points, using a ruler, and you see if there is an

21     obstacle.  In front of them you cannot place radio relay communication

22     there.  If there is something interfering, then you see in the manual for

23     signalsmen, which is like a Bible to them, you can find a suitable place

24     more easily than on a map.  It's very simple, really.

25        Q.   And if I can ask you to clarify, you said "if there's something

Page 37940

 1     interfering on the topographic map, then you see in the manual for

 2     signalsmen, which is a like a Bible to them you can find a suitable

 3     place."

 4             What is the next step, according to the manual?  What is then

 5     done to determine optical visibility for the purposes of setting up radio

 6     stations?

 7        A.   The place that I selected for a station has to be higher than all

 8     the obstacles in the way.  It has to be at the same altitude or higher.

 9     If an obstacle appears, then have you to move the station, place it

10     somewhere else.  And we always take care that a -- the beam doesn't go

11     towards the enemy; or, if it does, that it should be lateral.

12        Q.   And how does a diagram like this one relate to the manual for

13     signalsmen?

14        A.   Well, it coincides because there is the so-called Fresnel zone so

15     if the obstacle is somewhere close to the line I drew on the map, then I

16     take that manual and I see whether at least the first Fresnel zone passes

17     through that feature to -- to calculate radio visible and the Fresnel

18     zone is the zone through which the highest energy of the electromagnetic

19     waves go from one station to another.

20        Q.   If we could turn to page 19 - again not broadcast - this should

21     be the northern facility with Vlasenica again?

22             JUDGE ORIE:  But, Mr. Ivetic, could we first focus on what we see

23     on our screen now and to understand what exactly is depicted here.

24             MR. IVETIC:  Yeah, absolutely.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

Page 37941

 1             MR. IVETIC:  I think we're back on that page --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps we could enlarge it slightly.  There's no

 3     translation of this document, Mr. Ivetic?

 4             MR. IVETIC:  I don't have one, although it's -- the Prosecution

 5     has a 65 ter number of a similar document just without the numbers 1 and

 6     2 with the actual names.  I don't know if that one has a translation.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  But for this one, at this moment, there's

 8     not.

 9             MR. IVETIC:  Correct.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, did you yourself make this diagram?  Could

11     you answer that question, please.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  You said Vlasenica was at 820 metres altitude.  Do

14     you have an explanation as why it is on this diagram that Vlasenica is

15     put at a little bit over 500 metres rather than a little bit over 800

16     metres?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, that's the place, and

18     that's its altitude, if I understood your question correctly.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  If it's plotted on the diagram which apparently has

20     vertically the altitude of points to be connected, then I would have

21     expected 820 metres, Vlasenica, a little bit higher up.

22             Do you have any explanation for it being somewhere in the range

23     of the low 600s rather than on the 800s?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, unfortunately, I did

25     not understand the question.

Page 37942

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I see that various positions, I do understand

 2     the -- one is the radio relay station, the intercept, is at 1326 metres,

 3     and I find that plotted on this diagram just above the 1300-metres mark,

 4     which I understand.  However, for the Vlasenica altitude, I find it

 5     plotted on this diagram close to the 600 line rather than close to the

 6     800 line.

 7             Do you have any explanation for that?

 8             Perhaps the usher could assist by moving -- perhaps the usher

 9     could assist by moving the cursor at the 600 line and slowly going in the

10     direction of where it is written "Vlasenica."

11             Now I see there are 600 line and I see 820 metres.  Any

12     explanation for plotting one altitude in accordance with the numbers and

13     the other one quite different from what I see?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this diagram is not

15     correct.  It's not accurate.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But -- okay.

17             Now have I another -- in that respect, apparently it's not

18     correct.

19             Mr. McCloskey, you're on your feet.

20             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I have -- I can resolve this, Mr. President.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  You can resolve it.  Okay.  I give you an

22     opportunity to do that very soon.

23             You said there were two obstacles.  Which are these obstacles?

24     Could you describe what they are?  And so not -- not how they were

25     plotted on this diagram but what are they?  Are they buildings; and if

Page 37943

 1     so, what building?  Is it anything else?  Is it a hill?  Is it -- what

 2     are the obstacles that are plotted on this map?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the obstacles that are

 4     plotted there are hills, mountains.  So it is land.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But which hill is the one and which hill is

 6     then the other, if these are hill as soon as.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that cannot be seen in

 8     this diagram.  It can be seen in a map though.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm asking you whether you know what these

10     obstacles - because you talked about them - what they are.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Topographically speaking everything

12     above 500 metres is a mountain.  So they are mountains.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, they're not buildings.  You know that for sure.

14     Because buildings could be an obstacle as well, isn't it?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They can, Your Honour.  But here it

16     is marked down here that the first obstacle is 2 and a half kilometres

17     away from the station and the second one is 3.9 kilometres away.  So at

18     that distance a building would not constitute a problem, even if it were

19     quite tall.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  If it is on a mountain, that building?  Usually

21     buildings are not built at sea level but they are usually constructed in

22     the landscape.  If there are hills, you build a building on a hill.

23     Would that make any difference?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it would be taken into

25     account if it was higher than 20 metres.  But in view of the width of --

Page 37944

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  [Previous translation continues] ... yes, but what I

 2     want to know is:  Do you know what hill it is, whether it is accounted

 3     for there is a building on it?  Which are these hills?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't know just off

 5     the cuff.  I'd need to see a map.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  No, you don't have the knowledge apparently.  You

 7     say -- if you say, I have to see a map, you are reconstructing what, in

 8     your view, most likely would be the obstacle, isn't it?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I am sure that it is

10     the land itself.  The building -- or a building could not constitute a

11     problem in view of the width of the magnetic beam.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay, that's understood.  But you don't know what

13     these obstacles, what hills are presented on this diagram?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

16             Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.  We now at least know what we are

17     looking at.  But Mr. McCloskey offered his assistance.

18             MR. McCLOSKEY:  There's a significant problem that we need to

19     clear up to for this to go on.  It's not a big problem.  It's to the

20     benefit for everyone.  If we could ask -- the witness needs not to be

21     here when I offer this information.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Or you would rather have him not here?

23             MR. McCLOSKEY:  That would be a better way of saying it.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Because.

25             Witness, would you follow the usher for a second to leave the

Page 37945

 1     courtroom because Mr. McCloskey would tell us something which we would

 2     like not you to bother with at this moment.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand, Your Honour.

 4                           [The witness stands down]

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. McCloskey.

 6             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes, Mr. President.  We -- this diagram comes

 7     from Mr. Rodic's annex.  We have a good copy of it.  Our copy shows that

 8     Vlasenica is at 620 metres, as -- which would make it consistent with the

 9     map as you've indicated.  They're looking at a -- a copy, as we can see

10     that it looks like 8.  And I don't know -- you know, I'm not suggesting

11     that anything has been fiddled with.  I think it's just a bad

12     reproduction.  When you're determining optical sight, of course that's

13     significant.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  It certainly is.

