1 Thursday, 20 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
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. Therefore, we'll wait for the
12 witness to enter the courtroom.
13 [The witness takes the stand]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Stojkovic.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojkovic, I'd like to remind you that you're
17 still bound by the solemn declaration you've given yesterday at the
18 beginning of your testimony, that you'll speak the truth, the whole
19 truth, and nothing but the truth. And Mr. McCloskey will now continue
20 his cross-examination.
21 Mr. McCloskey.
22 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President. And good morning.
23 Good morning, everyone.
24 WITNESS: ZARKO STOJKOVIC [Resumed]
25 [Witness answered through interpreter]
1 Cross-examination by Mr. McCloskey: [Continued]
2 Q. Good morning, Colonel.
3 We left off yesterday, I was asking you about your specialty. I
4 was able to see some of your military gazettes last night which for your
5 promotions noted you as an infantry officer. So that's right, isn't it,
6 you're an infantry man?
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you please answer the question? Not just
8 nodding. We need it on the transcript.
9 MR. McCLOSKEY:
10 Q. So the answer out loud --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Well, we still do not have --
12 MR. LUKIC: The translation is ongoing all the time.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I haven't replied
14 because I was waiting for the interpreter to conclude. The answer is
16 MR. McCLOSKEY:
17 Q. All right. Let's -- we'll go to July 1995 now, and your
18 statement which is our number D1203 notes that you were interviewed by
19 Milenko Dundjer on 12 July 2014. And did you speak to Mr. Dundjer or any
20 other member of the Defence about these events of your wedding, about the
21 material in your report, prior to 12 July 2014?
22 A. No, I did not.
23 Q. And your wife's report, D1202, shows us the date of 12 July 2014
24 for her interview with Mr. Dundjer, and -- but it also says that -- she
25 had an interview on the 10th of January, 2012. And I take it you've
1 for -- prior to seeing Mr. Dundjer on the 14th -- excuse me. The 12th of
2 July, 2014, you had a chance to speak to your wife to -- about the
3 subject matter that Mr. Dundjer questioned her about in 2012?
4 A. Does it have to do whether my wife had seen Mr. Dundjer before?
5 Is that what you were trying to ask?
6 Q. No. My question was did you -- well, did you have a chance to
7 talk to your wife about the subject matter that she talked to Dundjer
8 about in 2012?
9 A. There was no need, since it involved our wedding. We certainly
10 knew what the date of our wedding was, even without Mr. Dundjer.
11 JUDGE ORIE: The question was not whether there was any need to
12 discuss it. Did you discuss with your wife what she discussed in 2012
13 when being interviewed? Did you speak with her about the questions that
14 were asked to her? And whether there was a need to do that is not
15 something that is of any interest to us.
16 MR. McCLOSKEY:
17 Q. So could you answer the question?
18 A. No, we did not discuss it in this context. We only discussed the
19 possibility of both of us appearing as witnesses.
20 Q. So let me take you to the context that -- well, from my
22 General Mladic has been, in 2012, arrested. He's going to soon
23 be on trial. Your wife is interviewed by a Defence investigator and
24 is -- provides information obviously about the events on the day of your
25 wedding. This was in 2012. Surely, sir, after your wife -- or before
1 your wife speaks to this investigator in this utmost serious topic you're
2 going to talk with your wife about what the investigator asked her and
3 about what she said. It's what husbands and wives do.
4 So you talked to your wife about what the investigator had asked
5 her about, didn't you?
6 A. I repeat: We mostly discussed the possibility of our appearing
7 as witnesses at Mr. Mladic's trial, relating to the events that we have
8 been discussing.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, the first sentence of your
10 question: "General Mladic has been, in 2012, arrested."
11 Are you sure that this date is correct?
12 MR. McCLOSKEY: I think I meant to say he been arrested and I
13 believe he had been arrested by that time, but I may be wrong. It was a
14 long time ago.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's how I understood it, that you just
16 referred to a time-frame in which Mr. Mladic had already been arrested.
17 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Let's leave it to that --
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Okay.
20 JUDGE ORIE: -- and -- perhaps the witness could answer the
21 question now directly. Because you said what you mostly discussed. The
22 question was whether you also discussed the questions that were put to
23 your wife and what she said in 2012.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know precisely.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
1 Please proceed.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I just ask a question for clarification.
3 What triggered the discussion between your wife and yourself to
4 discuss the possibility of you becoming witnesses in this case? What was
5 the reason had you to discuss the fact that you may be called as
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember precisely.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: You don't remember. Thank you so much.
9 Carry on.
10 MR. McCLOSKEY:
11 Q. So, sir, before your statement in 2014, you did have a chance to
12 speak with your wife about some of the events at the wedding,
13 specifically when General Mladic arrived, how long he stayed, that kind
14 of thing. There's nothing wrong with that, sir. You can talk with your
15 wife to help refresh her recollection. So didn't you talk with your wife
16 to help each other refresh your recollection about when General Mladic
17 came and how long he stayed? Didn't you do that before your statement?
18 A. We both knew the sequence of events. There was no need to try to
19 harmonise things in detail or discuss the matter further.
20 Q. Sir, I didn't suggest harmonise. I said help refresh your
21 recollection. So is your answer that you didn't talk to your wife before
22 you talked to the investigator to help refresh your recollection about
23 what happened when Mladic came, how long he stayed?
24 A. For the most part, my wife and I discussed the matter with the
1 Q. As you've mentioned before, what you did mostly or for the most
2 part is not very helpful. So can you acknowledge now that you and your
3 wife did talk about the details of when Mladic arrived, how long he
4 stayed, before you spoke to the investigator?
5 A. Yes, but not in detail.
6 Q. Okay. And when you spoke to the investigator, was your wife with
8 A. During my interview with the investigator, she was not.
9 Q. And during her interview with the investigators, were you with
11 A. No.
12 Q. Okay. Let's go to the restaurant. And what time do you recall
13 General Mladic arriving at the restaurant on the 16th of July?
14 A. Please allow me to say that I already said yesterday that we left
15 our apartment together for the church. We were together at the church
16 throughout the wedding ceremony and after that, again all of us,
17 including ourselves, General Mladic and the guests --
18 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... for one reason
19 or another you think we're interested in things not asked. The
20 question -- can you hear me through the interpretation? If you'd just
21 focus on what is asked -- but any problem on the B/C/S channel? Not.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's fine now.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would you please answer the question. For one
24 reason or another, you think that we're interested in things we're not
25 asking you, or Mr. McCloskey is not asking you. At what time, as far as
1 you remember, did Mr. Mladic arrive at the restaurant?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise if I was
3 misunderstood. That was not my intention. I simply wanted to summarise
4 something I had already said. But do allow me to provide a direct answer
5 to Mr. Prosecutor's question.
6 General Mladic, ourselves, and the guests, once the wedding
7 ceremony was over, around 2.00, we arrived at the restaurant.
