Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 43244

 1                           Monday, 18 April 2016

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.32 a.m.

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

 6     courtroom.

 7             Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.

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

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

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

11             Before we invite the Defence to call its next witness, I'd like

12     to briefly deal with one procedural matter.  I have a few others on my

13     list, but we'll leave them for a while.  It is a follow-up on an

14     outstanding Rule 92 bis attestation and declaration issue.

15             In October of last year, the Chamber filed four decisions

16     granting the Defence's Rule 92 bis motions and conditionally admitted

17     into evidence the statements of Ostoja Javoric, Drazen Visnjic,

18     Radoslav Danicic, and Dusan Djenadija.

19             In each instance, the Chamber gave the Defence a six-week

20     deadline for filing the relevant attestations and declarations.  In this

21     respect, to date, no such filings have been made, and in light of this,

22     the Chamber now sets a final deadline of three weeks from today's date.

23     If the attestations and declarations are not filed by this date, this

24     evidence will be marked not admitted.

25             Is the Defence ready to call its next witness, which the Chamber


Page 43245

 1     understands will be Mr. Stankovic.

 2             MR. IVETIC:  That's correct.  We are prepared to call Professor

 3     Dr. Stankovic at this time.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could the witness be escorted in the

 5     courtroom.

 6                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 7                           [The witness entered court]

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning, Mr. Stankovic.  Before you give

 9     evidence, the rules require that you make a solemn declaration, the text

10     of which is now handed out to you.  I'd like to invite you to make that

11     solemn declaration.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

13     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

14                           WITNESS:  ZORAN STANKOVIC

15                           [Witness testified through interpreter]

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Please be seated.

17             Mr. Stankovic, you'll first be examined by Mr. Ivetic.

18     Mr. Ivetic is a member of the Defence team of Mr. Mladic.

19             Mr. Ivetic, please proceed.

20             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you, Your Honours.

21                           Examination by Mr. Ivetic:

22        Q.   Good morning, sir.

23        A.   Good morning.

24        Q.   Professor, doctor, can you please state your full name for

25     purposes of the record.

Page 43246

 1        A.   My name is Zoran Stankovic.

 2        Q.   And, sir, could you tell the Chamber what you are by training and

 3     profession.

 4        A.   I have a degree in medicine and specialised in forensic medicine,

 5     and I'm a specialist in forensic medicine.  That's my job.

 6        Q.   And now I'd like to call up in e-court 65 ter number 1D03345.

 7             MR. IVETIC:  And I have a hard copy for the ease of the witness.

 8     With the assistance of the usher, I can offer that at this time for him.

 9             I think we have two B/C/S on the screen.  If we can get an

10     English translation as well, we'll be all set.  Okay.

11        Q.   Now, sir, we have a curriculum vitae before us on the screen of

12     which you have a hard copy in the Serbian language in front of you.  Do

13     you recognise this curriculum vitae?

14        A.   Yes, I do.

15        Q.   Okay.  And the first thing I want to ask if you could take a look

16     through the same to see if is up to date or if there's anything major

17     that needs to be updated in relation to this curriculum vitae.

18        A.   This is an updated version.

19        Q.   And if I can ask you about an entry that we find on page 1 in

20     both versions, and it is the fourth paragraph from the top of the

21     document.  And in this paragraph is mentioned a role as president of a

22     co-ordinating body for the municipalities of Presevo, Bujanovac and

23     Medvedja.  Is that a position that you still hold today?

24        A.   Yes, I am still president of the co-ordinating body for the

25     municipalities of Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja.

Page 43247

 1        Q.   And could you assist us with a description of the job duties that

 2     this position entails.

 3        A.   After the armed conflicts in 1999 in this area, the government of

 4     the Republic of Serbia established a co-ordinating body for these three

 5     municipalities to co-ordinate the activities between the leadership of

 6     the local government of Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja and the

 7     government of the Republic of Serbia.  Our role was to co-ordinate all

 8     the activities between the local self-government of these three

 9     municipalities and the government of the Republic of Serbia.

10        Q.   And staying with page 1 of the curriculum vitae for a moment, we

11     see here that you specialised in forensic medicine at the military

12     medical academy in 1988.  That's the second paragraph from the top.  From

13     that point in time onwards, 1988, what branch of medicine has been your

14     primary field of practice as a medical doctor?

15        A.   My primarily field of activity was forensic medicine, but I

16     practiced after specialising from 1987, that is to say, until today.

17        Q.   And do you have an estimate as to the total number of autopsies

18     which you would performed during the course of your career?

19        A.   In my rough estimate based on the documentation that I have and

20     that I reviewed at the military medical academy, it's somewhere between 5

21     and 7.000 post-mortems.

22        Q.   And here on the last page that is visible on the English on page

23     1, and bleeding onto page 2, and this is going to be on page 2 in the

24     Serbian original, and it's going to be in the middle of page 2 of the

25     Serbian original, it says that you testified as an expert witness at the

Page 43248

 1     Hague Tribunal.  And then it later says that you are a permanent court

 2     expert in Serbia - that will be on page 2 in the English - and that you

 3     testified at the High Court in Thessaloniki.  I want to take each of

 4     these in turn.

 5             First, in relation to the ICTY Tribunal, how many times and in

 6     what cases have you provided services as an expert witness?

 7        A.   I was between seven or eight times in The Hague Tribunal.  I was

 8     an expert witness in the Krstic trial, also an expert witness in the

 9     Milutinovic, Sainovic, Ojdanic, Pavkovic, Lazarevic and Lukic trial, and

10     all the way up to the Djordjevic, minister of police trial.  Then I

11     testified as an expert witness in the Seselj trial.  Several times I was

12     questioned by the OTP investigators and spent ten days in The Hague on

13     account of post-mortems I did in Eastern Bosnia, namely Zvornik, Kravica,

14     Fakovici, Ratkovici, Milici, Rogatica, and several times I gave

15     statements in Belgrade on different issues related to the events during

16     the war in the former Yugoslavia.

17        Q.   Professor, staying with the ICTY Tribunal, can you tell us for

18     each of these cases, which party it was that was calling you as an

19     expert?

20        A.   I've mentioned already I worked as an expert witness for the

21     Defence in the Krstic trial, in Milutinovic, Sainovic, Ojdanic, Pavkovic,

22     Lazarevic and Lukic trial, in the trial of General Djordjevic and I was

23     an expert for the Prosecution in the trial of Vojislav Seselj.

24        Q.   And you earlier indicated in one of your answers a time-period of

25     ten days when you were in The Hague, being interviewed in relation to

Page 43249

 1     post-mortems you did in the eastern Bosnian area.  Was that in relation

 2     to a particular case and, if so, what party?

 3        A.   An OTP investigator engaged me to analyse the events, the

 4     processing of the mass graves of Serbs that were found in eastern Bosnia,

 5     namely in Zvornik, several times in Fakovici, in Ratkovici,in Bratunac,

 6     in Milici, et cetera.  It was the Naser Oric case.  The Prosecutor versus

 7     Naser Oric.  After reviewing all these cases, at one point they asked me

 8     if I wanted to attend the trial of Naser Oric as an expert witness, and I

 9     told them, You decide, not I.  In the end, I wasn't called.  I was

10     informed verbally that my autopsy reports were accepted in the case, and

11     that was the end of it.

12             I worked also with the representatives of The Hague Tribunal on

13     the mass grave in Mrkonjic Grad which contained 181 bodies of civilians

14     and military men.  John Gerns, an investigator of the Tribunal, worked

15     with me, but he left soon afterward.  I also worked with OTP

16     investigators processing the refrigerator truck in Derventa containing

17     bodies of Albanians from Kosovo and Metohija.  There was a lot of work in

18     the past where I was involved.  In my career, I also had many contacts

19     and interviews with the first chairman of the commission for war crimes,

20     Mr. Kalshoven, with Cherif Bassiouni, with Richard Ambrovski [phoen] in

21     Zagreb, with Louise Arbour in Belgrade and The Hague, with Carla Del

22     Ponte before I became minister of defence on several occasions in

23     Belgrade.  There were many of these contacts.  I can't enumerate them

24     all.  And many activities as well.

25        Q.   And now if we could switch our focus.  In relation to your time

Page 43250

 1     as a permanent court expert in Serbia, do you have an approximation as to

 2     the number of cases that you have participated in and provided testimony

 3     as a permanent court expert in Serbia?

 4        A.   I began in 1987 when I finished my specialisation in forensic

 5     medicine.  I was elected expert in forensic medicine for the military

 6     prosecutor's office that existed in Yugoslavia at the time.  Then for

 7     civilian courts.  And it will be now nearly 30 years next year in which I

 8     did 2 or -- to 3.000 expert reports for lower courts or the appeals

 9     court, in almost all the cities of what is now the Republic of Serbia and

10     in other republics.

11        Q.   And, sir, in relation to those cases where you appeared as an

12     expert before the court in Serbia, which party was it that called you in

13     the capacity of an expert witness?  That is to say, was it the

14     prosecution, the defence, or someone else?

15        A.   In the previous period, we could only be engaged by the

16     investigating organ in the relevant case.  In the former SFRY and the

17     Republic of Serbia today, investigation was led by the investigating

18     judge of the competent court.  Two or three years ago, prosecutor's

19     offices took over investigations, and I mainly did my expert reports on

20     the instructions of people involved or leading the investigation, that is

21     to say, the prosecutor's office, or at the request of the chairman of the

22    Trial Chamber overseeing the case.  Since a year and a half ago, according

23     to the new law on criminal procedure in the Republic of Serbia, it is

24     allowed for the prosecutor's office, the Defence and the Trial Chamber to

25     engage so-called expert associates, advisors, and I am currently engaged

Page 43251

 1     as such by the defence counsel of the accused in a number of cases in

 2     trials ongoing before courts in Serbia.

 3        Q.   And, lastly, the High Court in Thessaloniki, how many cases have

 4     you appeared in your expert capacity before that court?

 5    A. The higher court in Thessaloniki contracted me when one Serbian student

 6     was killed by a Greek policeman during a school trip in Greece. This

 7     incident received wide media coverage in Greece and caused a great public

 8  outcry. The Greek court engaged me to do a post-mortem of the student, whose

 9  name is Bulatovic, and make an expert report. And on that account, I visited

10   Thessaloniki several times and worked there. They also wanted me to be the

11  expert in that case, but I refused because it would have been difficult with

12   the language barrier. I do not know Greek, and it would have been very

13     difficult to work as an expert in that country without knowing Greek.