15             MR. McCLOSKEY:  The next two numbers we have in the record, he

16     says the first obstacle is 885 and it's actually 695, and the next

17     obstacle he says is -- sorry.  That's the only one he says.  Now, so

18     that's wrong too.  He's made that a lot shorter and Vlasenica a lot

19     higher than it actually is, which messes up the whole calculation.  We

20     have -- and just in the spirit of trying to get to the bottom of this, we

21     have a map where we've drawn Vlasenica, the line of sight document, and

22     we see the two heights that he is talking about that Mr. Rodic was

23     talking about, and one is 695 and the other is 696.  So we have the

24     figures.  He's got the wrong figures as -- through your questions it is

25     clear that he didn't do this.  The position of the Prosecution is there

Page 37946

 1     is light of sight if you use the correct figures.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 3             MR. McCLOSKEY:  -- but we're a long way from getting there and it

 4     could be kind of time-consuming.  Perhaps I can sit with Mr. Ivetic and

 5     sort this out.

 6             MR. IVETIC:  I agree with the figures that Mr. McCloskey has

 7     stated since that is what's on the original document.  Whether that makes

 8     the obstacles higher than Vlasenica by more than what the witness said,

 9     so I agree it doesn't -- it makes the line ever sight more impossible to

10     reach.  That would be the Defence`s position.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Everything is plotted wrongly here, if I understand

12     it well.

13             MR. IVETIC:  No, the numbers that are visible on here because

14     this is a copy of a copy are blurred.  The one that Mr. McCloskey has

15     shows that this is 620 instead of 820.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes --

17             MR. IVETIC:  The figures themselves are blurry.  The handwritten

18     part is blurry on this copy so that we can't see that it's a 6 instead of

19     an 8.  And, likewise, that is a 6 instead of an 8 on the two obstacles as

20     well.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  If it's 600 then it seems that that is at least

22     plotted on this map well.  Then the next one -- Mr. McCloskey you said

23     the next one was?

24             MR. IVETIC:  695.

25             MR. McCLOSKEY:  695.  And the witness testified --

Page 37947

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.  695.  What I see is the most left of

 2     the three, if I could say so -- it looks as if it ends with a zero and

 3     not a 5.

 4             Is that a mistake as well?

 5                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

 6             MR. McCLOSKEY:  The -- the copy we have looks like it says 685.

 7             MR. IVETIC:  I think you're talking about the right -- the Judge

 8     is talking about the left.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm talking about the most to the left.

10             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes.  The most to the left clearly on the

11     document is 690.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  690 and that seems to be plotted, if I -- just below

13     700 so that that's looks as if that plotting at least corresponding with

14     the number you mentioned.

15             And then the one in the middle is?

16             MR. McCLOSKEY:  It appears to be 685 which makes sense.  It's

17     just below the 690.  So we think Rodic got this fundamentally correct in

18     terms of his plotting.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  So the plotting seems to be not the major problem.

20     Then I have one other question.  If you want to establish a line of sight

21     between two points and if you want to take into account the curve of the

22     earth, isn't it true that you would then have to put the zero point

23     exactly in the middle of the two?  Because it's not here.  Do you

24     understand what I mean?  If I take the curve of the earth and if I want

25     to see whether there's a line of sight, then I should take the highest

Page 37948

 1     point of the curve just in the middle of the two, and here it clearly is

 2     not.

 3             MR. McCLOSKEY:  That makes sense, Mr. President, though, as you

 4     recall it's a 35, I believe a 35-kilometre distance so the curve of the

 5     earth shouldn't be too much.  We need a sailor to tell us.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  I see that, of course, but one of the advantage of

 7     physics and mathematics that you do it not approximately but you do it

 8     precisely.  And therefore it may have no influence whatsoever, but I'm

 9     just trying to analyse what I see before me, and what is wrong, and there

10     are few minutes wrong and I add this as a possibly imperfection of this

11     diagram as well.

12             Now at least we know what we are talking about.  We'll

13     understand, I take it, then, the plotting and this is just altitudes.  It

14     has got nothing do with whether the obstacles really are in line of the

15     two.  That's the next issue I think we should pay attention to in order

16     to --

17             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Mr. President, just to respond briefly to

18     Mr. Ivetic.

19             The problem the witness has is that on Mr. Rodic's diagram it's

20     the first point from Vlasenica as you've talked is 685 and the witness

21     testified it was 885, so he's raised the problem.

22             So he is so off with his numbers and so sticking stubbornly to

23     them.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  We don't have that evidence, we don't need comments

25     on it.  You say there is an inconsistency in what he said compared to

Page 37949

 1     what he has written down here.

 2             MR. McCLOSKEY:  My point, Mr. President, is that he is sticking

 3     to this despite you clearly pointing out him several times and therefore

 4     I would say his evidence on this is just no good.  It's too -- it's over.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.

 6             MR. McCLOSKEY:  It doesn't help us any further.  I don't how to

 7     fix it.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  That is argument at this moment.

 9             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes, it is.  I'm asking it to be stopped.

10             MR. IVETIC:  If counsel is going to make arguments, then I'm

11     going to make arguments.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  First of all, neither of you -- let me.  I'm

13     stopping both of you.

14             MR. IVETIC:  Correction, Your Honour, you're stopping me.  He's

15     already made his point.  I'm entitled to make the point on the record,

16     otherwise you're only stopping me.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  You get one minute to use your time to say that you

18     use argument.

19             Mr. Ivetic, please, we listen for 60 seconds to your argument.

20             MR. IVETIC:  Yes, he's misrepresenting the testimony of the

21     witness, where the witness said that the next point after Vlasenica is 50

22     metres higher.  I'm trying to find the page number for that which is

23     before Your Honours asked him about that.  He said he thought that

24     Vlasenica was 820 and that this was 895 so the conclusions of the witness

25     are based upon the misreading of the numbers on the figure but both

Page 37950

 1     misreadings equate to the same amount.  If it is 695 and 620, the

 2     differences between Vlasenica and the first obstacle remain the same so

 3     counsel's arguments to the contrary are not logical.  That's all I have

 4     to say.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  So you both have had an opportunity to briefly

 6     comment.  I'd rather focus at this moment on what we see before us and

 7     what is apparently presented as evidence by the Defence at this moment.

 8             We haven't seen this diagram before, I think, as it appears here.

 9     So apart from the wrong plotting, I asked the witness ...

10                           [Trial Chamber confers]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, now, I mean the plotting is right but the

12     numbers attached to it are wrong.  Apologies.  Now that is clear.

13             Now I also asked the witness what position in Vlasenica was used.

14     Is there -- I -- I just -- my recollection doesn't assist me.  Have the

15     parties a common understanding of what was at 620 metres.