8 MR. McCLOSKEY:
9 Q. And you say "around 2.00." So given that had happened almost --
10 well, when you first started -- when your wife was first asked about it
11 in 2012, it happened a long time ago before you started talking about it.
12 So when you say "around 2.00," would that give or take an hour, give or
13 take 30 minutes? What's your best "around" estimate?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. So give or take an hour is fair, given the time distance and the
16 memory issues?
17 A. An hour would be too much. And I don't think it was before 2.00.
18 I don't think we arrived at the restaurant before 2.00.
19 Q. And when were you able to remember it was around 2.00? Because
20 it's not in your statement. Just now?
21 A. I was not asked about the time. I know that the wedding ceremony
22 had been scheduled to take place between noon and 2.00 p.m.
23 Q. Okay. So it's based on your memory of the wedding schedule, not
24 the actual time you arrived there? Which is fair enough. Even I
25 remember the time of my wedding.
1 Okay. I'm sorry, I was talking and so they probably didn't hear
2 your answer. Let me just continue then, I think. Can you tell us
3 that -- now, at the restaurant, was this a sit-down meal, or was it one
4 of these buffet affairs where people get their meals at the buffet and
5 sit around at tables, or was this a more formal, everybody sits down at
6 one table and gets served?
7 A. It was a wedding lunch, meaning the people were seated at the
9 Q. Okay. And when you first got to the restaurant, were there --
10 was there a like a small gathering in another room where people had
11 perhaps drinks or snacks then got together before they actually sat down?
12 Or did people, were they invited into the restaurant and sat down at the
14 A. Once they entered the restaurant, they sat down.
15 Q. And was there music played at the restaurant once people sat
16 down, or before?
17 A. Music began after they were seated.
18 Q. Can you -- do you remember roughly how long after people were
19 seated that the music started?
20 A. I can't remember precisely, but I know that the musicians stayed
21 until 8.00 p.m., for sure.
22 Q. That's how long they stayed, but my question was how long after
23 people sat down at the table did the music start playing.
24 A. I can't remember precisely.
25 Q. And were there drinks served at the restaurant?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Wine?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Beer?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And did General Mladic have his share of those drinks, any of
10 A. Only to make the toast.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey, the last item on the drinking list is
12 not there because you spoke too early.
13 MR. McCLOSKEY: Well --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Slivovitz.
15 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, we best get the slivovitz at the wedding on
16 the record.
17 JUDGE ORIE: It's on there now.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. McCLOSKEY:
20 Q. And what beverage did General Mladic use in his toast?
21 A. I can't remember precisely.
22 Q. And what beverage were you drinking at the restaurant?
23 A. Wine.
24 Q. Any slivovitz?
25 A. Only at the beginning, to join the toast.
1 Q. And I take it over this long evening of your wedding, you had a
2 few drinks and you were feeling good -- good about the day.
3 A. If you are in charge of organising things, you have to bear in
4 mind your conduct, no matter how much you drink.
5 Q. I agree, but let's get how much you did drink. Did you drink
6 enough so you could feel the alcohol?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Now, Did you have a chance to dance with your bride at the
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And about what time were you able to dance with your bride?
12 A. I can't remember specifically. It depended on the music.
13 Q. And at the time you were dancing with your wife, you --
14 General Mladic could have gone up and -- and left the area to the
15 restroom for a few minutes, I take it?
16 A. Not without me noticing.
17 Q. So did General Mladic ever leave during this period of time from
18 2.00 p.m. to 5.30 and go to the restroom?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Colonel, did he get up and take a break and go outside ever to --
21 or your eyes were on him the entire time?
22 A. Yes, he was before me throughout that time.
23 Q. Now let's go to a photo that the Defence provided us of your
24 wedding. It's 32879. And if Ms. Stewart could put it in, in Sanction I
25 think we might get a clearer picture of it?
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: While this comes up I would like to ask a
2 question for the witness.
3 Mr. Stojkovic, did anybody smoke during the long dinner or lunch?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Do you mean in the room or
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: This is my question to you.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, the people were smoking --
8 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could the witness kindly
9 be asked to move away from the microphone. Thank you.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You were asked to move a little away from the
11 microphone because it's difficult for the interpreters to listen.
12 I understand the people were smoking in the dining-room; correct?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. It was allowed.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Did you smoke?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At that time, yes.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Did General Mladic smoke?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
19 Mr. McCloskey.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey, before we continue, I'd like to put a
21 few questions --
22 MR. McCLOSKEY: Could I correct a misstatement I made just now.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please do.
24 MR. McCLOSKEY: We haven't seen it yet, but we are about to see a
25 photograph that actually was not provided by the Defence. We picked it
1 up ourselves so ...
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I have two short questions. How did you move
3 from the apartment to the church? Did you walk? Were you in cars?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We walked.
5 JUDGE ORIE: How did you move from the church to the restaurant?
6 Did you walk?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Also. We walked, all of us
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. McCLOSKEY:
12 Q. Now, let's take a look at this photograph, if we can;
13 65 ter 32879.
14 Do you see that photograph, sir?
15 A. Not yet.
16 Q. Sorry, it'll come up.
17 Do you see it now?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And for the record we see General Mladic near the centre of the
20 photograph. It appears to be a cigarette in his left hand, would you
22 A. Yes. But since I was a smoker myself, I didn't pay any attention
23 to one cigarette in one day.
24 Q. Yes. Well, we've seen General Mladic smoking in the
25 Hotel Fontana while speaking to people. So we know he smokes more than
1 just one cigarette at one wedding. Are you suggesting this was the only
2 cigarette General Mladic had at your wedding, your wedding dinner?
3 A. Probably. I'm not sure.
4 Q. It was a long time ago. You really can't be sure how many
5 cigarettes General Mladic smoked or how many times he went to the
6 restroom, can you?
7 A. As for cigarettes, I cannot be sure. As for the restroom, I do
8 know that he did not leave the room.
9 Q. Yes. And is this a picture of your wedding dinner at the
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. We see your bride next to General Mladic, and then we see you as
13 a slightly younger man with your hand to your chin?
14 A. Yes.
15 MR. McCLOSKEY: And could we focus in a bit on General Mladic's
17 Q. Now, it's not perfect, but if you look at your watch and you kind
18 of tilt it like that, what time does that look like to you?
19 A. 1500 hours.
20 Q. I thought it looked more like 1400 hours. But it is fuzzy.
21 A. It looks like 1500 to me. Rather.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. The Chamber is in a position to -- to analyse
23 what the Chamber sees and we do understand that you consider it to be
24 more 1500 hours and that the witness rather thinks as that -- the witness
25 rather thinks that it's 1500 hours and you think it's rather 1400 hours.
1 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes but I don't intend --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed --
3 MR. McCLOSKEY: -- to take it any further, Mr. President.
4 Q. And I want to show you one thing to see if it will refresh your
5 recollection. You're a military man. General Mladic was a military man.