14        Q.   And if we can return to the first page of this CV in English and

15     focus on the fifth paragraph from the top, and this will appear at the

16     very bottom of page one in Serbian and it will continue onto the top of

17     page 2 in Serbian.  In this paragraph, you identify teaching positions at

18     various academic institutions.  Can you tell us which of these teaching

19     positions are still ongoing?

20        A.   I taught as a professor of forensic medicine at the military

21     medical academy, also the police academy, the medical school of the

22     University of Banja Luka, the higher school of criminology in Zemun, and

23     now I teach at the Faculty of Dentistry in Nis.

24        Q.   Okay. And if we could take a look back onto page 2 in the English

25     and it will be also be page 2 in the Serbian and it will be the second-to

Page 43252

 1     last-paragraph of both languages of the CV and in this paragraph, it is

 2     mentioned that you authored a book in 2015, two monographs and over 50

 3     specialist academic papers.  Can you tell us on what field or subject

 4     matter were these various academic papers that are mentioned here?

 5        A.   Well, apart from this last book which has about 670 pages and

 6     deals with the estimate of damage in civil lawsuits before courts in

 7     Serbia, all of the other books and papers have to do with incidents

 8     involving massive casualties during the war preparations in the former

 9     Yugoslavia.  You have to know that immediately after the beginning of the

10     war in the former Yugoslavia, I was engaged in processing mass graves.

11     The first mass grave where I was leader of the forensic team was a mass

12     grave in Vukovar, and that gave rise to several of these publications.

13     In the territory of Vukovar, we found and processed over 1.000 bodies in

14     what were practically war-time conditions.  Then victims from Gospic, the

15     civilians killed by members of the Home Guard Corps at Siroka Kula.  I

16     forgot to say that I was expert witness concerning the incident, I was an

17     expert witness in the higher court in Rijeka.  Then I dealt with mass

18     graves elsewhere, such as Muslim bodies in April 1992 in Kula, near

19     Zvornik, then Serb victims in Zvornik.  After that followed all these

20     other mass graves that I enumerated.  I also worked in Herzegovina,

21     Bileca, Nevesinje, Trebinje.  Then we worked in Sarajevo.  The mass grave

22     in Mrkonjic Grad containing 181 bodies in the Orthodox Christian cemetery

23     and six bodies in the Muslim cemetery.

24             There were about 10-20 publications and books about all these

25     exhumations, describing the suffering and the violence involved.  And I

Page 43253

 1     also gave lectures in the country and abroad.  I was in Cambridge twice.

 2     At times, when it was very difficult for Serbs to travel because of the

 3     blockade and the visa regime, I lectured in Paris, in the Ukraine, and in

 4     the Netherlands, I lectured in The Hague, in Amsterdam, and in Utrecht.

 5             So my expert papers mainly dealt with the victims in cases where

 6     I worked with my team and the forms of violence involved.

 7             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours, at this time we tender 1D3345 as the

 8     next Defence public exhibit.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.  Therefore, Mr. Registrar.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit D1446, Your Honours.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Admitted.

12             MR. IVETIC:

13        Q.   Now, Professor, can you explain for us in general terms as a

14     result of your training and experience in your career, how do you see the

15     role of a forensic pathologist?  That is, what the objective of that line

16     of medical expertise?

17        A.   The role of the forensic pathologist or a forensic medical

18     expert, because both terms are used internationally, is to participate in

19     investigation concerning a particular crime and with his knowledge and

20     expertise and skills, when doing post-mortems, describe all the changes

21     on the body, classify the injuries, and the tools used to inflict those

22     injuries, to verify whether the cause of death is causally linked with

23     the injuries, whether morbid conditions are registered on the body,

24     whether the death is natural or violent, and all this is done with a

25     team, on the instructions of the investigating judge or the prosecutor

Page 43254

 1     leading the investigation, as is the case currently.

 2             The pathologist also describes the clothing that was on the body

 3     when it was found, and this is very important because the damage on the

 4     clothing can later be linked with the injuries on the body and could help

 5     explain the trajectory of the projectile or the blade or whatever other

 6     tool was used to inflict the injury.  After that, when all the data is

 7     collected, the prosecutor or the investigating judge would ask us to

 8     explain the juxtaposition of the victim and the attacker, and the

 9     position of the attacker, and later in the ballistic analysis, together

10     with the ballistic expert, we would try to determine the distance from

11     which trajectiles were fired from the weapon to determine traces of

12     gunpowder on the body of the victim.  So that essentially the role of the

13     forensic pathologist depends primarily on the person leading the

14     investigation and issuing the instructions to the pathologist.  At the

15     same time, the pathologist is an expert, a specialist who helps the

16     leader of the investigation, pointing on the crime scene whether there

17     are any biological traces and clues that need to be collected and points

18     to all the facts that could help to clarify the instant crime.

19             And, in conclusion, I should say that the pathologist cannot work

20     independently.  He is not the one making decisions on his own.  He is a

21     member of the team led by the prosecutor or the investigating judge,

22     following their instructions, and he is also their expert advisor making

23     suggestions to the investigating judge or the prosecutor, whether the

24     prosecutor or the judge would accept these suggestions is another matter.

25     It's up to them.

Page 43255

 1        Q.   And you mentioned in the course of your answer the term "forensic

 2     medical expert."  How does that role compare to that of a forensic

 3     pathologist?  Are they same or do they differ?

 4        A.   The training is different for forensic medical experts and

 5     forensic pathologists.  Big countries such as the UK, France, Russia,

 6     they have a separate specialisation in forensic medicine and the training

 7     is three or four years, depending on the country.  The person, after

 8     that, gets a degree in forensic medicine and performs all these

 9     activities that fall within that field, at the request of the competent

10     courts or prosecutors' offices.  However, in countries like the US,

11     persons first get a degree in pathology and then have a specialist

12     training of about six months, after which they qualify as forensic

13     pathologists and then proceed to carry on the same work.  Countries like

14     Serbia have a separate specialisation in forensic medicine, which is a

15     separate specialisation within the area of pathology and then you get a

16     title of expert in forensic medicine or forensic pathology both are

17     commonly currently used.

18        Q.   And now I want to focus on these proceedings in the Mladic case

19     before the ICTY Tribunal.  Can you tell everyone in what capacity were

20     you first engaged to be an expert for the Mladic case.

21        A.   First of all, I was asked to give my opinion and my report on the

22     report of Dr. Clark concerning the mass grave in Tomasica.  After that,

23     after Professor Dunjic died, the Defence team asked me in view of the

24     time needed to review that material all over again and also bearing in

25     mind that I have reviewed that material to a large extent in the Krstic

Page 43256

 1     trial, I was asked to look over Professor Dunjic's report and the

 2     methodology that he used within the time given me, which was a couple of

 3     months.  And I tried, within the limits of my abilities, to do that and

 4     to point out certain things in that report, such as things that need to

 5     be done in these situations.

 6        Q.   And if we could focus now on the part of your engagement dealing

 7     with the Tomasica mass grave, what was your assignment or mandate in

 8     relation to that part of the case?

 9        A.   Can I use these papers which are only in Serbian?  Material from

10     the Prosecution and the report?

11             JUDGE ORIE:  I think it depends on what you're referring to.

12     Could you -- whenever you use anything, could you clearly state what

13     document you have before you, and whether it's a clean copy of that

14     document or whether it contains any -- any markings or any writings on

15     it.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is Dr. Clark's report on

17     Tomasica, and it is the only report that I have been using.  The report

18     is in the Serbian language and while processing the materials, I only

19     underlined certain sections with a red pen, those that I considered

20     important.  And nothing else.  I did not add anything or write anything.

21             The other text that I used is the forensic analysis of the report

22     which is in possession of ICTY and which I have written.  It's also in

23     Serbian language.  These are the only two documents relating to Tomasica

24     that I have.  Nothing else.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  May I take it that what the witness is referring to

Page 43257

 1     is P7443, most likely.  Is there any party who would like to inspect

 2     whether there's more than underlinings?

 3             Prosecution.

 4             MR. MacDONALD:  If it's simply underlinings, Your Honour, then

 5     we're happy with that, certainly.  I wonder if I could take a quick look

 6     just at the --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you just give a quick look, with the

 8     assistance of the usher, so that we're certain that we're talking about

 9     the same ...

10             MR. MacDONALD:  Thank you, Your Honour.  It does appear to be

11     mostly underlining.  But there are initials "TO" I think, written quite

12     often beside paragraphs.  I wonder if the witness could just let us know

13     what that means.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you answer that question.  What TO means

15     written in the margin?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is an abbreviation and it means

17     this is important or focus on that during the testimony.  Nothing else.

18     There are also some signs such as a question mark and an exclamation

19     mark.  These are some signs that I also put in the margin.  But that's

20     everything.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  When you say it means it's also important or focus

22     on that during the testimony, is that that you instructed yourself to

23     focus on it or was there anyone else who suggested to you that that was

24     an important matter to focus on?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm the only one

Page 43258

 1     underlining the documents which I'm processing.  I have no consultants,

 2     nor is there anyone who could suggest that this is something that's

 3     important.  Because this has only to do with the forensic aspect and

 4     nothing else.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But even there, others could be in a situation

 6     that they consider it important.

 7             But you say you wrote that yourself on your own initiative.

 8             Then -- and the other report we are talking about?  Mr. Ivetic,

 9     could you assist us?  The other document would be?

10             MR. IVETIC:  1D05495.

11             MR. MacDONALD:  Yes, Your Honours, there are markings on this.

12     If you -- on page 11 there seems to be the change of the name of an

13     author and page 12, there seems to be a page number changed, and I think

14     both of those are self-explanatory.  On page 13, there is a comment

15     written in the Serbian language, I think it begins with the word "nema."

16     I'm not sure what that comment refers to.  Perhaps the witness could

17     explain.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps if the witness could explain that.

19             Witness, the handwriting on page 13, could you please slowly read

20     that.

21             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  And in the meantime, Mr. Ivetic, could you repeat

22     the 1D number, please.