16             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes, Mr. President.  You'll recall my questions

17     of the witness yesterday on the location --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes --

19             MR. McCLOSKEY:  -- of this.  And we have -- we know the location.

20     We have plotted the altitude, and ... as can you imagine, it's -- it's

21     not 620.

22             So I didn't get into that with him yesterday because of this very

23     complex issue but now that we're into it -- it's actually not so complex

24     I shouldn't say that.  But, yes, we have evidence.  I have an info report

25     we've just plotted the evaluation of that.  We have a JNA map with the

Page 37951

 1     line of sight drawn so can you see the different elevations and then

 2     it's -- which I'm sure Mr. Ivetic and I would agree on, it's -- in the

 3     end, it becomes a close call.  In our view there is about a 35-metre line

 4     of sight area, and I think by Mr. Rodic's call there's about a 35-metre

 5     non-sight view, based on his evaluation of the Drina Corps building

 6     frankly.  This witness is -- has -- is dealing with a product that he

 7     can't read and so we're really confused and my only issue is I don't know

 8     how we unravel the confusion.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  The problem is that we are discussing at this moment

10     evidence which we heard before, which is not -- so, therefore, whether

11     this witness can comment on -- without knowing that evidence, I do not

12     know.  I -- the witness could not give answer at least to a few questions

13     as to what the obstacles were, what point exactly was taken in Vlasenica,

14     and that may be an obstacle for us to develop the matter at this moment.

15     But I leave it in the hands of the parties.  If the witness can --

16             MR. IVETIC:  If I could ask --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.

18                           [Trial Chamber confers]

19             JUDGE ORIE:  We turn into private session for a second.

20                           [Private session]

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 37952











11  Page 37952 redacted.  Private session.















Page 37953

 1   (redacted)

 2                           [Open session]

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 5             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Mr. President, can we get him the document that's

 6     readable?  Because this is the document that's unreadable is causing the

 7     confusion.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  If you would --

 9             MR. McCLOSKEY:  And his response to it.

10             MR. IVETIC:  I think I can assist in that regard, Your Honours.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, please.

12             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I do have -- Ms. Stewart has a 65 ter 32891 on

13     page 21 --

14             MR. IVETIC:  That's correct.

15             MR. McCLOSKEY:  -- with an English translation.  That may be

16     helpful.  Whether it's this very document, I don't know.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.

18             MR. IVETIC:  It is page 21, Appendix 20.

19                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.  A better version to be used,

21     Mr. Ivetic.  You're aware of which one.

22             MR. IVETIC:  I have a printed copy of the same that I can give to

23     the usher and let the other side take a look at and we can put that in

24     the witness's hands so he has a paper copy and it is, indeed, on page 21

25     of 32891.

Page 37954

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Do we have an electronic version.

 2             MR. IVETIC:  Yes.

 3             MR. McCLOSKEY:  [Overlapping speakers] ... Ms. Stewart has

 4     suggested.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll have a look --

 6             First of all, if, Mr. Usher, if you would escort the witness back

 7     into the courtroom.  Meanwhile we'll look at the version that the

 8     Prosecution suggests we could use which is the electronic version of what

 9     you intended to give as a hard copy to the witness.

10                           [The witness takes the stand]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Could Mr. McCloskey, Ms. Stewart, assist in having

12     on our screen what they are on their mind.

13             MR. IVETIC:  If we could have 65 ter 32891 and page 21.

14             MR. McCLOSKEY:  That's the suggestion, yes, but we don't know

15     what it looks like till we see it.

16             MR. IVETIC:  And if we could perhaps zoom in.  Not broadcast.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Not to be shown.

18             MR. IVETIC:  Not to be shown, yes.

19        Q.   And, sir, what we should have now is a cleaner copy of the

20     diagram we looked at.  And looking, if we could zoom in perhaps on the

21     handwritten text that appears to be in blue on the right-hand side a

22     little bit more --

23             MR. IVETIC:  And do we have the paper copy that we can give to

24     the witness?  Page 21 of the same.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, could we give it to the witness.

Page 37955

 1             MR. IVETIC:

 2        Q.   Sir, now it's on the screen and you're getting a paper copy.  It

 3     would appear in the cleaner version that Vlasenica is at 620 metres.  The

 4     first obstacle appears to be 685 and 690.  Would that information change

 5     any of the conclusions that you reached as to optical visibility between

 6     Vlasenica and the southern location?

 7        A.   This diagram clearly shows that the first obstacle, 2 and a half

 8     kilometres, makes it impossible to receive anything from up there, from

 9     the south station.

10        Q.   And so the -- we earlier talked about 820 versus 620.  That

11     doesn't change the actual -- since everything's -- that doesn't change

12     the actual conclusions that can be reached from this diagram.  Is that

13     how I should understand you?

14        A.   I understood in that diagram I read, I read the number 8 instead

15     of 6.

16        Q.   Now, on this diagram, could you explain for us what the pink and

17     the green markings are near the obstacles?  And if we could perhaps zoom

18     back out to the full diagram and then zoom in a little bit -- there we

19     go.

20             Those pink and green marks that are by the two obstacles, we see

21     at the bottom there's a pink and green for the Fresnel zone of the

22     RRU-800 and the RRU-1.  What do those markings mean?

23        A.   I've already mentioned that the Fresnel zone is the strongest

24     electromagnetic beam that is transmitted by the antenna.  And I've

25     already said that electromagnetic waves bend more than visible waves.  So

Page 37956

 1     there is this calculation for the Fresnel zone.  However, here, we can

 2     see, nevertheless, that the other point is on the edge of the Fresnel

 3     zone and it would be possible for electromagnetic waves to pass through;

 4     whereas, the first obstacle would be very difficult for the

 5     electromagnetic waves to negotiate.  If there were to be direct

 6     communication between the participants, it wouldn't be secure.

 7        Q.   And if we could go, I believe, should be page 26 of this

 8     document - also not to be broadcast -

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, have you had an answer to the last

10     question:  What stands the pink and what stands the -- oh I see.

11             MR. IVETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ... it's on the table at the

12     bottom.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers]... yeah.  Yes please proceed.

14             MR. IVETIC:  If we can have page 26.

15        Q.   And, sir, this is from the northern location and Vlasenica and

16     given now we see here the -- it looks like two points between the two on

17     this.  Given the placement of these obstacles, would it be possible for

18     the transmissions to bounce off of these obstacles and reach the northern

19     location in the manner that the Prosecution was questioning you about in

20     cross-examination?

21        A.   According to this diagram, both Fresnel zones ...

22        Q.   If it helps, it should be page 26 of your hard copy as well that

23     you have in front of you.

24        A.   No.

25             MR. McCLOSKEY:  We also have -- if it helps, we can agree that

Page 37957

 1     there is no optical line of sight between the northern site and

 2     Vlasenica.

 3             MR. IVETIC:  Okay.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  That's hereby on the record.

 5             MR. IVETIC:

 6        Q.   And, sir, given that there is no optical visibility, can the

 7     waves bounce off of these mountains so as to reach that facility as you

 8     were being asked about in cross-examination?