6 MR. McCLOSKEY: Could we go, as the last exhibit,
7 Mr. President -- I would offer this into evidence and I don't know if the
8 Court wants the blow-up or wants -- I think you can probably --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Once it is in evidence, the Chamber and the Judges,
10 Mr. McCloskey, believe it or not, are able to zoom in and out. And if
11 there's any expert better matter of looking at that time, then please
12 present that, but just zooming in and out is within our competence.
13 MR. McCLOSKEY: I think Your Honour knows I -- well, I think I
14 know you're playing with me, so I take it as that. But if you ever need
15 Ms. Stewart's and Sanction's help to do what we did in court today we're
16 always at your service.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
18 MR. McCLOSKEY: And if we could -- I'd offer that into evidence.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Is it uploaded into e-court. It is, Madam Registrar
20 the number would be.
21 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter number 32879 receives Exhibit P7511,
22 Your Honours.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
24 Could I ask one question for the witness. Did I understand you
25 well, that on from when you met - I think that was at 10.00 in the
1 morning - up to the time Mr. Mladic left the restaurant which covers a
2 time of approximately seven to eight hours that neither you nor he went
3 to the restroom. Is that ...
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You mean irrespective of the
5 wedding dinner? You are referring to the entire period from 10.00 a.m.
6 at the apartment onwards?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But if you want to split it up, that's fine.
8 If you say I saw him going to the restroom in the apartment or during the
9 ceremony in church, that's fine. But you said you didn't lose him out of
10 sight during that whole period so that's the reason why I'm asking it for
11 the whole period. But if you can be more specific, please tell us.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The question was not from 10.00
13 a.m. onwards. It was about the meal in the dining-room, and that's why I
14 said that we were in the dining-room all the time in the restaurant.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And I'm now extending that question where your
16 statements says that you're always with him and you didn't lose him out
17 of sight from when he arrived. Could you tell us, neither you nor he did
18 go to the restroom when you were in the restaurant. Is that well
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Now, from 12.00 to 2.00, you said it was the
22 ceremony in church. You walked there. You walked from there to the
23 restaurant. Did you or he go to the restroom during those two hours?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. Since that is not allowed
25 during the church ceremony.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Now, from 10.00 to 12.00, from the moment he arrived
2 at your apartment and up to the moment where you arrived at the church,
3 Walking there, did you or he go to the restroom during those two hours?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do not recall exactly. Probably.
5 Since it's a small apartment.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I do not know whether in a small apartment you
7 go more to the restroom and in a large apartment, so leave that aside.
8 So you say you don't know whether you or he went to the restroom
9 between 10.00 and 12.00 but from 12.00 to anywhere between 5.00 and 6.00
10 up to the moment that Mr. Mladic left the restaurant you, neither he, did
11 go to the restroom.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I remember, that's the
13 way it was.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, are you sure about it; or do you say, Well, it
15 may have been but ...
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I remember, that's the
17 way it was. I cannot express myself in any other way: As far as I can
18 remember, after all, there is a time-period involved.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
20 Please proceed, Mr. McCloskey.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just one question.
22 Sir, at the restaurant -- I'm talking to you. At the restaurant,
23 did you -- did anybody else other than Mr. Mladic go to the restroom.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Probably. Probably.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: You say probably because you didn't observe
1 anybody going to the restroom. You don't remember observing anybody
2 going to the restroom?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I don't remember since I was
4 sitting at the head table, and there were about 80 people present all
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: And quite possibly some people went to the
7 restroom without you noticing.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Except for those who sat at
9 the head table.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, but there was dancing at a certain time,
11 isn't it so, and the people sitting at the head table sort of spread
12 around and started dancing. Is that not so?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's correct.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... at that time,
15 you would have been dancing with your wife and concentrating on the dance
16 with your wife?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... in those
19 circumstances anybody on the dance floor could have gone to the bathroom
20 without you noticing.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] From the dance floor, one could see
22 the head table the most.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... there's nobody
24 at the head table. Everybody's on the dance floor. I'm asking the
25 question during that dancing anybody could have gone to the bathroom
1 without you noticing. You were concentrating on the dance with your
2 wife. Is that not so?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. But the question had to do
4 with General Mladic, who did not dance, and he was sitting at the head
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Mladic did not dance? Is that your testimony?
7 He sat at the head table right through the dinner?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I can remember, yes.
9 MR. McCLOSKEY:
10 Q. Would it help your recollection if I told you we've seen
11 General Mladic's home videos at weddings. He's quite a dancer. Doesn't
12 that help you remember that he liked to dance at weddings and he actually
13 danced at your wedding?
14 A. I cannot remember exactly.
15 Q. Okay. Is this photo -- excuse me?
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: One short question.
17 Where in this restaurant was the restroom?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Outside the dining-room.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: On which floor?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's the first floor.
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: What floor is the restaurant itself? On what
23 floor is the restaurant itself?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The same one where the dining-room
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... on what floor
2 is that?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First floor.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Or the floor in between.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: In between what?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of the apartment building.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: I am completely lost now. I don't understand your
9 answer, sir. I'm not -- the floor in between the apartment building.
10 The apartment building and what?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The restaurant and its dining-room
12 are located within an apartment building, and the restaurant and its
13 dining-room are on the first floor.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: And the toilet, the restroom?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Likewise. Likewise.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. That's what I wanted to
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and earlier you said "or the floor in between."
19 Did you mean to say that there was a kind of a semi- or half
20 floor or halfway the stairs from one floor to another, that it could have
21 been there? If you don't remember, just tell us.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. I was determining the
23 floors in relation to height, so it is definitely the first floor.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. McCloskey.
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. Just one last exhibit and a short
1 series of questions.
2 Could we go to P01338.
3 Q. Sir, you're active lieutenant-colonel in the VJ. You've
4 certainly heard of General Vinko Pandurevic?
5 A. Yes.
6 MR. McCLOSKEY: We need to go to the next page. Sorry, this is
7 the wrong one. P1338. Okay. Thank you. That's right.
8 Q. What was your rank on the day of your wedding?
9 A. Captain first class.
10 Q. And had you heard of -- on your wedding -- actually, I believe he
11 was a colonel, Vinko Pandurevic, at the time.
12 A. I cannot remember exactly.
13 Q. Okay. What we have in front of us here is an intercepted
14 communication by the Bosnian State Security Service on 16 July 1995 at
15 1615 hours, the time that you were at the restaurant, and we see that
16 this is between the Main Staff duty officer, and that means the
17 Main Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska who was located, at the time,
18 in Crna Rijeka, and General Mladic. And they couldn't make out -- the
19 intercepters couldn't make out General Mladic's part of the conversation.
20 But we can see from the -- from what the duty officer is saying, he's
21 giving information about the president called a short while ago and, in
22 our view, that would be President Karadzic. He mentions Pandurevic,
23 other officials, and what I was wondering if you take a careful look at
24 this intercept, which the Prosecution believes, sir, is absolutely
25 genuine, do you remember General Mladic mentioning anything to you about
1 the goings-on over in Bosnia, anything about the president, anything
2 about Pandurevic? Anything like that?