23             MR. IVETIC:  Absolutely.  1D05495.

24             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the text that I have before me

Page 43259

 1     right now, on page 11, there is an error when cases were compared, and in

 2     comparison, there was an error instead of Dr. Clark it reads professor

 3     Dr. Nermin Sarajlic.  So this is crossed out and it's written "Dr. Clark

 4     change."

 5             And on page 12, when cases are discussed, the text says that it's

 6     page 32.  However, in Dr. Clark's report in the Serbian language, it's

 7     crossed out, changed, this should be page 39.  And another marking, it's

 8     case number 9 where it is stated and it's disputed, it's stated that the

 9     projectile was found within the heart muscle but at the same time, it

10     stated there is no description of the fracture of the mandible and the

11     right humerus, as in Dr. Clark's report.  So that's the only text.  It's

12     the supplement and the changes.  So that's what I can see in the text

13     that I have.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Is that also to be found on page 13, because the

15     question was specifically on handwriting on page 13.

16             MR. MacDONALD:  I wonder if the witness might simply read out the

17     letters in red text that is handwritten on that page and then we can know

18     what he has written down.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could you please read out the handwritten text

20     on page 13, Mr. ...

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have already read

22     the text.  The text reads:  "No description of fracture of the mandible

23     and the right humerus."

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

25             Mr. Ivetic, there may be a problem in relation to the 65 ter

Page 43260

 1     number of the report.  If I would read the following, would that be the

 2     right number?  1D05945?

 3             MR. IVETIC:  I believe so.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  That's the one.  And not the numbers you mentioned

 5     earlier.

 6             Please proceed.

 7             MR. IVETIC:

 8        Q.   And now, sir, if we can still remain focussed on the work that

 9     you did in relation to Dr. Clark's report and the Tomasica grave site,

10     can you tell us what materials did you have access to and review for

11     purposes of your work on this case and the generating of your own report

12     as to Tomasica?

13        A.   I analysed materials called in Serbian, the Tomasica grave

14     Prijedor, Bosnia, 2013/14 report on forensic findings.  And then also

15     Dr. Clark's report on the forensic findings, Tomasica table, with a

16     summary of the post-mortem examination findings by Dr. Clark, and I also

17     analysed forensic reports produced by forensic technicians, Dr. Dzevad

18     Durmisevic from Bihac, and Professor Nermin Sarajlic from the University

19     of Sarajevo, and I --

20             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... yes, please.

21             MR. MacDONALD:  Thank you, Your Honour.

22             The witness appears to be referring to a number of documents

23     brought in a white folder.  I would imagine that's simply the documents

24     that he simply read out just now, but I wonder if he could just confirm

25     that to the Court.  These are documents underneath the two reports he's

Page 43261

 1     mentioned already.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could you please clarify.  Folder with

 3     documents.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This bundle of papers are the main

 5     cases, the forensic reports drawn up by Dr. Clark during his work in

 6     Tomasica.  That's the first document with the tables which are included

 7     in it.  Nine cases are circled with a red ball-point pen or red-felt-tip

 8     pen and the forensic reports that are marked so come from other forensic

 9     materials.  They have been photocopied and they are contained among these

10     papers.  Forensic report Tomasica volume 4, PRD 357T, case of

11     Esad Aliskovic [phoen].  Dzevad Durmisevic was in charge of the

12     post-mortem examination.  And then PRD 042T, Suljo Mujadzic.  Dzevad

13     Durmisevic performed the autopsy.  Then PRD 088T, forensic report.

14     Dzevad Durmisevic again performed the autopsy.  PRD 124 --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, may I perhaps interrupt you.

16             It is clear from your report, that's at least what I saw, that

17     you commented on P7443, P7445, and P7444.  These are the three reports

18     you're referring.

19             Could you please put away anything else, and if you need to

20     consult that, then at that point in time, you're telling us that you'd

21     like to consult and then you tell us what report that exactly is.  We'll

22     then verify whether it is in evidence or not and how we'll deal with

23     that.  Mr. Ivetic will certainly aware be of materials being used already

24     in evidence -- being in evidence already or not.  So let's just focus on

25     the two documents you gave earlier to the Prosecution for inspection and

Page 43262

 1     put aside all the rest.

 2             Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

 3             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours, I hate to correct you, but the nine

 4     cases that the witness has been reading are also covered in his report in

 5     section B with the ERN numbers of these documents set forth in his

 6     report.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  If that's the case, I missed that, and the nine

 8     cases, is that not in evidence yet or are they?  I must say I'm looking

 9     now at part A and --

10             MR. IVETIC:  It starts after paragraph 47 in the report, there

11     are the nine cases where the analysis of Dr. Clark is compared to the

12     post-mortem analysis of the Bosnian doctors -- the two Bosnian doctors.

13     And I don't believe that those actual underlying reports are in evidence.

14     I believe the Prosecution only admitted Dr. Clark's summary table of the

15     Tomasica post-mortems.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  That's the reason I started with the beginning of

17     the report.  But whatever is not in evidence, and you're fully aware of

18     that, Mr. Ivetic, should not be consulted.  So if you would limit it for

19     the time being to the two reports that were given for inspection and

20     whatever shows up in the course of the examination which is not yet in

21     evidence, you draw our attention to that.  Then we'll see whether you

22     should present it or whether the witness has a copy and what to do with

23     that part of the expertise.

24             Please proceed.

25             MR. IVETIC:  Okay.  May I suggest before we move further that we

Page 43263

 1     then MFI 1D5945 so that I can stop making mistakes on that 65 ter number

 2     and reserve a number for it, as it will be tendered after we go through

 3     it all?

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I take it there are no objections.  Mr. Registrar,

 5     1D5945 would receive number?

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit D1447, MFI, Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Marked -- Could you please repeat?

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  That would be Exhibit D1447, MFI.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Marked for identification.

10             Please proceed.

11             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you.

12        Q.   Doctor, now, you also mentioned that you were engaged for

13     purposes of providing expert services in relation to the report of the

14     late Dr. Dunjic.  What exactly was your mandate or assignment in relation

15     to that part of the evidence?

16        A.   I received a request to perform an analysis of the expertise of

17     Dr. Dunjic and to provide my opinion about his report.  That implied the

18     methodology that Professor Dunjic applied in his work, whether the

19     methodology was acceptable, and in what sense, and also to provide my

20     opinion as to whether I would agree with the conclusions relating to the

21     processing of data, about mass graves around Srebrenica, as provided by

22     Dr. Dunjic.

23        Q.   And in relation to your review of the expert report of the late

24     Dr. Dunjic and that part of the case dealing with that, what materials

25     were at your disposal to review for purposes of fulfilling that

Page 43264

 1     assignment?

 2        A.   I had at my disposal his report submitted to ICTY in the Serbian

 3     language, then also I had in my possession some materials from the time

 4     when I was engaged in the Krstic trial, so these were materials that I

 5     had.  I checked or tried to verify certain pieces of information from the

 6     extant documents by reading them.  I had a limited time for a very

 7     extensive materials, just a few months, so these were the basic materials

 8     that I used in my work.

 9             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours, I think we're at the time for a break.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  We are indeed at the time for a break.

11             But before we take that break, Mr. Stankovic, I'm going to give

12     you an instruction which I usually only give at the end of the day but

13     due to the special circumstances I prefer to do it now.

14             While you're on the stand as a witness, you should not speak or

15     communicate in whatever way with whomever about your testimony.  Now,

16     this Chamber is aware that there's a television crew around who would

17     like perhaps to speak with you.  Please keep in mind that you're not

18     allowed to communicate about your testimony and that is to be understood

19     in the broadest terms.  Usually I only give it at the end of the day, but

20     since you might come across them even during the day, that's the reason

21     why I instruct you now already.

22             We take a break, and we'd like to see you back in 20 minutes from

23     now.

24                           [The witness stands down]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  We resume at ten minutes to 11.00.

Page 43265

 1                           --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.

 2                           --- On resuming at 10.51 a.m.

 3                           [The witness takes the stand]

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  You may proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

 5             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you.  I'd like to call up in e-court 1D05891.

 6        Q.   And, sir, we have a report on our screens before us.  Do you

 7     recognise this report?

 8        A.   Yes, that is Professor Dunjic's report.  It's a forensic analysis

 9     of reports on the exhumations of mass graves in the area of Srebrenica

10     and Eastern Bosnia.

11        Q.   Okay.

12             MR. IVETIC:  If we could also have this 1D5891 marked for

13     identification.  We will be tendering it after we conclude asking

14     questions about it at the end of the testimony.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar under what number would it be marked

16     for identification.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be D1448, MFI, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

19             MR. IVETIC:

20        Q.   Now, professor, prior to being engaged in the Mladic case to

21     perform this review of Dr. Dunjic's report, did you have occasion to know

22     Dr. Dunjic?

23        A.   Yes, I knew Professor Dunjic because I specialised in forensic

24     medicine for a period of one year at the institute where Dr. Dunjic was

25     permanently employed.  At the time when he was at the institute, he was a

Page 43266

 1     mentor of some autopsies that I carried out as part of my specialisation.

 2        Q.   And apart from this report of Dr. Dunjic in the Mladic case, did

 3     you ever have occasion to see any of his work in relation to other cases?

 4        A.   I saw a little bit on the Internet and on The Hague Tribunal

 5     website but I'm not really too familiar with his earlier activities.  I

 6     know that he worked on the Karadzic case and on the Popovic case.

 7        Q.   And are you familiar with the work that he did in Serbia in any

 8     way?

 9        A.   Professor Dunjic was one of the leading forensic medicine experts

10     during the past 25 or 30 years, not only in the Republic of Serbia but

11     when the country was Serbia and Montenegro, and also in the Socialist

12     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.  He was a very experienced forensics

13     expert who testified in courts as an expert several thousand times.  He

14     carried out thousands of autopsies.  He worked on the mass graves in

15     Kosovo.  At the same time, this was a man, an expert, who, during the

16     past 25, 30years was a leading forensic expert.  I emphasise that, a

17     leading forensic expert, who worked on the most difficult cases that were

18     brought to trial in courts of the former Yugoslavia.