 9        A.   Waves do bounce off a mountain or any obstacle and the angle is

10     90 degrees.  So they do not go towards the targeted station, regardless

11     of whether it is the receiving station or one's own participant.

12        Q.   Okay.  Now --

13             MR. IVETIC:  And, Your Honours, I'm done with these.  I suggest

14     that we could perhaps tender the two pages that we've looked at in court

15     or the whole thing.  I don't know what the Prosecution's position on this

16     is.  I definitely think the two we've looked at in Court should be

17     tendered so we have in the record what we've looked at and connects the

18     witness's testimony as to that.  And it should be under seal.

19             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I think the appendix of the report that these

20     documents are in also had that other -- the other map we spoke of and I

21     think it's a good idea just to put all of them in and because it shows in

22     whose handwriting all this material is.  I think it is easier to just

23     have the whole annex.

24             MR. IVETIC:  I think 20-some pages.

25             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yeah.  And I think it is it helpful for a

Page 37958

 1     particular fact.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  If the parties would agree on that basis could you

 3     please repeat -- because we now have the map.  Is that part of the annex

 4     as well?

 5             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes, it is.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  So, then, Mr. Ivetic, the number was.

 7             MR. IVETIC:  32891.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  And that will receive, Madam Registrar, number.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit number D1200, Your Honours.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  D1200 is admitted under seal.

11             MR. IVETIC:  Okay.

12             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Mr. President, so it's clear there's been a lot

13     of maps.  So when I say map, I meant that map that the witness spoke of

14     yesterday that had the zones on it.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Oh, that map.

16             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Not the map you have shown previously.

18             MR. McCLOSKEY:  [Overlapping speakers] ... and I thought that you

19     might have meant that.  So, yes, it's that previous map.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Just to inform the parties that before taking

21     a break, I don't know whether I exactly understood the function, the

22     role, and the impact of the Fresnel zone.  So just for you to know that I

23     may not be fully familiar with that yet, and I very much wish to

24     understand it.

25             Witness, we'll take another break and we'd like to see you back

Page 37959

 1     in 20 minutes, that is, 20 minutes past 12.00.  You may follow the usher.

 2                           [The witness stands down]

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  We resume at 20 minutes past 12.00.

 4                           --- Recess taken at 11.59 a.m.

 5                           --- On resuming at 12.23 p.m.

 6                           [The witness takes the stand]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, you may proceed.

 8             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you.

 9        Q.   Sir, I'd like to first ask you about the question Judge Orie

10     asked before the break.

11             If we could again have now it's D1200, page 26 on the screen and

12     not broadcast the same.

13             And the question we'd like to know, Colonel, what is the role or

14     purpose of taking into account the Frenela zona in relation to

15     establishing whether a transmission wave can pass an obstacle.  And I'd

16     ask you to explain that.

17             MR. IVETIC:  Can we flip the diagram, maybe.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, what is understood

19     under the first --

20             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please slow down, please.

21             MR. IVETIC:

22        Q.   [Interpretation] Just a moment.  They are asking you to speak

23     more slowly so they can interpret.  Would you start over.

24        A.   A Fresnel zone is understood to be a part of space within which

25     the most important part of the energy of a signal is transmitted between

Page 37960

 1     the transmitter and the receiver.  In cases where the first Fresnel zone

 2     is disrupted or even penetrated, there is a significant diminishment of a

 3     signal at the receiving end.

 4             Now, if I can explain a little.  A Fresnel zone, if we were to

 5     look at a beam of electromagnetic radiation and then cut through it

 6     horizontally, it would be like a circle divided into three parts.  The

 7     first central part is the first zone, and the other two would be the

 8     second and the third.  Here, looking at this, the beam from Vlasenica

 9     would run into two obstacles at 290 metres and 330 metres.  One is marked

10     with green and the other with red.  We see that both are cut through in

11     view of the altitude of these obstacles ahead of Vlasenica.

12        Q.   [In English] Okay.  And thus, then, what role are -- pardon me.

13             Is Frenelova zona always something we have to take into account

14     when determining whether there is an optical visibility between two

15     points such that a radio transmission could pass?

16        A.   It is calculated -- if you suspect there could be a disruption of

17     the radius of the first Fresnel zone, the devices that work at military

18     radio frequencies are constructed in such a way that they can operate

19     still if the second and the third Fresnel zone are disrupted.  However,

20     if you disrupt, if you cut through the radius of the first Fresnel zone

21     then that communication would be unusable.

22             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Just for the record, it should be Fresnel zone

23     from Augustin-Jean, F-r-e-s-n-e-l in English.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, as a matter of fact, it's the same of a

25     physician who I think invented it or described it.  So it's French and

Page 37961

 1     English as well.

 2             MR. IVETIC:  I have been using the B/C/S to make sure that the

 3     right word gets to the witness but I think we all agree on the English.

 4        Q.   Now, I'd like to ask you, sir, about the atmosphere at transcript

 5     page 37840, lines 20 through 25, you mentioned the possibility of

 6     bouncing off the atmosphere.  What can you tell us about such atmospheric

 7     conditions that are needed to be in place to create the type of bouncing

 8     that you were talking from the atmosphere?

 9        A.   The higher frequency of the waves, they penetrate the layers of

10     the atmosphere better, whereas, lower frequencies bounce off these areas

11     and in these cases, we can have at the receiving end a double signal.  So

12     if they are denser or less dense, especially the ionised layers, the

13     lower frequencies would stay lower, whereas, the higher frequencies go

14     further above into higher layers of the atmosphere.

15        Q.   What can you tell us about such atmospheric conditions that can

16     result in bouncing, in terms of -- are they static or do they change?

17        A.   The amplitude of electromagnetic waves, if they are lower

18     frequencies, they bend towards the ground.  If they are higher

19     frequencies, they can reach up into the atmosphere and bounce off that

20     layer.  But that's why there is a maximum distance useable between a

21     transmitting station and a receiving station, so that cannot affect the

22     reach of the electromagnetic waves.

23        Q.   And these atmospheric features that waves would bounce off of, do

24     they change?

25        A.   The layers from which electromagnetic waves bounce off in the

Page 37962

 1     atmosphere change during day-time and during night-time, but they can

 2     also change if there is a stronger magnetic radiation from the sun.  The

 3     bouncing off can also be calculated so there are communications that are

 4     set up through the bouncing of these waves multiple times.

 5        Q.   How does the changing of the atmosphere affect the ability of

 6     someone to rely upon and try to receive consistently waves bouncing from

 7     the atmosphere of the transmission, instead of the actual transmission?

 8        A.   This bouncing off mainly affects VF communications, that is to

 9     say, high-frequency communications in the military.  With VVF and radio

10     relay devices, when the devices are located at proper distances, this

11     bouncing off cannot affect communications.