3 A. No, never.
4 Q. And when General Mladic, he left the restaurant early; right?
5 A. At 1730 he said good-bye, and I saw him off at 1730.
6 Q. Yes, but that was earlier than everyone else.
7 A. No. There were people who left even earlier. They had to
8 because of transportation since there were wedding guests who were coming
9 in from outside Belgrade. There were some like that too.
10 Q. But is it fair to say he excused himself and cited official
12 A. He didn't mention any such thing.
13 Q. Well, when your wife testified, page 38058, starting at line 24
14 the question -- well, 20. Question says: "To the best of your
15 knowledge, do you remember when General Mladic and his wife left your
17 And what she said was: "Yes. I think I pointed out in my
18 statement it was around 5.30. I don't know whether it was a minute or
19 two before or later, but definitely around 5.30 or quarter to 6.00. That
20 is when he left the dining hall at the Dva Ribara restaurant where the
21 ceremonial lunch took place. He excused himself, citing official
23 And I quote your wife: "He excused himself, citing official
25 And then she said: "I stayed in the dining hall with my guests
1 while my husband escorted him to the car."
2 So you would agree with your wife, would you not, that she's
3 correct? Perhaps you didn't hear Mladic tell that to her, but she said
4 he excused himself, citing official duties. So would you support your
5 wife on that?
6 A. I'm not sure about official duties, but I am sure that he excused
7 himself and said good-bye.
8 Q. You have no reason to believe your wife is not telling the truth
9 about that statement, do you?
10 A. Of course. Since, when one leaves a wedding, one says good bye
11 to the bride and the groom. So I do not rule out the possibility that
12 that is what she was told, but I did not hear that.
13 Q. Thank you. I have no further questions.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I have. No, I first give an opportunity -- any
15 questions arising from cross, Mr. Lukic, which you'd like to address.
16 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour, but can I consult with my client
17 for a second.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you can. But, again, it's not the first time
19 that Mr. Mladic speaks at audible volume and that is the only thing he is
20 not allowed to do. So take care that nothing can be heard by others.
21 [Defence counsel confer]
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
25 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 Re-examination by Mr. Lukic:
2 Q. [Interpretation] Good day once again.
3 A. Good day, Mr. Lukic.
4 Q. Please let us focus now on the arrival in the Dva Ribara
5 restaurant. You were asked whether it was an hour before or later, and
6 you said it's around 2.00, not earlier. Can you say that an hour was too
7 long? How much later? Can you tell us now? Five, ten minute, half an
8 hour later?
9 A. As far as I can remember, around 1400 hours, we left the church
10 on foot towards the restaurants and that is why I said "around 1400
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Question -- how far --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the logical follow-up question is how far is it
14 from the church to the restaurant, 500 metres, 200 metre, 1 kilometre?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A couple of hundred metres. 500
16 metres maximum.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so it wouldn't take more than ten, 15 minutes
18 at the most.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, calculating already that walking in a wedding
21 dress doesn't go as fast as in a normal dress.
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
24 Q. [Interpretation] It had been put to you that the general liked to
25 dance at parties. You told us that you do not remember that he danced.
1 What happened in the Mladic family during that last year, a year and a
2 bit, before your wedding? Did some misfortune befall the family?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Do you remember what happened in the Mladic family?
5 A. They lost their daughter, Ana.
6 Q. You said that you did not lose sight of the general. What kind
7 of status does the best man enjoy in our part of the world?
8 A. The best man, much like in the English culture, it entails
9 someone of high moral principle, exemplary conduct, and family
11 Q. Thank you. Could we look at the intercept before us, P1338.
12 My colleague, Mr. McCloskey also said --
13 A. Yes, it's on the screen.
14 Q. My learned friend Mr. McCloskey told you that those intercepting
15 such conversations were unable to hear General Mladic in this case. In
16 the intercept itself, among the words uttered by the participants,
17 there's no mention of General Mladic.
18 A. Yes, that is correct.
19 Q. At 4.15 on the day of your wedding, to the best of your
20 recollection and to the best of your knowledge, would it have been
21 possible for General Mladic to establish radio communication with the
22 Main Staff of the VRS in Crna Rijeka?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Mr. Stojkovic, let me just ask you this: Would you say you were
25 drunk at your own wedding?
1 A. No way.
2 Q. Thank you. This would be all we had of you.
3 JUDGE ORIE: I have one or two questions for you, Mr. Stojkovic.
4 Questioned by the Court:
5 A statement was taken from you and a statement was taken from
6 your wife. Those statements were signed. Did you read or see the
7 statement that was taken from your wife?
8 A. No.
9 JUDGE ORIE: To the best of your knowledge, did your wife see or
10 read your statement?
11 A. Not as far as I know.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Did you receive a copy of your own statement?
13 A. Do you mean here or before the trial?
14 JUDGE ORIE: At any time. If you did, tell us when.
15 A. I can't recall.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Not recall when or that you got a copy?
17 A. I can't recall whether I received one.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do you have any recollection as to giving your
19 wife access to the statement that was put on paper for you?
20 A. No. Because, as far as I remember, our statements remained with
21 the counsel to whom we had provided them.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And when you were finally prepared for
23 appearing as a witness here, the statement of your wife was not shown to
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My statement was shown to me when I
1 arrived here during the proofing I had with Mr. Branko Lukic.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Were you alone during that proofing or were you
3 together with your wife?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At times, I was together with my
5 wife, depending on the attorney-at-law's, Mr. Branko Lukic's requests.
6 JUDGE ORIE: So during the part of the proofing, you were there
7 and your wife was there as well.
8 A. Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Did you -- at that time, was your statement read to
10 her or was her statement read to you, during that part of the proofing?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I'm asking you this for the following reasons, and
13 I'd like you to first listen to what I'm telling you.
14 When your wife was asked at what time Mr. Mladic left the
15 restaurant, she said: "As I said already in my statement, it was at
17 Now, in the statement of your wife that time is not mentioned.
18 However, in your statement that time is mentioned. So I wondered why
19 your wife said: "As you can see in my statement it was 5.30," where we
20 can only see that in your statement. Do you have any explanation as to
21 why she would have said: "As you can see in my statement, it was 5.30,"
22 where it is not in hers but it is in your statement?
23 A. I do not have a particular explanation, except for the fact that
24 my wife knew the approximate time as well.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But I'm focussing not on the time. I'm
1 focussing on what she said, that that can be found in his statement,
2 which was not the case.
3 I have no further questions.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just to make sure I heard you properly --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mladic, no --
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have something.
7 JUDGE ORIE: No speaking aloud, Mr. Mladic. Sit down. Sit down.
8 Mr. Mladic ...
9 [Defence counsel confer]
10 JUDGE ORIE: I still can hear Mr. Mladic so he should really
11 speak at inaudible volume or remain silent.
12 MR. McCLOSKEY: Excuse me, Mr. President. You may want to look
13 at paragraph 9 of the wife's statement.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: While you do that, can I ask the question I wanted
15 to ask.