19        Q.   And now I want to show you in e-court 65 ter number 1D05944 and I

20     do have a hard copy of this one if -- if you need it.  I know we don't

21     have both languages on the screen.

22             Do you recognise this document that we now have before us?

23        A.   Yes.  This is a document that I drafted, and it's overview, an

24     analysis of the reports on the exhumations of mass graves that Dr. Dunjic

25     worked on.

Page 43267

 1        Q.   Now, what can you tell us about this overview that you authored

 2     as to the report of Dr. Dunjic in the Mladic case?  That is to say, what

 3     do you wish to highlight for us as being important?

 4        A.   What is particularly important in this report is that it

 5     represents a comprehensive, detailed, professional, complex analysis, and

 6     in order to be able to interpret it, a person would need to be very

 7     familiar with forensic sciences and have experience in the field, not

 8     just through study but also by taking part in the practical work and

 9     scientific symposia.  It's a very complex report that requires lengthy

10     analysis, and this is something that Professor Dunjic himself did.

11        Q.   And now I'd like to focus on a part of your overview and it's on

12     page 2 at the bottom in English and then it goes onto the next page in

13     that language, and is on page 2, the second paragraph from the top in the

14     Serbian original.  And here it states:  "Professor Dr. Dunjic, in his

15     comments and observations on the reports of The Hague experts is, for the

16     most part, correct, reasoned, precise, and detailed.  However, there

17     are" --

18             MR. IVETIC:  And we need to go to the next page in the English.

19        Q.   "... parts of the analysis from which the wrong conclusion may be

20     reached, that he overly stresses his principles in relation to The Hague

21     experts; e.g.  by using three or more punctuation marks, such as question

22     and/or exclamation marks at the end of the sentence.  Very often he

23     expressed his principle and opinion with a capital and/or bolded

24     letters."

25             Can you explain for us precisely what you mean here about the

Page 43268

 1     wrong conclusions possibly being reached?

 2        A.   Since I don't see that part of the text in Serbian, I just wanted

 3     to have my own copy in the Serbian.  If not, perhaps I can look at the

 4     Serbian text on the screen, please.

 5        Q.   Should be the third page, the second paragraph from the top.  I

 6     apologise.  I had the wrong page number written.  And it's the second

 7     paragraph from the top.

 8        A.   Yes, it's the Serbian, it's page 3.

 9             In looking at Professor Dunjic's analysis, I noticed some

10     details.  I understood those details as a warning or as

11     Professor Dunjic's position in order to warn the Trial Chamber or a draw

12     their attention to certain activities which were not part of the normal

13     work of forensic medicine witness and these were the parts that he wanted

14     to draw the Trial Chamber's attention to.  This principally refers to the

15     analysis of witness statements, such as witness Bekir Ademovic, Alic

16     Hasan, Alic Mevludin.  He quotes those statements on pages 37 and 38 and

17     he draws certain conclusions which partially are part of the remit of

18     forensic medicine but there are also conclusions there which could go

19     beyond the normal expertise, as this is something that the Trial Chamber

20     and the Prosecution should argue for or against.

21     What I understood was that he wished to say that when an order is issued

22     for an expertise in courts in the Republic of Serbia, an expert needs to

23     state his observations in the form of proposal or report and submit it to

24     the person requesting the investigation.  This would be the first part.

25     When we're talking about underlined parts of the text, punctuation marks,

Page 43269

 1     question marks at the end of each sentence, sometimes there are four or

 2     five exclamation or question marks, this is something -- or bold text,

 3     this is something that he used in order to draw attention to certain

 4     inconsistencies in the reports that he analysed.  I am afraid, though,

 5     that this could be understood in a different way.  It was just an

 6     indication that he used at his own discretion to emphasise certain things

 7     and this should not be a dominant feature of the analysis.  It should be

 8     interpreted just as his wish to draw attention to specific details that

 9     he believed were important.

10        Q.   Now, in relation to your comments as to the underlining, bold

11     text and exclamation marks, do they in any way detract from the validity

12     of the conclusions and objections raised by Dr. Dunjic in his report, in

13     your opinion?

14        A.   These emphasis on certain parts of the text does not reduce the

15     value of his expertise, but it can give rise to certain reactions by

16     people who could misinterpret this or interpret it in a different

17     context, and this is why I said that this is something that should not be

18     given particular attention.  The primary interest should be given to the

19     actual text and the analysis that is in the report.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  If I may just ask a question.

21             Sir, you do refer to the fact that this method of writing by

22     Dr. Dunjic may lead to some wrong conclusions.  Can you give an example

23     of the kind of wrong conclusion that could be reached as a result of

24     these exclamation marks?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I have the report in Serbian?

Page 43270

 1     His report in Serbian, please.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, you certainly will be aware of what the

 3     witness is referring to.  Could you tell us whether that is in evidence

 4     and under what number.

 5             MR. IVETIC:  D1448, marked for identification.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 7             MR. MacDONALD:  Yes, Your Honours, there appears to be -- aside

 8     from underlinings and the letters TO, comments on pages 17, 30, 45, and

 9     58 no more than a few words each time but I wonder if the witness might

10     read out the red text that is handwritten.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, apparently you're not working from an

12     exclusively clean copy, so would you please read what you wrote on the

13     pages just mentioned by Mr. MacDonald, and he referred you to pages - let

14     me just see - 17.  Could you read what you wrote on page 17?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On page 17, paragraph 2, it says:

16     "Objective findings must be verified and transparent.  In order to be

17     able to verify, there must be a detailed description of each injury."

18             This is the position of forensic practice in Europe.  And this is

19     something that was written by Professor Dunjic.  And then I wrote in the

20     margin:  "Confirm this on the basis of literature."

21             Nothing more than that.  It was a note to myself.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  You don't have to explain any further but just read

23     what you added to what is not in the report itself.

24             Could you then move to page 30.  And just read what you added.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Plastic bag for body marked by

Page 43271

 1     ZOV."  That's what Dr. Dunjic wrote.  And I added "ZOV," and under that,

 2     I wrote the expansion of the abbreviation ZOV, which means health bag for

 3     autopsy.  That's all.  Nothing else.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Page 45, please.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On page 45, "While forming the

 6     final conclusion about the cause of death and redacting the final version

 7     of autopsy report, the legal assistant of ICTY, Peter McCloskey helped."

 8     That's what Professor Dunjic wrote and I wrote in the right hand margin:

 9     "That's what's written, check."  And then I looked at the San Antonio

10     report and other reports to see whether what Dr. Dunjic has written is

11     correct or not.  But on the right-hand margin it's only written, "that's

12     what's written here, check."  Nothing else.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And then finally, page 58.  It's sufficient if you

14     just read what you added in your own handwriting.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The margin reads:  "Injuries,

16     ligatures, distribution of injuries ... and blindfolds."

17             Nothing else.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

19             Then I think you were asked to give an example of where the

20     report might lead to misunderstanding due to the exclamation marks and

21     others.  Could you please now answer that question.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Serbian page 22, last paragraph,

23     and the last comment.  "This does not exclude that this person lost the

24     life in combat, homicidium bellicum," three exclamation marks.  I think

25     that...

Page 43272

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  And the...

 2             MR. IVETIC:  That's at page 22 in the English as well of the --

 3     the report that I mentioned which is D1448 MFI.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 5             MR. IVETIC:  I think it's the last comment on the page which

 6     starts about at the middle of the page in English.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And could you please explain to us how that

 8     leads to misunderstandings, those exclamation marks?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it could be interpreted as if

10     emotions dominated in Professor Dunjic during his expertise, and that

11     when he objected to somebody else's work, he used all capital letters or

12     decided to use three consecutive exclamation marks.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  So, therefore, you think we should not misunderstand

14     the exclamation marks as depriving what was written by Professor Dunjic

15     from its rational analysis.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not as irrational but one

17     exclamation mark would have been sufficient rather than three.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  That's clear.

19             Please proceed.

20             MR. IVETIC:  Okay.

21        Q.   Getting back to your overview which you authored which we have in

22     front of us on the screen, you have already answered or given us an

23     explanation of the second-to-last paragraph so I will skip ahead to the

24     last paragraph just above the signature.  It's on the bottom of the page

25     in the B/C/S, where it says:  "Analysing the expert report in question,

Page 43273

 1     it is possible to claim with certainty that it expresses the forensic

 2     medical opinion of a very experienced, qualified, educated and

 3     responsible expert who invested great effort to point out certain

 4     inconsistencies in the reports of The Hague experts and, as such,

 5     deserves to have the experts whose reports he analysed declare themselves

 6     about it, but also to have the views he set out explained in detail

 7     before the Trial Chamber of The Hague Tribunal.  It is up to the Trial

 8     Chamber to weight the analysis in question, admit or dismiss the

 9     statements and views expressed therein."

10             Sir, do you still adhere to the view as expressed in this

11     paragraph of your overview which you prepared earlier this year?

12        A.   Yes, I still stand by that.

13             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours we would tender as the next public

14     Defence exhibit this three-page original Serbian document which is, I

15     think, two pages in the English.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  1D5944 will be Exhibit D1449, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  And I understand that there's no objection.

19     Therefore, admitted.

20             MR. IVETIC:

21        Q.   Now, I want to return to a topic that you touched upon earlier

22     and that was the work that you did in relation to various mass graves and

23     I want to ask you on those occasions when you were acting as a forensic

24     medical expert in relation to those various mass graves that you listed

25     earlier today, were you acting alone or as part of a team?

Page 43274

 1        A.   Most of mass graves in which I performed autopsies of the bodies

 2     I was a member of a team headed by an investigating judge, as at the time

 3     in the territory of the former Yugoslavia it was the investigating judges

 4     rather than the prosecutor who was normally in charge of investigation.

 5     Unlike now.

 6        Q.   And were there any other specialists as members of the teams that

 7     you were involved in?

 8        A.   Yes, there were other forensic specialists, and other experts who

 9     performed certain expert analyses from their own purview.  In relation to

10     the investigating judge there was a prosecutor and also experts such as

11     forensic specialists, then also experts in ballistics, expert

12     archaeologists, specialising in archaeological graves when that was

13     necessary and there were other experts who worked with the investigating

14     judge.  Next to us was also the on-site investigation team.  Those were

15     representatives of the police who had the duty to make sketches and

16     photographs, video-recordings, and everything else that's part of the

17     on-site investigation procedure and we also had orders that were signed

18     by people who were in charge of the investigation and we had specific

19     mandates that we were provided by this order, specifying our presence and

20     the processing of mass graves.