12        Q.   And if we can call up and not broadcast D1187 marked for

13     identification under seal, and turn to page 30 in the English and page 43

14     in the Serbian.

15             This will be your report again, sir, and I'll be asking about

16     paragraph 10.9, which you were asked about in cross-examination.  And now

17     that ... well, we were on the same page.  Now -- now that we're on the

18     same page, and, again, this paragraph starts off by talking about the

19     types of devices available to the ABiH.  For the conclusions in this

20     paragraph, have you taken into account any of the other criteria apart

21     from just the capabilities of the device to determine the capabilities of

22     the ABiH to listen to transmissions?

23        A.   For somebody to do any listening, they would have to have the

24     same kind of device with the same frequency and the same modulation, and

25     it should be at a distance adapted to the transmitter of the signal.  So

Page 37963

 1     when I talked about the devices of the ABH, I said they were able to

 2     listen in to our VF, VVF and radio relay devices, everything except those

 3     that worked at more than 4.4 gigahertz.

 4        Q.   And for purposes of this paragraph, are you taking into account

 5     in this paragraph the distance, frequency, and modulation?  Again, we're

 6     looking at 10.9.  Or is it simply just -- the latter part of your answer,

 7     the devices?

 8        A.   They were able to listen in to all of our communications and get

 9     everything that was not encoded, and I already spoke about their ability

10     to decode the encrypted part of the communications.

11        Q.   I think we're missing each other in the translation.  Let me try

12     it this way, by turning to page 32, I think it would be, in the English,

13     and page 45 in the Serbian.  And, again it should not be broadcast.

14             And, sir, in these pages and onwards, you give certain

15     conclusions about the line of sight and the distance of the southern and

16     northern posts from the radio relay nodes in the Drina Corps area and

17     give conclusions about the ability of the ABiH to intercept the same.  Do

18     you stand behind those conclusions in these pages, first of all?

19        A.   Yes, I stand by all my conclusions.

20        Q.   And so the conclusions we just talked about in terms of devices

21     in 10.9 of your report, do we have to consider that together with the

22     conclusions in this section of your report where you examine other

23     criteria?

24        A.   I didn't quite understand the question.

25        Q.   Do we have to consider your conclusions in paragraph -- pardon

Page 37964

 1     me, on page 45 onwards - I think that's paragraph 10.16.2 onwards -

 2     together with 10.9 to get a full picture of what the capabilities and

 3     what the actual situation of the ABiH's abilities to listen to VRS

 4     communications are, or were, I should say?

 5        A.   Well, as you could understand from what I stated until now,

 6     everything boils down to determining the ability of the BH army to

 7     monitor the communications of the Army of Republika Srpska, and I would

 8     have nothing to add to that.

 9        Q.   Okay.  But then -- when you say everything that you've stated

10     until now, are you referring to your written report?  Or what are you

11     referring to?

12        A.   I mean my entire report.

13        Q.   Now if we can look at another document that was shown to you,

14     P7058.

15             I think this one can be displayed.  It's not under seal.

16             And if we look at paragraph number 3 together, and it's starts --

17     let me see, in the Serbian it starts [Interpretation] "The fact is that

18     secret" -- [Microphone not activated]

19             In the English, I will read what is said here by General Mladic:

20     "It is true that secret military information is most frequently leaked

21     through irresponsible and unprofessional use of existing communications

22     which are generally not protected (such as PTT communications and a large

23     proportion of military communications and communications of the

24     RS/Republika Srpska MUP/Ministry of Interior, and also through

25     undesignated use of portable radio sets without applying cryptographic

Page 37965

 1     data protection."

 2             Now, what the general is talking about here, is it implicating

 3     radio relay communications or other types of communications?

 4        A.   I understand what is written, sir, and I understand it to apply

 5     to all types of communications using electronic devices from wire

 6     communications, to radio relay.  Regardless of the user, a civilian or a

 7     soldier, everyone is obligated to carry out measures of electronic

 8     protection.

 9        Q.   And the specific items identified such as PTT and portable radio

10     sets would those apply to radio relay transmissions?

11        A.   PTT communications also used multiple channel devices, but

12     portable headsets were in private hands, and they were prohibited in the

13     Army of Republika Srpska.

14        Q.   If we look at the next page in English and stay on this page in

15     Serbian.

16             THE INTERPRETER:  Correction:  Radio set, not headsets.

17             MR. IVETIC:  And we see it's the last line in the Serbian.  And

18     it says in order to present any further leakage of secret military

19     information but using radio relay and PTT communications without applying

20     measures of electronic and cryptographic data protection, I hereby

21     order" --

22             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Slow down.

23             MR. IVETIC:  I apologise.  "In order to prevent any further

24     leakage of secret military information by using radio, radio relay, and

25     PTT communications without applying measures of electronic and

Page 37966

 1     cryptographic data protection, I hereby order" --

 2             And we have to go to the next page in Serbian.  And then all

 3     these measures.  Sir, looking at the measures that are ordered here, what

 4     effect would such measures have on the ability of someone else to

 5     continue listening in on transmissions at issue.

 6        A.   Sir, when you take these measures, the enemy or the person

 7     intercepting will certainly have less information and then they will also

 8     take measures to strengthen or intensify their surveillance to get more

 9     information.

10        Q.   Done with that document.  Now if we can go into private session

11     for the last several questions.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  We move into private session.

13                           [Private session]

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 37967











11  Pages 37967-37971 redacted.  Private session.















Page 37972

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17                           [Open session]

18             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

20             MR. IVETIC:

21        Q.   Colonel, I thank you for your patience and for trying to explain

22     matters to us.  I apologise for it taking longer than anticipated.

23             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honour, have no further questions in re-direct.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you Mr. Ivetic.

25             Mr. McCloskey, any further questions for the witness?

Page 37973

 1             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes, Mr. President.

 2                           Further cross-examination by Mr. McCloskey:

 3        Q.   In talking about simplex communications, we have seen some

 4     simplex communications for VRS radio communications.  For example,

 5     RUP 12, the classic simplex -- or the RUP 12, for example, has a transmit

 6     button.  In order to transmit, have you to press the transmit button and

 7     then you say something, hello, please come in, Crna Rijeka.  You lift off

 8     and you can then receive a response and I think we've heard information

 9     that as long as you've got the transmit button down, you can't receive

10     any response.  Now, are you suggesting there's some kind of simplex

11     conversation where two sides can talk over each other and overlap each

12     other and not have to press a transmit button?

13        A.   This specific device does not have such constraints, the one that

14     was used by those who communicated in this recording.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  And what specific device was used?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know of such a device.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  No, you said:  "This specific device does not have

18     such constraints, the one that was used by those who communicated in this

19     recording."