16 JUDGE ORIE: If I made a mistake, of course, I stand to be
17 corrected, but ...
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The document should be D1202.
19 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please. You said paragraph ...
20 Yes, it says "about." Where -- I do agree that I -- it -- that
21 it could be understood as mentioning 5.30 and I stand, in that respect,
22 corrected. And that's -- it's good that you point my attention to it. I
23 was looking at the figures, 5.30, is in the statement of the husband
24 whereas approximately that time is mentioned in the statement of the
25 wife. I stand corrected. I think I have not sufficiently looked at
1 that. And if that is what Mr. Mladic wanted to bring to the attention of
2 Mr. Stojanovic, then I better understand -- then I better understand why
3 he wanted to intervene immediately. That's on the record hereby. I
4 think Mr. Mladic wanted to convey something else. You can tell it to
5 Mr. Stojanovic if there's anything you would like to bring to our
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] It's fine now, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And I also thank Mr. McCloskey for pointing at this.
10 [Defence counsel confer]
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sir, I just wanted one question.
13 Just to make sure I heard you properly, did I hear you correctly
14 that you said when you were with Mr. Lukic together with your wife at the
15 same time, that was at Mr. Lukic's request?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes --
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ...
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Given the fact that procedurally --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please finish what you started saying.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wanted to say that it was at
21 Mr. Lukic's request so as to explain to us the procedure and protocols in
22 place before the Tribunal when it comes to witnesses.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey, any further questions?
24 MR. McCLOSKEY: No, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojkovic, this concludes your testimony in this
1 court. I would like to thank you very much for coming to The Hague and
2 for having answered all the questions that were -- all the questions that
3 were put to you, put to you by the parties, put to you by the Bench. I
4 wish you a safe return home again.
5 You may follow the usher.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
7 [The witness withdrew]
8 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber, at least I got a note, that we had
9 received information that there were no further witnesses available.
10 MR. LUKIC: That's correct, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we expected the problems last week and we have
12 the problems now apparently.
13 When will the next witness arrive and when --
14 MR. LUKIC: Next witness should arrive on Saturday, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: On Saturday.
16 MR. LUKIC: For Monday.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Any explanation as to why this situation arose.
18 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour. There was a scheduled videolink
19 from Banja Luka but Banja Luka court is not operating before the 25th of
20 August, so we were not able to organise that videolink.
21 JUDGE ORIE: We've seen that. But no other witnesses --
22 MR. LUKIC: No other witnesses were able to come before the end
23 of this week.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. It's for a fact we can't go on the streets
25 and find witnesses and fill our time.
1 Therefore --
2 MR. LUKIC: I have one issue to raise if we are going to finish
3 the day for today.
4 JUDGE ORIE: No, we are not because we have a lot of items on our
5 agenda to be read --
6 MR. LUKIC: Then I can continue after the break.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and we are already late for the break and we
8 should have stopped 15 minutes ago.
9 We take a break, and I suggest that we take a break for half an
10 hour and we resume after that. Any matter you'd like to raise then is --
11 you could do that first and after that we'll deal with quite a few
12 procedural matters.
13 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour. I was just asked by Mr. Mladic if
14 it is possible for him to leave and not to be present for these
15 procedural matters.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mladic always can waive his right to be -- to be
17 present during trial. Whether he can be transported immediately is a
18 matter that's beyond our control, but at least the Registry is now aware
19 of the wish of Mr. Mladic to -- to not further attend.
20 We'll -- one second, please.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE ORIE: In order to proceed, not having received yet any
23 written waiver, I'd like to have Mr. Mladic, at this moment, confirm
24 orally that he waives his right to be present after the break just for
25 this day. If he could use the microphone to tell us, then we would have
1 it on the record.
2 Mr. Mladic, do you waive your right to attend court for the rest
3 of this day in which we'll not hear any further evidence but in which
4 we'll deal with procedural matters.
5 Could you please respond to that.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Comrade Orie, I waive my right.
7 And I feel the need to receive my best man and matron of honour in the
8 Detention Unit --
9 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Mladic, the
10 Court accepts a waiver without being informed of what you'd rather do
11 than be in court. It's hereby on the record that you waived your right.
12 Therefore, we'll resume at 20 minutes past 11.00.
13 --- Recess taken at 10.49 a.m.
14 [The accused withdrew]
15 --- On resuming at 11.23 a.m.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I, first of all, put on the record that Mr. Mladic
17 is not present in the courtroom and we heard his waiver just before the
18 last break.
19 I have quite a number of items on my agenda, and I saved them for
20 a rainy day. I start with the replacement of P2586.
21 On the 21st of April of this year, the Prosecution informed the
22 Chamber and the Defence, via e-mail that a corrected version of P2586 had
23 been uploaded into e-court. The Prosecution requested the Chamber to
24 instruct the Court Officer to replace P2586 with the version uploaded
25 under Rule 65 ter number 30368b.
1 On the 22nd of April, the Defence responded, stating that it did
2 not object.
3 The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to replace the existing
4 version of P2586 with the uploaded document.
5 Next item is a remaining issue from the testimony of
6 Vinko Nikolic.
7 On the 5th of February of this year, D893, a table of concordance
8 with regard to the adjudicated facts included in Vinko Nikolic's witness
9 statement was marked for identification, pending verification of the
10 information contained in the document. This can be found at transcript
11 pages 31240 through 31243. As of today's date, the Defence has not
12 verified the information contained in D893.
13 The Chamber sets a deadline of one week from today for the
14 Defence to respond.
15 Next item is a remaining issue from the testimony of
16 Goran Krcmar, P7171.
17 On the 3rd of March of this year, P7171, an UN Security Council
18 document, was marked for identification, pending an agreement between the
19 parties as to the excerpt to be tendered.
20 On the 2nd of April, the Prosecution advised the Chamber via
21 e-mail that: 1, it had informed the Defence of its proposed selection
22 which was uploaded into e-court under 65 ter number 32099a; and, 2, the
23 Defence had not requested the tendering of additional portions.
24 On the 26th of June, the Prosecution sent the Chamber a further
25 e-mail advising that the B/C/S translation of the excerpt had been
1 uploaded into e-court and attached to the English investigation.
2 The question arises whether the Defence has any objections to the
3 admission of the document bearing 65 ter number 32099a.
4 If you are not in a position to respond, Mr. Lukic, and I see
5 you're nodding no, which is hereby on the record, the Chamber is hereby
6 instructing the Registry to assign P7171 to 65 ter number 32099a and
7 admits it into evidence.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ORIE: And the Defence is -- does not need to give specific
10 reasons if they want to revisit the matter by not later than next week,
11 Tuesday. If there are serious portions to be added, Mr. Lukic, then
12 we'll reconsider our decisions without requiring you to give the usual
13 reasons for reconsidering a decision.
14 Four -- number 4 on my agenda is a remaining issue from the
15 testimony of Ian Hanson. It's about D1084.