21        Q.   Okay.  And now I'd like to focus on one area that you mentioned.

22     You said something about 1992 near Kula, Zvornik, that there were some

23     Muslim bodies that you examined.  How did you become involved in that --

24     in that work?

25        A.   Before that, I had been head of the team for the autopsy of

Page 43275

 1     bodies and forensic examination of bodies in Vukovar and also in Gospic.

 2     That was the time when the state - that is to say, the SFRY - broke up.

 3     The courts had local authority so that the civilian courts had their

 4     local jurisdiction which extended within the borders of the republics and

 5     provinces of the former SFRY.  The military courts were formed

 6     differently, according to the division of the country into Military

 7     Districts or army commands, as that was called, so that we had a number

 8     of those, the 1st, the 2nd, the 5th and the 7th, and so on, those were

 9     the army commands, and their borders, the borders of their local

10     jurisdiction were somewhat different as compared to local courts.  So on

11     the basis of that, we were in charge of autopsies in Vukovar, but, at the

12     same time, when the conflicts broke out, the military court in Belgrade,

13     which was headed by investigating judge Mirko Stojanovic, requested from

14     us as the experts of that court to go to Zvornik and process the bodies

15     of Muslims that had been found in and around Kula, upstream from Zvornik.

16     The bodies were scattered around the area, and this was the basis for us

17     to set off with the crime technicians from the Belgrade police to process

18     the bodies.

19        We went to Zvornik twice. The first occasion was, I think, the 30th of

20     April, 1992 and the second visit was, I think, on the 5th of May, 1992.

21     We examined more than 110 bodies that had been found in the area. We made

22  autopsy reports. We had a photo file from the first examination, 30; and the

23  second time, the forensic technicians from the MUP, the Ministry of Interior

24  from Belgrade, had some problems with equipment so there are no photographs.

25             A certain number of bodies were identified, and the documents

Page 43276

 1     were forwarded.  And now in possession of the special court where I was a

 2     special witness in the trial against the then-president of the

 3     municipality, Gruic and others, who I think have been sentenced in the

 4     meantime.

 5             Other documents were handed over to ICTY investigators, if I'm

 6     correct, and after that, we finished our work, and that was -- those were

 7     the first mass casualties that I was in charge of examining in the

 8     territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 9        Q.   And those bodies that you say were scattered around Kula that you

10     were processing as a forensic medical expert in Zvornik, how were those

11     bodies brought to you?

12        A.   I was not at the site.  When we did this work, the first and the

13     second time, combat was still ongoing among armed Muslim groups and

14     members of the police forces and other armed forces from Zvornik.  The

15     representatives of the utilities company of Zvornik picked up those

16     bodies and brought them to the Alhos enterprise, which is at about half a

17     kilometre from the bridge in Zvornik between Zvornik and Mali Zvornik, or

18     in other words between Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia.  The bodies were

19     packed in black plastic bags with a ZOV marking, because that was the

20     sort of bags that the army used at the time, helping the civilian

21     services to collect dead bodies.  They were in a state of advanced

22     putrefaction, covered by maggots, which practically filled the body bags

23     containing those bodies because the bodies had been left lying on the

24     ground for a number of days in the area where they were found, in Kula or

25     in the woods, and we completed the autopsies.  We described the clothes

Page 43277

 1     and the injuries, whatever was possible, of course.  We took out and

 2     listed personal items from the bodies.  Some of them had money or

 3     valuables in their clothes.  We handed that over to the people in Alhos

 4     and who represented the Territorial Defence of the town.  And after that,

 5     we did the same thing once again, following the same procedure and

 6     applying everything required by the investigating judge and applying all

 7     the usual norms when processing dead bodies.  So the documents are

 8     available, and they have been forwarded, inter alia, to ICTY.

 9        Q.   And you mentioned the clothing.  What specific type of clothing

10     did these bodies have?

11        A.   I think all of them were in civilian clothes and had civilian

12     shoes.

13        Q.   And you have mentioned that these bodies were brought in plastic

14     bags that were marked ZOV.  Can you confirm for us again what the ZOV

15     designation means?  What is its source or meaning?

16        A.   That plastic bag was made after some of my activities when I

17     carried a soldier who was killed in a car accident.  At that time, we did

18     not have adequate equipment to collect the bodies, and a woman from the

19     military medical academy and I made that bag.  I said what the

20     specifications should be, and a company called Naravno Plast [phoen] from

21     Nevesinje made the bag and they patented it and marked it ZOV.  To be

22     honest, at the outset I didn't know what that means, but now when I

23     analysed it, regardless of the fact that I participated in its making, I

24     now know the acronym means.  It means:  Sanitary autopsy bag.  It means a

25     bag designed for corpses before and after post-mortem.

Page 43278

 1             I can also add that later on other bags were made but at the

 2     beginning of the war, including in 1992, mainly these bags with this

 3     marking that you indicated, were used.

 4        Q.   To your knowledge, during what time-period were bags marked ZOV

 5     in use, especially as to the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

 6        A.   I think they were used at the beginning of the conflict in 1992.

 7             Now, I'm moving to another period that they were used, for

 8     instance in the period, when I went to Sarajevo and met General Mladic.

 9     When those soldiers were killed in the Dobrovoljacka Street, we went by

10     helicopter to Pale, then to Pale by trucks, carrying the bodies of the

11     soldiers that were later transported to Belgrade.  They were also used in

12     1993 at the time of the Tuzla column of troops who were killed and later

13     on all the quantities were used up and since this company, Nevesinje, was

14     still active, they made their own body bag.

15        Q.   If I can just ask you to clarify, you have identified the attack

16     on a -- an attack on the Tuzla column of troops.  What year was that

17     attack on the Tuzla column of troops?

18        A.   That was in 1992, when troops were withdrawing from Tuzla.  A

19     large number of troops were killed at that time and I got an order from

20     the leadership of the army and I travelled by helicopter to Bijeljina

21     where the bodies were, where we collected them and conducted autopsies

22     because these soldiers were mainly natives of what is now Serbia, whereas

23     soldiers who were natives of Bosnia and other areas were taken over

24     before I left and buried in Bosnia and Herzegovina or wherever the

25     families wanted.

Page 43279

 1        Q.   And earlier you also mentioned being in Zvornik to work on bodies

 2     of Serb victims.  I'd ask you to tell us what time-period that was.

 3        A.   That was, I believe, the end of 1992 until 1995, 1996, when I was

 4     in Srebrenica, where we found the mortal remains of some people who were

 5     killed in that period.  And the last post-mortem I did was not linked to

 6     some these victims it was some TV reporter who was killed in a motel

 7     Vidikovac, it was called, in Zvornik, but the period was 1992 to 1996.

 8        Q.   And do you have an idea of how many villages you visited to

 9     perform post-mortem on remains of Serbian victims during that specified

10     time-period?

11        A.  Together with the investigating judge, Nikolic, of the lower court

12   in Zvornik, I think, I travelled first to Glodjanska Brda where mass graves

13   had been found containing bodies of soldiers who were killed there.  It was

14   on the border-line where the armed units of Republika Srpska took over

15   those areas. I remember there was one mass grave on the very edge. We found

16     15 to 20 bodies there, including Miladin Asceric's body, a man who was

17     decapitated.  And then with foreign and local reporters, we visited that

18     area.  Since it was not possible to work there because of the fighting,

19     which was ongoing, we just came to collect the bodies and an exchange of

20     fire occurred between members of the VRS and Muslim armed units so we had

21     to take cover while collecting the bodies.  We did post-mortems in the

22     fire-fighters' hall in Zvornik which was a convenient place, and together

23     with these people, with my crew, I went there to work.  Later on we

24     worked in Sandici which is about 10, 15 kilometres from Bratunac.  That

25     was a grave where we found the commander of the police station,

Page 43280

 1     Milosevic, and another 14 bodies.  That's the trial ongoing now in

 2     Sarajevo of Naser Oric.  I was there on the crime scene.  Biljana Plavsic

 3     was there, and Milan Gvero.  After that we worked in Bratunac on bodies

 4     that were brought in from the surrounding villages.  And then I was in

 5     the village of Kravica where we did autopsies.  And we worked in Kravica

 6     while combat was going on in February, March, I believe, so we had to

 7     protect ourselves from the shelling, sniping and everything.  And then we

 8     want to Fakovici.  It's a village near Srebrenica but roadless.  We went

 9     there to collect the bodies of the civilians who were killed there.

10     There was one Vinka Maksimovic, a woman, the parents of a man called

11     Pavlovic, and so on.  And then I went to Milici.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. MacDonald is on his feet.

13             MR. MacDONALD:  Thank you, Your Honours I wonder if the witness

14     could just provide dates when he went to these places because these

15     places are also concerned in the indictment.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, in more general terms, Mr. Ivetic, you asked

17     how many villages did you visit and then we get an answer of three to

18     four minutes setting out all kind of details who was there, what was

19     done, et cetera.  Now, it may well be that's exactly what you had on your

20     mind, but it seems to be a bit of a pattern here that you ask a simple

21     question and we get a long explanation.  And the Judges may be a bit lost

22     on what you are demonstrating at this moment.  Are we still talking about

23     the expertise of the witness or are we still talking about what ZOV

24     means, which you had explained, by the way, before, what the acronym

25     meant, spontaneously.  So, therefore, could you try to remain focussed

Page 43281

 1     and also put your questions in such a way that it's clear for us whether

 2     you're still focussing on the experience of this witness or on certain

 3     matters which are specifically important in view of the indictment so

 4     that we do not have a short question and then three, four, or five

 5     minutes answer.

 6             MR. IVETIC:  Okay.  I apologise.  The questions --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  And then also if there's anything in detail, perhaps

 8     you could -- you could elicit from the witness what time-frame he is

 9     referring to.  We were not seeking a long explanation but one or two

10     words on what are you doing at this moment would certainly assist us.

11             MR. IVETIC:  This dealing with the fact witness aspect of this

12     witness before we go back to the analysis of Tomasica and the Dunjic

13     report.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear that he is talking about facts but talking

15     about facts also we would appreciate if we know exactly in what context

16     those facts are presented so that we know what the relevance for this

17     case is.