20             Now what specific device was used, was my question.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand the question.  I don't

22     know.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  How could you draw any conclusions as what was

24     or was not possible with the device used?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, on the basis of the

Page 37974

 1     recording, I see that this is a device of some frequency below 100

 2     megahertz with a lot of fading.  That is to say, that the waves are

 3     bounced off, the participant who is closer to the station is heard well,

 4     the other one that is farther away fades away and that does not happen in

 5     radio relay communications, and that is not supposed to happen in radio

 6     relay communications.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. McCloskey.

 8             MR. McCLOSKEY:

 9        Q.   Really, sir, tell us what radio, simplex radio we can buy that

10     doesn't require us to press "transmit"?

11             MR. IVETIC:  I think that was asked and answered in the part -

12     one moment.  Actually answered page 63, lines 9 through 11.

13             MR. McCLOSKEY:  It was, but it was such an outrageous claim it

14     can be asked again, in my view.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  You can put the question again, Mr. McCloskey.

16             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Thank you.

17        Q.   Tell us, what simplex device is there in this world where you can

18     talk without pressing "transmit" and then letting go?

19        A.   I am not familiar with any type of radio device ...

20        Q.   And you agree that this tape we heard, that was a radio

21     transmission?  Wasn't a phone-tap, a wire-tap.

22        A.   At any rate, no, because there wouldn't be any fading heard.  And

23     that is why I said it was radio and below 100 megahertz.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Just to get matters now sharp, you say - than

25     apparently is a conclusion - apparently the equipment allowed for

Page 37975

 1     speaking at the same time, but you are not aware of any such equipment

 2     existing?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't know.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  So, therefore, that it's possible just to interrupt

 5     each other on a simplex communication is something -- you have no idea

 6     whether there was any equipment that allows for that?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't know.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. McCloskey.

 9             MR. McCLOSKEY:

10        Q.   Yes.  Sir, on re-direct examination for the first time, you used

11     this 65 ter 32891, page 21, that is the graph from Mr. Rodic's report and

12     the if I am one that we could all read showed that the Vlasenica

13     evaluation was at 620.  And I'm -- I know at this point we all agree that

14     getting the elevation of the reception point is important.  So let me go

15     to 65 ter 32924.

16             Sir, recently in order -- we -- we sent an investigator to the

17     Vlasenica headquarters with two elevation devices, and what you're about

18     to see is a report on what those devices said at the location of the

19     former Drina Corps headquarters.  And according to those devices, it was

20     at elevation above sea level of 672.  And we can see that at -- I'm

21     sorry, we don't -- didn't yet have an ability to translate it.  But you

22     can see the co-ordinates, north and east, and under that you see the

23     term, 672.

24             If we can go to the next page in the document.  This is a picture

25     of the building.  Do you recognise that building?  Have you been to

Page 37976

 1     that -- Drina Corps headquarters?  This is a bit more recent.  It may

 2     look a little more fixed up from the war days.

 3        A.   Sir, I've already said that I just passed through Vlasenica and

 4     it was before the war at that.

 5        Q.   All right.  Let's go to the next page then.  This is a different

 6     angle, a bit older, but I take it your answer is the same.

 7             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Do you recognise this building?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.  I've already said

 9     that I never walked through Vlasenica.  I just passed through it.

10             MR. McCLOSKEY:

11        Q.   Okay.  If we could look at the next photograph.  And that's just

12     an aerial shot.  Can you make any -- any sense out of that?  Which is the

13     actual co-ordinates from an aerial shot that gives us a feel for where it

14     is in the town?

15        A.   Sir, in this image, I can see that the building is somewhere

16     around the middle and by the river-bed or close to the river-bed.

17        Q.   All right.

18             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I would offer this into evidence.

19             MR. IVETIC:  No, Your Honours, we would object.  In so far as

20     it's a statement of facts not in evidence I think the proper procedure

21     would have to the Prosecution individuals examined or to have a site

22     visit to the site because we got this for the first time last week.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. McCloskey.

24             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Given what was brought out and how it was --

25     particularly how it was brought out that I think having a record of the

Page 37977

 1     elevation and the location is important and having read it into the

 2     record is fine with me if counsel thinks this is a problem.  If the Court

 3     wishes to accept this into evidence I think you have the power to do so.

 4             MR. IVETIC:  Well, the problem is --

 5             MR. McCLOSKEY:  [Overlapping speakers] ... with authority.

 6             MR. IVETIC:  I'm not trying to say the Court doesn't have

 7     authority, I'm saying that the Court should consider that this is a

 8     Prosecution investigator going out there with a specific purpose.  Now I

 9     would like to --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ...

11             MR. IVETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ... myself to measure.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  What is that purpose?

13             MR. IVETIC:  Well, the Prosecution's case is that the elevation

14     is higher than the Defence says it is for the -- for that particular

15     place.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

17                           [Trial Chamber confers]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  The document will be marked for identification.

19             The parties are invited and urged to see whether they can agree

20     on it.  It's a matter of nowadays of GPS equipment.  Choose the best you

21     can.  Put it at the bottom of that building and see whether it really

22     44.18 and 18.94 at an elevation of 672 and at the ground level.  I mean,

23     these are, I would say, you can argue all kind of other things, but this

24     is a matter which seems to be similar like where London is located or

25     New York or Paris or a certain building.  So, therefore, the parties are

Page 37978

 1     really urged now to seek agreement on it and the Chamber would like to

 2     know if there's disagreement, would like to know what is wrong.  And I

 3     just focus at this moment on nothing more than the location of the

 4     building which we see here and perhaps another question is, then, whether

 5     this is the building depicted in the previous paragraphs.  If the parties

 6     could agree on that as well, that would also be appreciated.

 7             MR. IVETIC:  I think the only issue is the elevation.  That's the

 8     crux of what I was saying, is the elevation of the building [Overlapping

 9     speakers] ...

10             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ... if that is the only thing

11     there is no dispute about this being the position of the building as

12     described by Mr. McCloskey.  That's hereby then clear and put on the

13     record.  Then the only thing one has to do is send someone this with the

14     three best GPS equipments you could think of and measure what the

15     evaluation is and that's -- if it is a matter of 1 or 2 metres then we

16     should not -- but if it is considerably different from what is here, then

17     the Chamber would like to know.

18             Meanwhile we mark the document for identification.

19             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Can we go back to the first page.  I know we went

20     through it pretty quick.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please do so.

22             MR. McCLOSKEY:  In that last paragraph, you can see that the

23     investigator used two GPS devices and he describes them.  So we got two.

24     We didn't have three.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  No, perhaps the Defence has a better one.  That's

Page 37979

 1     still possible.

 2             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Okay.  All right.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  We'd like to hear within the next three weeks from

 4     the Defence as to whether there is a dispute about the elevation of this

 5     place.

 6             Marked for identification.

 7             Madam Registrar, under number?

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  32924 receives exhibit number P7508,

 9     Your Honours.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And is marked for identification.

11             Any further question, Mr. McCloskey?

12             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  How many?