16 On the 25th of June, 2015, exhibit number D1084 was reserved for
17 two pages of a document bearing Rule 65 ter number 1D05491. This can be
18 found at transcript page 36339.
19 The Chamber at that time instructed the Defence to upload these
20 pages into e-court and decided these pages will be admitted once
22 On the 9th of July, the Defence advised the Chamber and the
23 Prosecution via e-mail that the pages had been uploaded under the
24 document bearing Rule 65 ter number 1D05491a.
25 The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to attach the extracts
1 to the reserved exhibit number and hereby admits D1084 into evidence.
2 Next is a remaining issue from the testimony of Milutin Misic.
3 It's about D1095.
4 During the testimony of Milutin Misic between 8 and 10 July of
5 this year, translation issues arose with regard to the documents marked
6 for identification D1095, D1096, D1105, and D1106. In the weeks after
7 his testimony, the Defence advised the Chamber and the Prosecution via
8 e-mails that the English translations had been uploaded into e-court
9 under document numbers -- document IDs 1D25-1896, 1D25-2445, 1D25-1762,
10 and 1D25-1906 respectively.
11 With regard to D1105, it concerned a revised translation. The
12 Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to attach the corresponding
13 translations to D1095, D1096 and D1106 and hereby admits them into
14 evidence, whereby D1096 stays under seal.
15 Lastly, the Chamber instructs the Registry to replace the current
16 translation of D1105 with the revised translation and admits D1105 into
18 Next on my agenda are remaining issues from the testimony from
19 the testimony of Tihomir Stevanovic.
20 I start with the admission of P7372.
21 On the 7th of May of this year, P7372 was marked for
22 identification pending English translation. This can be found at
23 transcript page 35257.
24 On the 24th of July, the Prosecution advised the Chamber via
25 e-mail that an English translation had been uploaded into e-court under
1 document ID 0430-3446-ET-1.
2 On the 11th of August, the Defence advised the Prosecution and
3 the Chamber via e-mail that it had no objection. The Chamber hereby
4 instructs the Registry to attach the translation and admits P7372 into
6 The next is replacement of P2109.
7 On the 6th and the 7th of May of this year, during the testimony
8 of Tihomir Stevanovic, a translation issue arose with Exhibit P2109.
9 This can be found at transcript pages 35225 and 35250.
10 On the 24th of July, the Prosecution advised the Chamber via an
11 e-mail a revised English translation had been uploaded into e-court under
12 doc ID 0529-6797-ET-1.
13 On the 11th of August, the Defence advised the Prosecution and
14 the Chamber via e-mail that it had no objection.
15 The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to replace the current
16 translation of P2109 with the revised translation.
17 I now move to a remaining issue from the testimony of
18 Drasko Vujic.
19 During the testimony of Drasko Vujic on the 4th of May of this
20 year, P7368, a newspaper article from Kozarski Vjesnik dated the 17th of
21 November, 1995 was marked for identification following the Defence's
22 objection to admission. This can be found at transcript pages 35039
23 through 35040. The Defence indicated it would address the document
24 during re-examination of the witness. However, the Defence has not made
25 any further submissions on this matter. This can be found at transcript
1 pages 35040 and 35062.
2 The Chamber sets a deadline of one week from today for the
3 Defence to respond.
4 Perhaps it's not much of a response, but at least to make any
5 submission in relation to the admission of this document.
6 I now move to remaining issues from the testimony of
7 Bruno Franjic.
8 The first one is a revised translation of P7433. During the
9 testimony of Bruno Franjic on the 25th of June of this year, the Chamber
10 asked for a review of the English translation of the witness's CV,
11 admitted as P7433. This can be found at transcript page 36384.
12 On the 16th of July, the Prosecution informed the Chamber in an
13 e-mail that a revised English translation had been uploaded into e-court
14 under number doc ID 0687-0517-ET-1 and requested replacement of the
15 existing translation with the revised version. In this revised
16 translation, the description of the witness's occupation as "court sworn
17 criminology expert" has now been corrected to "court sworn forensic
18 criminalistics expert."
19 Does the Defence have any objections?
20 MR. LUKIC: No, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber hereby then instructs the Registry to
22 replace the current the translation of P7433 with the revised
24 Next is the admission of D1085.
25 During the testimony of Franjic on the 29th of June of this year,
1 exhibit number D1085 was reserved for an excerpt from a brochure from
2 Unis Igman d.d. Company to be selected and uploaded by the Defence. This
3 can be found at transcript pages 36486 through -487.
4 On the 29th of July, the Defence advised the Chamber in an e-mail
5 that it had selected pages 1 and 2 of the brochure to be admitted as
7 On 11 August the Defence informed the Chamber that the excerpt
8 had been uploaded into e-court under 65 ter number 1D05461a and requested
9 its admission into evidence.
10 Any objections from the Prosecution?
11 You have 48 hours to revisit the matter if you suddenly change
12 your mind and wanted to express any objections. But the Chamber hereby
13 instructs the Registry to attach the extract as uploaded to the reserved
14 exhibit number and admits D1085 into evidence.
15 And, again, a request for reconsideration doesn't need to be
16 motivated similarly as I -- was the case previous with the Defence.
17 I now to remaining issues from the testimony of Goran Dragojevic.
18 During Goran Dragojevic's testimony on the 14th of May of this
19 year, his 92 ter statement was admitted as Exhibit D1049 together with
20 three associated exhibits. Those are D1050 through D1052. This can be
21 found at transcript pages 35591 and 35619.
22 The Chamber notes that the Defence did not seek admission of the
23 other eight associated exhibits included in its 92 ter motion dated the
24 15th of September, 2014.
25 Could the Defence indicate whether it still intends to tender
1 these associated exhibits or whether they are withdrawn.
2 MR. LUKIC: Your Honours, I have to revisit the issue and go
3 through the documents.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll hear from you by next week, Tuesday, and
5 if do you not make any submissions, they are considered to be withdrawn.
6 I move onto admission of P6976.
7 During the testimony of Milorad Sajic, P6976, a video of a
8 meeting in Banja Luka, was marked for identification. Subsequently the
9 Prosecution informed the Defence and the Chamber that a revised English
10 translation of the video's transcript is available. The Defence
11 indicated that it had no objections.
12 The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to replace the English
13 translation of P6976 with the revised version uploaded as doc ID
14 0301-0000b-1 and admitted P6976 into evidence.
15 Next item deals with the replacement of a translation and
16 concerns Exhibit P7023.
17 On the 2nd of April of this year, the Prosecution sent an e-mail
18 informing the Defence and the Chamber that a revised English translation
19 of Exhibit P7023, an excerpt of the 49th Session of the Republika Srpska
20 Assembly, was available under Rule 65 ter number 2410b.
21 The Prosecution indicated that the revised version identifies the
22 speaker as Mr. Karadzic. However, in identifying the speaker, the
23 revised version adds ten pages of the document to the exhibit.