18             Please proceed.

19             MR. IVETIC:  Okay.

20        Q.   Professor, you've heard the comments that we've just talked

21     about.  Could you please tell us a little bit more in detail as to what

22     time frame, that is to say, what years or in relation to certain events

23     that you undertook this forensic work in this area in relation to Serb

24     victims in these villages that you have now, I think, identified.  I

25     don't know if there are more villages.  But could you help us out in

Page 43282

 1     terms what events were under way -- when were these events under way?

 2     What time-period, what years?

 3        A.   I apologise.  There were a lot of things that I did, so please

 4     stop me when I go over the limit because I don't have a clear idea of how

 5     much I need to say.

 6             At the time when it was done, it was all made available to the

 7     Tribunal and when working on these graves, I spent ten days in The Hague

 8     and another six days in Belgrade when I provided detailed information

 9     about all the graves, all the bodies that I autopsied, but now I'm not

10     prepared to provide more details about the bodies because I'm not

11     prepared.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  The question was:  When the events happened to which

13     you referred to in a previous answer, not whether you gave it to

14     The Hague but when these events happened you described.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm trying to say precisely that.

16     I can't tell you the exact dates.  For instance, I worked on the victims

17     in Kravica in 1993, for example.  It was certainly in March 1993, but I

18     am afraid to give you the wrong date and confuse my later testimony,

19     considering that I went to Zvornik at least ten times and worked on all

20     the bodies that were subsequently found from 1992 to 1995 or 1996.

21             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... yes, 1992 to

22     1996, various visits to Zvornik.  That's clear.

23             Any other time frame for any of the other matters you described?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I think it's mainly about the

25     graves we did in 1993, but I can't tell you for sure at this moment.

Page 43283

 1     Because I covered practically the whole territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina,

 2     and I went wherever needed more than once.  I would have to have

 3     something in writing before me to give you exact information.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  We understand you are unable to give exact

 5     time-frames for the other events you mentioned.

 6             Mr. Ivetic, please proceed, and let's try to move on and receive

 7     as much factual information, if we are still at the factual part of the

 8     testimony of the witness.

 9             MR. IVETIC:

10        Q.   Could you help us with the ethnic makeup of the villages that you

11     visited where these bodies were located that were being processed?

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. MacDonald.

13             MR. MacDONALD:  I object to that question at the moment,

14     Your Honours.  I would ask my friend to lay a foundation for the

15     witness's knowledge of that.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic.

17             MR. IVETIC:  Okay.

18        Q.   Did you have any information as to the ethnic makeup of the

19     villages that you identified earlier, Kravica, Bratunac, and Fakovici and

20     I believe you mentioned Skelani or Sekovici, I can't remember which one

21     that were around Zvornik where these bodies were located.

22        A.   These villages --

23             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These villages were mainly Serb.

25     That's something that I learned later.  I didn't know it at the time when

Page 43284

 1     I was working there.

 2             MR. IVETIC:

 3        Q.   And you indicated that some of these bodies had been identified

 4     and, indeed, you mentioned some names.  What was the ethnicity of those

 5     bodies that were identified?

 6        A. We did not pay attention to the ethnicity.  We determined names and

 7     surnames as we worked and as we identified them.  As for ethnicity, that

 8   was an area of concern for the judges, not our job. We didn't deal with it.

 9        Q.   And you -- the local population in the areas of these villages,

10     did they have any reaction to the discovery of the bodies, and if so,

11     what was that reaction?

12        A.   As long as the fighting lasted, most of the people were not in

13     the villages.  All those who could leave left.  Those who were unable to

14     leave, and that means the poorest people, stayed, and we had to make

15     calls through the media and inform people that we are working on a

16     particular mass grave so that people who had fled to Serbia, as most of

17     them did, should come and help us identify the bodies, based on the

18     clothing and other details.

19        Q.   Okay.  And did you have any personal interactions of relatives of

20     those persons who were deceased?

21        A.   Well, after the identification, many of them were looking for any

22     assistance available, and they are still looking for it, and it's mainly

23     for medical assistance in view of the health situation in that area.  We

24     had contacts and I still have contacts with many people who want to talk

25     about their next of kin because I did the post-mortems and they see me as


Page 43285

 1     the person who last touched the bodies of their near and dear and learned

 2     certain details by performing the autopsy.  And they often ask for

3      interviews, and I talk to them as often as I can.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, I'm looking at the clock.  It seems to

 5     be time for a break.

 6             MR. IVETIC:  That's fine.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, we'd like to see you back in 20 minutes.

 8     You may follow the usher.  We take another break.

 9                           [The witness stands down]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  We resume at ten minutes past midday.

11                           --- Recess taken at 11.51 a.m.

12                           --- On resuming at 12.13 p.m.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  We briefly move into private session.

14                           [Private session]

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 43286











11 Pages 43286-43289 redacted. Private session.
















Page 43290

 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                           [Open session]

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

16             JUDGE ORIE:  I asked for the witness to be escorted into the

17     courtroom.

18                           [The witness takes the stand]

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Professor Stankovic, the break was extended slightly

20     because we had to deal with an administrative matter but Mr. Ivetic is

21     now ready to resume his examination.

22             Please proceed.

23             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you.

24        Q.   Professor, a few more factual-related questions in respect to

25     your work in the Zvornik area, in the time-period that you specified


Page 43291

 1     mainly 1993, but from 1992 to 1995.  In relation to those bodies that

 2     were in the predominant Serb villages that you mentioned, do you recall

 3     anything about the age distribution of those bodies, of those victims, I

 4     should say?

 5        A.   You mean among the Serbian victims?

 6        Q.   Yes.

 7        A.   There was a 11-year-old boy among them.  His last name was

 8     Stojanovic.  I don't remember his first name.  There were women, aged --

 9     like Radosava Kovacevic, for example, who was 82 and lost her life in

10     Skelani.  There were people over 80 years of age such as Ergic from

11     Kravica, who was 81.  There were --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. MacDonald is on his feet.

13             MR. MacDONALD:  I think Professor Stankovic is reading from

14     something again, Your Honours, in front of him.  I'm just not certain

15     what that is, this time.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Are you reading, Mr. Stankovic?  Mr. Stankovic, were

17     you reading from anything?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.  I've told you

19     what I have here.  This is just what I remember in terms of typical

20     cases.  Perhaps I find it easier to remember if I look down rather than

21     if I look in some other direction.  If I am to remember the names, the

22     ages and other numbers, please feel free to check.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Apparently -- I can't see what it in front of

24     you because the screens in between.

25             Mr. MacDonald, does this --

Page 43292

 1             MR. MacDONALD:  Yes, Your Honours.  There's a document open and

 2     I'm happy to accept that Professor Stankovic was not reading from it.  I

 3     wonder if we just took that away, just to make certain that we know.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  If you would please put aside whatever you are not

 5     reading from.  And then if you want to consult any of the documents just

 6     tell us that you are consulting them.

 7             Yes, Mr. Stankovic, you were interrupted when answering the

 8     question about the age of those bodies, and you gave, I think, a few

 9     examples of very young or very old people.  It would certainly assist me

10     if you would also say so many were women, so many were below the age of

11     16 or 18 years old, so many were above the age of 60 so that we get an

12     overall impression of the age of these persons that had died.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm not in a position

14     now to provide you with all the information.  I mentioned some individual

15     cases.  The youngest victim whose autopsy I performed in the area was 11

16     years old, and the oldest was over 80.  The majority of the deaths

17     occurred with people whose age was between 20 and 60.  That's all I that

18     I can specify right now.  Everything else would be just guess-work

19     because I never performed this sort of analysis of the data.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  And by majority, male or female?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Most were men.  There was a

22     significantly smaller number of women.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  And we are talking about in total

24     approximately?  Because talking about Zvornik, you referred to Muslims

25     who had died and Serbs who had died, and I think the number of the Serbs

Page 43293

 1     was considerably higher.  Could you tell us what approximately the size

 2     of the group of deceased people was?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When we talk about Eastern Bosnia,

 4     I think the group comprised around 1100 bodies, including those who were

 5     certainly Muslims.  That was the group that we examined in early 1992.

 6     And the others were mostly Serbs from Serb-populated villages because we

 7     were requested, we were called to come over and examine those bodies.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 9             Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

10             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you.

11        Q.   And I think you -- I think you mentioned that the documentation

12     had been provided to the ICTY and that you had been interviewed.  Were

13     you ever called to testify in court as to these remains of Serbs from

14     these villages that we've been discussing?

15        A.   I already said that at one point someone from the Prosecution

16     asked me whether I was willing to testify as a witness who performed

17     these autopsies at the Naser Oric trial.  I said that if that was the

18     Prosecution's decision that I had nothing against it and that I would act

19     in compliance with the Prosecution's request.  I -- and the trial ended

20     after that but I was not invited to testify before that Trial Chamber.

21        Q.   Okay.  Then I would like to conclude that factual part of your

22     testimony and return to the expert aspect of your appearance here and I'd

23     like to --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I just put one additional question --

25             MR. IVETIC:  Yes --

Page 43294

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  -- I'm not surprised by your last answer because

 2     that's what you said before as well.  But before you also said that your

 3     expert report was admitted into evidence in that case.  You didn't say

 4     that now.  Was it?  In the Oric case.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You may have misunderstood me.  I

 6     said that ICTY investigators talked with me about victims whose autopsies

 7     I performed in Eastern Bosnia.  I don't know whether my autopsy reports

 8     were admitted or not.  I just know that they contacted me and asked me

 9     whether I was willing to come and testify.  It's possible that the

10     reports were admitted ...

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me read what you said and I'm referring to page

12     6 of today's transcript.

13             You said:  "In the end, I wasn't called.  I was informed verbally

14     that my autopsy reports were accepted in the case, and that was the end

15     of it."

16             I understood that that they would have been admitted into

17     evidence, but if this is wrongly understood - or if you don't know -

18     please tell me.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've told you what they told me,

20     but I'm not certain whether the autopsy reports were admitted into

21     evidence or not.  That was something that I was told, but ...

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Typically a matter on which, I think, the parties

23     could easily agree if it was the case.