14             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I wanted to go over some of these -- well, this

15     one more issue on the elevation which I think will be helpful, and some

16     of the information that Your Honours were interested in.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  We'll take a break and the next witness is

18     then, I would say, excused and doesn't have to remain on stand by.

19     Unless you would think could you finish it in ten minutes, ten to 15

20     minutes.

21             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I doubt I can.  I really will try.  And if I get

22     to the point.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  The next witness, Mr. McCloskey, even explaining why

24     it takes more time, takes more time.

25             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yeah.

Page 37980

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  The next witness doesn't have to remain stand by.

 2     We take a break, and we resume at quarter to 2.00.  The witness may

 3     follow the usher.

 4                           [The witness stands down]

 5                           --- Recess taken at 1.24 p.m.

 6                           --- On resuming at 1.46 p.m.

 7                           [The witness takes the stand]

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. McCloskey, you may continue.

 9             MR. McCLOSKEY:

10        Q.   Sir, can you agree with me that with a good former Yugoslavia

11     topographic military map, one can reasonably determine elevation?

12        A.   [No interpretation]

13        Q.   Let's look briefly at 65 ter 32894.

14             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours, we didn't get interpretation of the

15     answer on the transcript.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  You confirmed what Mr. McCloskey put to you, that

17     you can reasonably determine and then I think it was elevation and not

18     evaluation.  I think I heard you confirm that.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

21             MR. McCLOSKEY:

22        Q.   You're not going to be able to -- it's too small a scale for us

23     to sort out detail and I don't -- I don't want ask you to, but what I'm

24     most interested in is can you tell from what you can see -- and let's

25     blow up the bottom.  I think it's the printing on the bottom that I think

Page 37981

 1     that is most important for these questions that we have the translation

 2     for to the right.

 3             So from what you see and we can -- well, we can read the

 4     translation -- oh.  If we could blow that up that English part there.

 5     Thank you.  It says:  "Published and printed by the Military and

 6     Geographical Institute."

 7             And so is this the kind of military map that you have used and

 8     that the VRS has used in the past?

 9        A.   Sir, I used maps like these, but I mostly used maps with a scale

10     of 1 to 100.000.  This one is 1 to 25.000.

11        Q.   All right.  And we can see that.  Thank you.  That we see contour

12     lines on this map.  And according to the scale down here, that there is

13     10 metres between -- 10 metres of elevation between contour lines on this

14     map; is that correct?

15        A.   Da. [No interpretation]

16        Q.   And now I'd offer this into evidence.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  65 ter 32894 receives exhibit number P7509,

19     Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Admitted into evidence.

21             MR. McCLOSKEY:

22        Q.   Now that map with the information on it was from the -- for the

23     Zvornik area and so now I want to take us to a map that includes

24     Vlasenica.  It's also a 1 to 25.000 but it's a blow-up of the Vlasenica

25     town area, and that is 65 ter 32922.

Page 37982

 1                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 2             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Maybe one more.  That's good.

 3        Q.   Now, what we've done is we've gone to the map where they've

 4     written in on the -- the makers of the map have written on various

 5     contour lines the elevation, and we have these two ovals where we saw

 6     600.

 7             So in those ovals, can you agree that those ovals reflect a

 8     600-metre elevation for the area along those contour lines?

 9        A.   It's drawn here.  I see 600 -- oh, I apologise.  First 600

10     metres, then 610, 620, 650, and the last is 680 at the centre near the

11     church.

12        Q.   Right.  But you'll agree with me that the written-in 600 in the

13     oval is the elevation of that particular contour line noted as 600;

14     correct?

15        A.   The arrow shows 680 metres at the contour line near the church.

16        Q.   Yeah, I'm talking about the one in the black ovals we'll get to

17     the church in a minute.  The two black ovals, that says 600 in that oval,

18     right, on that contour line?  The black oval on left corner, that just

19     means that contour is at 600 metres elevation.

20        A.   Maybe I can't see well, sir, but it seems to me that it's written

21     800 and here below 810.

22        Q.   I can --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask whether the parties agree on that it's

24     600?  Then you can put the follow-up questions to the --

25             Mr. Ivetic.

Page 37983

 1             MR. IVETIC:  I can't with this map, no.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  You can't with this map.

 3             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I've got a map that you can.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  The whole of the city is indicated here as being at

 5     680.

 6             Mr. Ivetic, would that change your mind as far as whether this

 7     could be 800?

 8             MR. IVETIC:  Well, now Your Honours are asking about a different

 9     number, 680 I suppose the one in the lower left-hand corner means 801.

10             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  No, below the word "Vlasenica."

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Below the word "Vlasenica," yes, it says 680.

12             MR. IVETIC:  Yes, it says 680, but what that is, I can't tell

13     from this map, that's what I'm saying.

14             JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... No, of course you can't.

15     Of course not.  It's usually an indication of the elevation, but of

16     course, you can't tell for this map.

17             Please proceed, Mr. McCloskey.

18             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Let's consider for the purposes of these

19     questions that this is 600 within this oval which I can tell you is clear

20     on a map without all the electronics.

21        Q.   If that is correct and it's 600 that would indicate that that

22     contour line that it's written on is 600 metres elevation; correct?

23             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You're referring to the top left corner, the oval

24     here.

25             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes.

Page 37984

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I see that the witness is looking at the different

 2     position.

 3             MR. McCLOSKEY:

 4        Q.   Look at the top left --

 5             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 6        Q.   If that says 600 on the contour line, according to the map makers

 7     that means 600 metres above sea level?

 8        A.   I see that.

 9        Q.   And you agree with that?

10        A.   Da. [No interpretation]

11        Q.   I heard you say "da."  I'm not sure that anyone else --

12             You agree that that 600 means in that oval is 600 elevation?

13        A.   I agree, sir.  And the terrain increases towards the centre.

14     Along the contour lines.

15        Q.   Yes, and I agree with you that it does increase.  And if, as

16     you've said previously and as we saw on that last map, if it increases in

17     elevation for ten metres on each -- for each contour line by the time we

18     get down near the -- the church, the church is at about 680 elevation;

19     correct?

20        A.   Yes, correct.

21        Q.   All right.  And so we can also see that same contour line, it's a

22     little -- it is hard to make out in this map.  So the 672 estimate of the

23     investigator is -- is consistent with this JNA map in terms of elevation,

24     is it not?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 37985

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. McCloskey, I don't know how you're going to

 2     proceed, but to -- to draw conclusions as to the consistency of 672, this

 3     witness is not better qualified than the Chamber to do these kind of

 4     things.  He has never seen this map before apparently.  We can interpret

 5     the map not any less than the witness could.

 6             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I understood.  It was just my way of getting so

 7     that you knew that that was my point.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Yes.  Yes.  Okay.  Please proceed.

 9             MR. McCLOSKEY:  All right.  I would offer this map into evidence.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, I hear of no objections.

11             Madam Registrar.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  65 ter 32922 receives exhibit number P7510.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And is -- you're on your feet.