24 Furthermore, it is sufficiently clear from the transcript of the 18th of
25 December, 2014 in this case that the excerpt contains the words of
1 Mr. Karadzic.
2 Under these circumstances, the Chamber denies the Prosecution's
3 request to replace the English translation of P7023.
4 I move to the admission of D1083.
5 On the 23rd of June of this year, D1083 was reserved for an
6 extract of a document describing data and equipment used by the Ljubija
7 mining company. Subsequently, the Defence, in an e-mail, informed the
8 Chamber and the Prosecution that an excerpt had been uploaded under
9 Rule 65 ter number 1D05826.
10 The Chamber instructs the Registry to assign Rule 65 ter number
11 1D05826 to Exhibit D1083 and admits it into evidence.
12 I would now read an oral decision on the admission of P6889.
13 The Chamber as I said now delivers its decision on the admission
14 of Exhibit P6889 which was marked for identification during the testimony
15 of Nedjo Vlaski on the 4th of November, 2014. This document was further
16 used during the testimony of Tomislav Puhalac on 10th of November.
17 On the 4th of November, the Defence challenged the authenticity
18 of P6889 an undated report on meetings between the SDS Main Board and the
19 Crisis Staff between the 1st of the January and the 31st of May, 1992 and
20 objected to its admission.
21 On the 20th of January, 2015, the Prosecution stated that the
22 parties were in discussion about this document, and on the 6th of March,
23 the Prosecution informed the Chamber by e-mail that the parties had not
24 reached an agreement.
25 The Defence submits that P6889 was created by Bosnian Muslims and
1 not by Serb authorities as Trnovo was at one point under Muslim control.
2 I refer to transcript pages 27821, 27822, 27846 and the OTP e-mail of the
3 6th of March.
4 The Prosecution submits that the Trnovo security service created
5 this document and that the Sarajevo Agency for Investigation and
6 documentation recovered it during the reintegration process; transcript
7 pages 27821 and -822 and 27844.
8 It further submits that P6889 was created by Serbs on the basis
9 of the references and the language used in the document, as well as its
10 consistency with other documents that reflect similar records of the same
11 meetings, including P3777 and P6887 to be found at transcript pages 27844
12 and in the e-mail of the 6th of March.
13 The Prosecution noted also that Vlaski at transcript page 27807
14 confirmed his own comments in those meetings as they were recorded in
15 P6889. The applicable law governing the admission of evidence is set out
16 in Rule 89(C) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence which allows a
17 chamber to admit any relevant evidence which it deems to have probative
18 value. Authenticity is a factor to be taken into consideration in
19 determining whether the tendered material has probative value. Definite
20 proof of reliability is not required. Prima facie evidence of
21 reliability on the basis of sufficient indicia is sufficient to grant
22 admission the Chamber has reviewed P6889 in light of the parties'
23 submissions and the testimonies of Vlaski and Puhalac. The Chamber notes
24 that the document bears a signatory body which states, "State Security
25 Sector, Trnovo," and that was a quote, and that the Prosecution provided
1 information on the origin of the document, namely, that it was recovered
2 by the Agency for Investigation and Documentation. P6889 is also largely
3 consistent with other exhibits that describe the same meetings, including
4 P3777 and P6887. Vlaski also described parts of P6889 and thereby
5 implicitly confirmed as accurate the minutes of the meeting as they are
6 recorded in the document.
7 Based on the foregoing, the Chamber finds that there are
8 sufficient indicia for prima facie proof of reliability, that P6889 is
9 relevant and of probative value pursuant to Rule 89(C) and hereby admits
10 it into evidence.
11 The Chamber, however, emphasises that the weight to be attributed
12 to P6889 will be assessed in the context of all the evidence before the
14 The Chamber now moves to translation issue that's rose with
15 regard to P6889 during Vlaski and Puhalac's testimonies. This can be
16 found at transcript pages 27863 to 27864 and 28026 to 28027.
17 On the 15th of December, 2014, the Chamber informed the Chamber
18 and the Defence by e-mail that a revised English translation had been
19 uploaded into e-court under document 0228 -- yes. It was the Prosecutor
20 that informed the Chamber on the 15th of December, 2014 that the revised
21 English translation had been uploaded under number 0228-0101-A-ET.
22 The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to replace the current
23 translation of P6889 with the revised translation.
24 Finally, the Prosecution is instructed to file notification
25 containing its e-mail dated the 6th of March, 2015 for the record.
1 And this concludes the Chamber's decision.
2 I now move to the replacement and admission of P6865.
3 On the 29th of October, 2014, during the testimony of
4 Slavko Kralj, the Prosecution tendered in intercept bearing 65 ter number
5 25112 for which the Chamber reserved exhibit number P6865, pending the
6 uploading of a revised translation.
7 On the 24th of July of 2015 the OTP indicated in an e-mail that
8 the revised translation had been uploaded and on the 11th of August, the
9 Defence responded that it did not object to the revised translation. The
10 Chamber therefore instructs the Court Officer to replace the existing
11 translation of P6865 with the translation bearing doc ID number
12 0504-7165-ET-1 and admits P6865 into evidence.
13 I move to the admission of D649.
14 On the 19th of September, 2014, during the testimony of
15 Witness GRM246, Exhibit D649 was marked for identification pending the
16 outcome of a discussion between the parties concerning its reliability.
17 This can be found at transcript pages 25917 through 25918. However, the
18 Chamber has not received any additional submissions since that time.
19 Could the parties tell the Chamber what the result of that
20 discussion was, if there is any result? And I can imagine that you not
21 be able to do that right way; but if so, you have an opportunity do it
23 No one stands up. Therefore, one week from today is the deadline
24 hereby set for additional submissions on the admission of D649.
25 I move to the replacement and admission of P7019.
1 On the 17th of December, 2014, during the testimony of
2 Boro Tadic, Exhibit P7019 was marked for identification due to its
3 illegibility. The Prosecution e-mailed the Chamber and Defence on the
4 same day, stating that it had uploaded a more legible version and
5 requesting the replacement and admission of the exhibit.
6 On the 5th of March of this year, the Chamber set a deadline of
7 seven days for any additional submissions once the Registry had replaced
8 the exhibit.
9 On the 7th of March, the Registry filed a memo confirming the
10 exhibit's replacement, after which no additional submissions were made.
11 The Chamber hereby admits Exhibit P7019 into evidence.
12 Next on my list is the admission of P7209.
13 On the 12th of March, 2015, during the testimony of Miso Rodic,
14 Exhibit P7209 was marked for identification pending a English
16 On the 17th of March, the Prosecution e-mailed the Chamber and
17 the Defence, indicating that the translation had been uploaded and that
18 it would request replacement of the existing translation and admission of
19 the document into evidence.
20 The question to the Defence is whether it has any objections to
22 I apply the same system, that is, that the Chamber instructs the
23 Court Officer to replace the existing translation of Exhibit P7209 with
24 the translation bearing doc ID number 0091-6545a and admits P7209 into
1 Until Tuesday, Mr. Lukic, you have an opportunity, and you can do
2 that without motivation, to request the Chamber to reconsider this
3 decision, of course, then giving the reasons why you oppose the -- why
4 you object to the admission. Yes, of course, if you do.