24             Please proceed.

25                           [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 43295

 1             MR. IVETIC:

 2        Q.   Sir, I'd like to move another matter.  If we could have but not

 3     broadcast Exhibit D283.  And I also have a hard copy of this as well that

 4     we can help -- with the help of the court usher get into your hands.

 5             And, professor, I will ask you to ignore the name of the stated

 6     person and focus on the diagnosis in the document that we will be looking

 7     at.

 8             And looking at the diagnosis in the original, are you in a

 9     position to identify what language the diagnosis is written in?

10        A.   The diagnosis is written in the Latin tongue.  And the therapy

11     and the other information is written in the Serbo-Croat-Bosnian language.

12        Q.   And could you express to us what this diagnosis in Latin means in

13     relation to the injuries exhibited by this individual, again without

14     referencing the name.

15        A.   It follows from the discharge list that the person spent some

16     time at the military medical institution and received treatment from the

17     16th of July, 1995 until the 11th of August, 1995.  The diagnosis in

18     Latin means explosive injury in the left pelvis and the left gluteus.  In

19     the epicrisis, the doctor wrote that anti-tetanus protection and

20     antibiotic therapy were provided, the bandages were changed regularly.

21     The wound is normal and discharge for outpatient care, redressing every

22     other day at the nearest outpatient clinic.  Checkup with orthopaedic

23     surgeon at the Tuzla health centre as necessary.

24             So explosive injuries to the left pelvis, left hip, and left

25     buttock.

Page 43296

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask you.  You said it was the left gluteus.

 2     Could you please confirm that.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry no, it's the right one.

 4     It's the right gluteus.

 5             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... making mistakes

 6     is very human.

 7             Please proceed.

 8             MR. IVETIC:

 9        Q.   And in your medical opinion, what kinds of things could cause the

10     type of injury that is described here in the Latin, an explosive injury

11     of the manner that you just detailed for us?

12        A.   Those injures are caused by fragmentation of mines or explosives

13     such as mortar shells or cannon shell and also such injuries may be

14     caused by the explosion of hand-grenades.  So hand-grenades may also be

15     the cause of such injuries.

16        Q.   How would a gun-shot wound compared [sic] to the type of wound

17     that is described in this document?

18        A.   There are differences between blast wounds and gun-shot wounds.

19     Depending on the angle at which the projectile enters the body, it could

20     be round or oval in form.  If the projectile has not been damaged before

21     entering the body, the edges of the wound are straight and smooth as

22     opposed to wounds caused by shrapnel, where injuries are irregular forms.

23     So are the edges.  They can be of different shapes, another difference is

24     depending on the distance from which projectiles were fired.  If it is

25     point blank, a gun-shot injury is probably an entry and exit wound except

Page 43297

 1     when it hits a bone such as the hip bones, which are very thick and in

 2     which a projectile may get stuck.  As opposed to blast wounds where there

 3     are numerous channels that destroy much more soft tissue, because the

 4     shrapnel has an irregular pattern of penetrating a human body.  And as

 5     this person was admitted to a hospital when the wounds were dressed,

 6     pieces of shrapnel are lodged at smaller depth than gun-shot projectiles.

 7     And the persons who dressed the wounds can very easily make a distinction

 8     between shrapnel and gun-shot projectiles and the injuries caused by

 9     them.  In this specific case, taking into account that the person was

10     admitted to a hospital for a period of 26 days, probably it was a mine or

11     an explosive, such as mortar shell or a cannon shell, and that these were

12     serious injuries which are not described in this discharge list, but such

13     injuries required a long period of treatment as verified by the doctors

14     in their finding.

15        Q.   Thank you.

16             MR. IVETIC:  Your Honours, I've had discussions with

17     Mr. McCloskey of the Prosecution and I understand there is a CLSS

18     translation of this document that has the Latin translated into -- I

19     can't remember if it's English because I only received a hard copy and I

20     lost it so I don't have the information on that.  But is this sufficient

21     in terms of the meaning of the Latin or do we need to get that document

22     uploaded to complete the record?

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Is it all about the explosive wound?

24             MR. IVETIC:  Yes.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  That's the issue.

Page 43298

 1             MR. IVETIC:  Yeah.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. McCloskey.

 3             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes, Mr. President.

 4             Looking at the record for this issue, I promised you many months

 5     ago to get you a translation of the Latin.  CLSS came back with a

 6     translation that we frankly disagreed with the Defence on and we have not

 7     offered it.  However, Mr. Ivetic has gone to a source that has described

 8     that and the way it was translated is, I think, fair, and I think we're

 9     willing to stand on the old translation and the testimony of this witness

10     and he will, of course, be cross-examined.

11                           [Trial Chamber confers]

12             JUDGE ORIE:  We leave it there for the time being.

13             MR. IVETIC:  Okay.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  And we'll wait what later happens.

15             MR. IVETIC:  Thank you.

16        Q.   Professor, now I wish to return to your expert work in relation

17     to the Tomasica evidence of Dr. Clark, so I would ask that we now take a

18     look at Exhibit D1447 marked for identification and that would be your

19     report as to Dr. Clark and the Tomasica material.  And ... I think you

20     still have your copy in front of you as I don't have a clean copy in

21     front of me.

22             I'd like to turn to page 16 in e-court in the English and this

23     will be page 22 of the original in Serbian.  And we have... oh.

24             MR. IVETIC:  If we can go to the next page in the Serbian.  I

25     appear to have miscounted.  I see it's hard copy 22, it's in e-court, in

Page 43299

 1     the original Serbian.  But we have here a list of sources that you used

 2     in your analysis and I wish to focus on two of these that are to be found

 3     on the next page in both language versions of the report.  And I will

 4     wait for the e-court to catch up with us.

 5             And they are the second and third up from the bottom of the list

 6     and they deal with asanacija of the terrain or sanitisation as it has

 7     been translated.  One of them deals with the identification of bodies in

 8     mass disasters, and the other talks about a kit, SNK69 for use in

 9     identifying bodies in mass disasters.  Can you tell us how you came to

10     prepare these two documents that are listed in the report as sources that

11     you used.  That is to say, how did you become -- how did you come to be

12     requested to author these two documents?

13        A.   The second document, "Sanitisation of terrain in mass disasters,"

14     commissioned by Belgrade was a result of mass disasters in our city

15     caused by either natural causes, earthquakes, floods or et cetera, or

16     caused by war or terrorist action.  The city of Belgrade did not have

17     enough autopsy specialists who would deal with these bodies and the

18     commander of civilian protection at the time, a certain Colonel Kovacevic

19     who was in charge, knowing all this and bearing in mind the problems of

20     sanitizing the terrain at the time when a plane from Zagreb fell when it

21     was still the country of SFRY, asked that he be able to participate in

22     drafting a document that would regulate sanitisation of terrain in the

23     event of massive disasters.  There were representatives of the army, the

24     police, civilian structures involved in this work, and we produced a

25     draft document that was first adopted by the Assembly -- Municipal

Page 43300

 1     Assembly of Belgrade and then proposed it to another municipalities to

 2     adopt for the same purpose.

 3             What did sanitisation of terrain mean?  It meant primarily taking

 4     care of the terrain after an accident designating a place where bodies,

 5     human corpses and carcasses would be disposed of, a place where autopsies

 6     would be done.  It designated who would be leaders of the teams and other

 7     experts necessary, what documentation produced should look like, how it

 8     would be presented, and various other related issues.

 9             After this draft document was made, we designated exact locations

10     where bodies would be collected, who would be in charge of post-mortems,

11     where we would look for assistance and from whom --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness, the question was how did you come to be

13     requested to you author these two documents.

14             Mr. Ivetic, it could be that witness is exactly telling what you

15     wanted to ask him anyhow, but could we try to get focussed questions,

16     focussed answers, such as this was triggered by this or that event or I

17     was asked by the municipality, rather than to explain far beyond what was

18     asked.

19             Please proceed.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as the first document is

21     concerned, the Assembly of Belgrade asked me to do it.  At that time, I

22     was a well known expert in this area, and together with other experts, I

23     was asked to do it.

24             In the second case, it was the army who requested it because in

25     the army there was a Department for the development of war sanitary

Page 43301

 1     equipment.  They wanted a document about sanitisation in massive disaster

 2     there was already one set of procedures and rules, but they wanted it to

 3     be complemented and updated with an eye on how it is done in other

 4     countries.

 5             MR. IVETIC:

 6        Q.   And you identified that it applies to war and terrorism et

 7     cetera.  What was to be done in represent to explosives, weapons, and

 8     munitions found in -- in the asanacija or sanitisation process as it

 9     related to war?

10        A.   In some parts of the clothing of the soldiers we autopsied at the

11     military medical academy, we found grenades, explosives, ammunition,

12     bullets, and everything we found we handed over to the military police

13     and they somehow stored it and disposed of it, and they gave it to the

14     quartermaster service or whatever section in the army it is that deals

15     with it.

16        Q.   And were there any instances when it was foreseen that full

17     autopsies would not be able to be performed in mass disasters; if so what

18     were those circumstances foreseen?

19        A.   A complete post-mortem implied opening bodily cavities according

20     to the prescribed rules.  A partial post-mortem implied an external

21     description of the body while removing the clothing to see what personal

22     items were there.  A record would be made, and after that, the corpse

23     would just be externally inspected to register injuries, the location of

24     injuries, their appearance, their size, number, and whatever was possible

25     to describe at the moment, and those were the characteristic body parts

Page 43302

 1     for identification.  After that, the bodies were stored in designated

 2     locations, and then the people who did the exhumations could see the

 3     bodies again, if necessary, or remove parts of the body needed for DNA

 4     analysis and describe the injuries in greater detail.

 5        Q.   Now, focussing specifically on the asanacija that applies to

 6     war-time conditions or combat, what, according to the procedures was to

 7     be done for bodies found in the battle-field?  Corpses found in the

 8     battle-field, what was to be done with them?

 9        A.   Well, what I said about partial autopsies, that also includes

10     recording the body and describing it, including the clothing found on the

11     body, external description of the parts that could be useful for

12     identification, the dental status that is to be compared with dental

13     records in health centres, and after that, the body, under a certain

14     number, would be buried, and after the war, the bodies could be exhumed

15     again for renewed post-mortem and collecting samples for further

16     processing.