14             MR. IVETIC:  I would only ask that we get the original, the

15     papers, so that we can actually make use of it instead of on the monitor.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  And I take it you have a paper copy somewhere, which

17     allows Mr. Ivetic to check whether what is added to the map, those are

18     the numbers whether that's accurately done, yes or no.

19             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes, and I think has had it in his computer but I

20     know there's a lot in the computer so I can handle -- we can get this for

21     him and --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Admitted into evidence and if any of the additions,

23     Mr. Ivetic, meet some objections that is to the indication of the numbers

24     related to the elevation lines, we'd like to hear from you within the

25     next 48 hours.

Page 37986

 1             Please proceed.

 2             MR. McCLOSKEY:

 3        Q.   Now, if we go briefly back to your report, D1187, page 32.

 4     Should be 47 in the B/C/S.  Okay.  And I want to get into the third

 5     paragraph under the northern site.

 6             And what I want to ask you about is from the station at the

 7     northern site, there is optical and radio visibility towards the nodes at

 8     Veliki Zep, Cer and Crna Vrh.  So I just want to confirm with you, from

 9     the northern site there is optical visibility to the Veliki Zep node?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   All right.  And -- when you talk about the southern site in your

12     report you don't note anything about the optical visibility between the

13     southern site and Veliki Zep.  But let me take you to Mr. Rodic's report,

14     65 ter 1D05805, page 19 in the English, page 16 in the B/C/S.  And this

15     is under seal as well.

16             And looking at this 7.1.2, visibility profile, southern site,

17     Veliki Zep, Mr. Rodic says:  "There is an optical and radio visibility,

18     and in that respect there are no obstacles for interceptions of

19     communications from" --

20             Yeah, I'm at 7.1.2.  Yeah, it should say there is no -- sorry.

21     Let me just make sure we get this right.  It says, "There is no optical

22     and radio visibility and in that respect there are no obstacles for

23     interceptions of communications ..."

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  There is an optical.

25             MR. IVETIC:  An optical, yes.

Page 37987

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  There is optical and radio visibility and there is

 2     no obstacle.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  And that is consistent with there being no

 4     obstacles.

 5             MR. McCLOSKEY:  That's what I meant to say.  Thank you for

 6     everyone helping on that.

 7        Q.   So do you believe -- do you agree with Mr. Rodic there is no

 8     optic visibility problem, that there is optic visibility between the

 9     southern site and Veliki Zep?

10        A.   I agree.

11        Q.   Okay.  And the Court has heard about the radio relay route,

12     Veliki Zep-Vlasenica.  So if there is optical -- if there is optical

13     visibility to Veliki Zep, if there's a communication to Vlasenica from

14     Veliki Zep, it can be picked up somewhere near Veliki Zep by both the

15     southern and northern site, because Veliki Zep doesn't have any optical

16     problems; correct?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And so I think we can debate for a long time about how close it

19     is to Vlasenica that we may or may not get into an optical visibility

20     issue.  But Veliki Zep was a good place to send your interception beams

21     if you're the Muslim army; right?

22             MR. IVETIC:  I object to the representation that interception

23     beams are sent somewhere.  We have been talking for three days about how

24     interception is done.  There was no discussion of beams being sent

25     somewhere and that's actually contrary to my understanding of the science

Page 37988

 1     involved.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 3             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  If you would rephrase your question but I take it

 5     that you wanted to know whether if you want to intercept whether

 6     Veliki Zep was a good place to do so for the Muslim army.

 7             MR. McCLOSKEY:  It's a good place -- I'll say point your beams.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Well --

 9             MR. McCLOSKEY:  -- if that's better.

10             MR. IVETIC:  It is not.

11             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Point your antennas.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  That's perhaps better.

13             Would Veliki Zep be a good place to -- for interceptions to at

14     least to focus on Veliki Zep to interceive communications?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sir, whoever is intercepting

16     selected places from which they can receive, and towards whom a

17     communication is sent doesn't matter, if I understood your question.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  My question was that if you would focus on

19     Veliki Zep, that that would be a good thing to do if you wanted to

20     interceive.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

23             MR. McCLOSKEY:

24        Q.   And I would just -- and focus from the northern site and the

25     southern site.  That's the key part of this.  Is that yes, you agree with

Page 37989

 1     me?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Thank you.

 4             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I have nothing further, Mr. President.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. McCloskey.

 6             MR. McCLOSKEY:  One small detail, if -- I did show a picture of

 7     the ribbon, and we have a picture of it just to get if we want to get

 8     that in the record so anyone reading it knows what I'm talking about.  I

 9     leave that in your hands.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  You were showing the witness a ribbon.  I think

11     there's no dispute about it.  That you did it ostensibly.  And I don't

12     think that anything put needs to be put on the record than that.

13             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Thank you, Mr. President.

14             Mr. Dosenovic, this concludes your testimony because my

15     colleagues have no further questions for you.  I'd like to thank you very

16     much for coming a long way to The Hague and for having answered all those

17     many questions that were put to you, both by the parties and by the

18     Bench, and I wish you a safe return home again.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  [Previous translation continues] ... you may follow

21     the usher.

22                           [The witness withdrew]

23                           [Trial Chamber confers]

24             JUDGE ORIE:  We have three minutes left.  I'll briefly deal with

25     a few matters which were still outstanding.  I still have many, but let's

Page 37990

 1     try to get rid of a few.

 2             The first one is about Exhibit P3706.  On the 11th of February of

 3     last year, 2014, Exhibit P3706 which is an excerpt from the minutes of

 4     the 63rd Session of the Kotor Varos Crisis Staff held on 7 July 1992 was

 5     admitted into evidence.  On the 4th of May of this year, 2015, the

 6     Prosecution informed the Chamber by e-mail that the incorrect B/C/S

 7     original, bearing 65 ter number 02611, had been uploaded into e-court and

 8     uploaded a corrected version under 65 ter number 02611a.  The Prosecution

 9     then requested the replacement of the original B/C/S version with the

10     corrected version.  This we have not heard of any objections by the

11     Defence.  The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to replace the

12     current B/C/S version of P3706 with the corrected version uploaded into

13     e-court under 65 ter number 02611a.

14             If there's any need to revisit the matter, you're invited to do

15     so within the next 48 hour, Mr. Lukic.

16             One very short, another one, about Exhibit P3468.  The Chamber

17     has identified a potential translation error in Exhibit P3468.  The

18     English translation of the document appears to be dated 2007 which does

19     not correspond with the B/C/S version dated 1995.  And the Chamber hereby

20     invites the Prosecution to have the English translation verified and

21     notify the Chamber and Defence accordingly.

22             I leave it to that.

23             We adjourn for the day, and we'll resume tomorrow, Wednesday, the

24     19th of August, 2015, 9.30 in the morning, in this same courtroom, I.

25                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.15 p.m.,

Page 37991

 1                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 19th day of

 2                           August, 2015, at 9.30 a.m.