5 I move to the next item, which is also a remaining issue from the
6 testimony of Miso Rodic.
7 On the 12th of March during his testimony, the Defence indicated
8 that the document bearing Rule 65 ter number 18387 which it had tendered
9 as an exhibit associated with Rodic's witness statement was mistakenly
10 referenced in that statement. The Chamber also notes that the document
11 is already in evidence as part of Exhibit P3271. And for these reasons,
12 the Chamber denies the admission into evidence of the document bearing
13 Rule 65 ter number 18387.
14 I move to my next item which deals with the withdrawal of 92 ter
15 motions for dropped witnesses.
16 On the 6th of February and the 25th of March, 2015, the Defence
17 filed submissions informing the Chamber that it was withdrawing several
18 witnesses who could not be called to testify. The Chamber considers, in
19 such circumstances, that the corresponding Rule 92 ter motions for such
20 witnesses are also withdrawn and hereby place this is on the record.
21 I move to a remaining issue from the testimony of
22 Bosko Kelecevic.
23 On the 15th of July of this year, P7485, an interview with
24 Bosko Kelecevic, was admitted into evidence.
25 On the 16th of July, the Prosecution requested via e-mail that
1 P7485 be replaced with an excerpt of the interview which has been
2 uploaded into e-court as document bearing 65 ter number 32715b.
3 The question to the Defence is whether there's any objection to
4 this replacement?
5 MR. LUKIC: It is shorter version. Probably not, but maybe we
6 should just be given some time to see if we want to include anything for
7 better understanding purposes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Lukic, would it be a problem for you if I
9 would do it in a similar way, to already instruct and if you revisit the
10 matter by next Tuesday that you don't have to give -- of course, you
11 would have to give the reason why you want to revisit it, but you don't
12 have to motivate why reconsideration is justified.
13 Then the Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to replace P7485
14 with the document bearing 65 ter number 32715b.
15 I move to the semi-last item which is about D745.
16 On the 5th of November, 2014, during the testimony of
17 Nedjo Vlaski, the Prosecution stated it did not object to the admission
18 of D745 as long as the Defence provided information relating to the
19 source of the document and established personal knowledge foundation
20 through the witness.
21 On the 20th of May of this year, the Defence e-mailed the Chamber
22 and Prosecution and advised that Vlaski: "Confirmed that the document
23 was provided to him by the Serbian security level."
24 On the 15th of July, the Chamber asked the Prosecution for its
25 position. As at today's date the Prosecution has not responded, and the
1 Chamber therefore sets a deadline of one week for the Prosecution to
2 provide its submissions.
3 The very last item, D768.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Just to be sure that the record will be even more
6 perfect than it is already, page 45, line 17, reads that Vlaski had
7 confirmed that the document was provided to him by the Serbian -- let me
8 now check. "By the Serbian security service."
9 I now really move to my last item, D768.
10 During the testimony of Cedo Sipovac on 12 November 2014, D768
11 was marked for identification pending translation and use with another
12 witness. The translation issue was resolved on the 3rd and the 24th of
13 February, 2015.
14 On the 12th of March, D768 was tendered through Miso Rodic and,
15 on the same date, a new translation arose, and therefore D768 remained
16 marked for identification.
17 It was about failing translation or missing translation of
18 handwriting in that document.
19 Thereafter, the Chamber asked the Defence four times - on the
20 10th of April and the 30th of April via an e-mail, and on the 14th of
21 May and the 8th of July in court - for an update on the progress of the
22 revised translation.
23 Can the Defence inform the Chamber within one week of the
24 progress of the revised the translation.
25 MR. LUKIC: I can do that now, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Whenever I expect you --
2 MR. LUKIC: Not this one.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Not this one.
4 MR. LUKIC: I spoke with my Case Manager he sent this for revised
5 translation to CLSS and they were not able to see what we were asking
6 from them although it is partially visible on the document and I think
7 that the witness also read it on the transcript that it was instead of
8 Croatian it was Yugoslav nationality of this man. So we can accept that.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. If the parties -- you'll understand that I
10 don't have it on the top of my head available at this moment. Could the
11 parties seek an agreement that on some handwriting is missing, that the
12 parties agree on what it is and most likely that would be what the
13 witness read it to be, and that the parties are satisfied that the
14 translation of what the witness read in court is correctly to be found in
15 the transcript in the English transcript.
16 If could you agree on that.
17 MR. TRALDI: Yes, Mr. President. We'll -- Mr. Lukic and I will
19 JUDGE ORIE: You'll speak to each other. And then we'd like to
20 hear from you by not later than next week.
21 And that would celebrate the fifth occasion on which the matter
22 was raised. I'm not going to congratulate you on that, Mr. Lukic,
23 especially because I understand that you sent it for translation but
24 there were some problems.
25 Is there anything the parties would like to raise at this very
2 MR. LUKIC: If I may be the first, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.
4 MR. LUKIC: Yes, there is a deadline for the Defence to respond
5 to P7510 and it's the map of Vlasenica in regard of elevation lines, and
6 we cannot respond today.
7 JUDGE ORIE: You cannot respond today --
8 MR. LUKIC: Because we just got the bigger map from the
9 Prosecution at the beginning of this session so we need somebody who
10 knows how to read a map.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Well.
12 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
13 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... it's quite simple
14 elevation lines connect points which are at the same elevation and by
15 looking at them thoroughly, you can see where the hills are and where it
16 goes down. And usually the map explains what is the difference in
17 altitude between two lines and often on every 50 or 100 metres, you would
18 find somewhere on that line what altitude, what elevation, that line
20 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour. But since there were some issues
21 in regard of obstacles, those obstacles could be seen on this bigger map
22 as well.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Obstacles. You mean hills.
24 MR. LUKIC: Mountains.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mountains, yes. It seems to be a very purely
1 technical matter. What about a cup of tea or cup of coffee together with
2 Mr. McCloskey and the map.
3 MR. LUKIC: We have a meeting after this session.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay. Can I order coffee or tea already
5 or ...
6 Okay. We'll hear from you not later than next week. Yes?
7 MR. LUKIC: That's fine, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Any other matter? Nothing? You don't want to
9 announce, Mr. McCloskey, that you have a meeting with Mr. Lukic after
11 MR. McCLOSKEY: No. I -- there are a couple of things I owe you
12 from questions in past witnesses and I will gather those together and let
13 you know where we are because some of them have taken a long time dealing
14 with governments and UN organisations, but I will get organised like you
15 just did and get back to you. And we may have others as well.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That's promising that you may have others as
18 One second, please.
19 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE ORIE: If nothing then remains, we adjourn for the day, and
22 we'll resume Monday, the 24th of August, 9.30 in the morning, in this
23 same courtroom, I.
24 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.12 p.m.,
25 to be reconvened on Monday, the 24th day of August,
1 2015, at 9.30 a.m.