17        Q.   Okay.  Now, I'd like to turn to page 3 in both languages of D1447

18     MFI which we have in front of us, and I'd like to address with you the

19     part A of your report which is:  "Objections and unresolved issues

20     regarding deviations from acceptable standards and procedures that follow

21     from the contents of the report."

22             And here in the first numbered paragraph -- oh, I have to wait

23     for the B/C/S.  Now I have to, I think, wait for the English.

24             And you have written here under number one:  "How is it possible

25     for the chief ICTY pathologist in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia to

Page 43303

 1     offer his help with the exhumation and processing of bodies in Tomasica,

 2     receive his information about the grave-site in informal conversations,

 3     he does not state with whom, and say that his role was 'was an unofficial

 4     one' and that ICTY then requests him to draw up a report on autopsy

 5     findings?"

 6             Now, I want to break this down.  First of all, the unofficial

 7     role of Dr. Clark in the investigations of Tomasica.  Can you please tell

 8     us, from the perspective of the field of practice of forensic medicine,

 9     what is the standard role of a pathologist and how does it compare to

10     this unofficial role of Clark?

11        A.   I've already said that if somebody participates in work on a mass

12     grave and the team is led by an investigating judge, then the leader of

13     the post-mortem team is the one who assigns roles to every member of the

14     post-mortem team.  I cannot understand that somebody describes their role

15     as unofficial, that they did not have any kind of mandate since this

16     investigation was overseen by the prosecutor's office of

17     Bosnia-Herzegovina, it would have been logical for the prosecutor to

18     specify the role of Dr. Clark, in co-ordination with the Tribunal or

19     something, I don't know.  But, in any case it is completely impossible

20     for somebody to come in from the street and say, I want to participate

21     and help in the processing of this mass grave.  From an expert point of

22     view, it's unacceptable, and I, as an expert, I would never accept such a

23     role in dealing with a mass grave.

24             And then we can't find in the papers any detailed trace of

25     Dr. Clark's role, but he proceeds to make a report on the case, although

Page 43304

 1     he was absent at the beginning of the exhumations and although he

 2     receives his information in what he calls informal conversations.  Why

 3     didn't he conduct formal interviews with the leading people in the

 4     investigation who must have given him their approval to be there,

 5     otherwise he couldn't have been there?  So why didn't he ask them also to

 6     give him access on all the resulting -- all the resulting information?

 7     That's why I made this remark about this work procedure and this way the

 8     report was written for such an important institution as the international

 9     Tribunal in The Hague.

10        Q.   From the perspective of your profession, what is the proper

11     procedure for obtaining information via interviews when one is a forensic

12     pathologist engaging in an investigation?

13        A.   From the moment when the leaders of the investigation decide to

14     engage you, the leader decides on your level of clearance.  You can have

15     contacts and hear other versions of events from other people.  You can

16     talk to other people involved in the work, processing the mass grave, but

17     formally and legally, it is the investigating judge or the prosecutor who

18     determine your role and you act accordingly, in keeping with their

19     instructions.

20        Q.   And now if we could take a look at number 2 in your objections

21     and unresolved issues, you say:

22             "Why did Dr. Clark take notes and take photographs independently

23     of Dr. Dzevad Durmisevic of Bihac and Professor Nermin Sarajlic from the

24     Sarajevo University and can this be understood as mistrust of experts

25     from Bosnia and Herzegovina."

Page 43305

 1             In your experience, where there are multiple forensic

 2     pathologists working together, what would be the commonly accepted

 3     procedure for this type of work, especially as to photography?

 4        A.   It's very odd and very unprincipled to conduct a separate

 5     investigation within the framework of the investigation led by the

 6     official authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  And for Dr. Clark to

 7     write a separate report without trying to harmonise what he wrote with

 8     Dr. Sarajlic and Dr. Durmisevic.  It's the first time I hear of anything

 9     like that happening.  Because if the doctors who were in charge got a man

10     who is doing work off his own bat, I myself would never accept to work in

11     such conditions.  I would just tell the people in charge, I cannot go on.

12     If this is the way you want it, you will do it without me.  Because if he

13     was officially engaged, then they had the obligation to harmonise their

14     findings.  Later on, when we get to the examples, we will see exactly

15     what's wrong with it, and then the leader of the investigation should

16     have tried to harmonise their findings.  If he was unable to, then he

17     would engage external experts and then we wouldn't have two different

18     causes of death for one person, parts of the body that one doctor

19     described and the other didn't, et cetera.

20             It's also beyond my understanding that he, as a person who is

21     producing a general report for the ICTY, makes his only photographs.  On

22     site, there must have been a scene-of-crimes team from the official

23     authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina and he could have just pointed and

24     asked them, Please make me photos of this or that body part.  I can

25     hardly imagine a forensic pathologist lowering himself to the role of a

Page 43306

 1     simple photographer.  He is a renowned specialist with great experience.

 2        Q.   You questioned here if Clark --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Can I seek clarification.

 4             You say you can hardly imagine someone lowering -- apart from

 5     whether taking photographs is lowering for someone who has other

 6     capacities as well, but is there any suggestion that he did not take

 7     those photographs or -- I mean, do you not believe him?  Or is it just

 8     that you are astonished by that cause of action which you, as a respected

 9     expert, would never have followed?

10             Which of the two?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, the main problem, in my view,

12     is that a forensic pathologist's main focus should have been on analysing

13     and qualifying --

14             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... witness, let me

15     stop you there.  Could I receive an answer to my question.  Is it that

16     you don't believe him that he took those photographs?  Or is it that you

17     would never have done that for professional reasons to do it as he says

18     he did?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I believe these

20     people, but I find it hard to believe that they did this.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  [Previous translation continues] ... I -- yes, but

22     you, nevertheless, believe it.  You do not -- I'm trying to understand

23     your testimony, whether there's any suggestion that he's not telling the

24     truth or that you think that he acted very unwise.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I find it hard to believe that he

Page 43307

 1     acted in a way that is completely dissonant with his professional

 2     qualifications and that he did work that is not in his area of

 3     competence.  I have no dilemma that he took his own photographs.  That's

 4     not what I'm questioning; I believe that.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  You have answered my question.

 6             Please proceed.

 7             MR. IVETIC:

 8        Q.   And in the last part of this item number two, you question if

 9     Clark had mistrust for experts from Bosnia-Herzegovina.  What is the

10     reputation within the forensic medical community, historically as to the

11     practice of forensic medicine in Bosnia-Herzegovina?

12        A.   Well, I can say that forensic medicine in Bosnia-Herzegovina

13     never had any prominent specialists in the former Yugoslavia.  There was,

14     for instance, Professor Vujicic [phoen] from the military medical academy

15     who was practically the founder of forensic medicine in

16     Bosnia-Herzegovina but in this specific case I'm not able to come up with

17     any names of people who were particularly well-known in the area of

18     forensic medicine and would have been generally accepted in the territory

19     of former Yugoslavia.  As for others, for instance, there was Dr. Curkic

20     [phoen] in Doboj and Dr. Cirklas [phoen] in Tuzla, with whom I used to

21     work.  They are very good doctors.  There is the late Dr. Dobraca, with

22     whom I also worked.  In Mostar he was a solid man.  There was some

23     others.  I don't want to talk about them in this context.  I don't know

24     about Dr. Durmisevic and Dr. Sarajlic.  I first came across their names

25     through these reports.

Page 43308

 1        Q.   Now, in relation to his arrival at the Tomasica investigations,

 2     and his role in the same, Dr. Clark testified in this trial and I would

 3     like to ask you about some of the things that he testified about.  So I'd

 4     like to read to you his testimony from transcript page 36621, line 17 to

 5     36623, line 16, and then I'll have some questions about that.  So here

 6     comes the quotation:

 7             "Q.  So it has to do with the procedure in the mortuary.  You

 8     gave us an answer today as well, stating that you became involved in what

 9     is described here under number 3.  You told us that the actions carried

10     out in paragraphs 1 and 2 had already been carried out by other people.

11     How long did this last, that is to say, what was described in

12     paragraphs 1 and 2, opening bags, removing clothing for washing, and then

13     cleaning the bodies themselves, all these things what the anthropologists

14     did?

15             "A.  That process was already under way by the time I arrived at

16     the mortuary.  Really, from the time that the bodies started arriving

17     from the site into the mortuary, local staff, some of them employed by

18     ICMP, some of them probably not directly employed but they had started

19     going through the bodies, removing the clothing to wash the bodies so

20     that they could be examined by the anthropology team who would do an

21     inventory of what bones and parts of the body were present, try and

22     assess the sex of the individual from looking at the bones, and sometimes

23     taking a sample at that stage, a bone sample or a tooth sample for DNA

24     analysis.  Once that was completed, the body would be sealed up again in

25     the body bag, awaiting the pathologists to have a look at that in due

Page 43309

 1     course, examine the body in due course.  We obviously could see the

 2     processes going on just in the general course of events, but we had no

 3     direct oversight over them.

 4             "Q.  I do apologise, but you did not answer my question.  For how

 5     long had the work already been done in terms of paragraphs 1 and 2 before

 6     you arrived and became involved in the Tomasica case?

 7             "A.  I would imagine that probably one to two months.  I don't

 8     know precisely the date, but it would be of that pat-- order.

 9             "Q.  It would be a fair assessment to say that you had no

10     knowledge whatsoever in terms of what had been done before you arrived

11     there and before you started working on the Tomasica case.  Would that be

12     correct?

13             "A.  I was aware.  I was aware that procedures had been carried

14     out.  I had not witnessed it directly myself.

15             "Q.  How was it that you were aware of the procedures that were

16     applied?

17             "A.  When I did arrive, these procedures were still ongoing

18     because there was so many bodies, so I was able to see the bodies being

19     washed, and I was informed that a lot of other bodies had already been

20     dealt with, so I could see -- I could see the process.  It was still

21     ongoing.  And I could see -- similarly, I could see the process done by

22     the anthropologists and the records that they kept and the details and

23     the photography done, so I did at least see a substantial number of cases

24     going through these procedures but only kind of -- from a distant,

25     distant point of view.

Page 43310

 1             "Q.  Did you try to intervene in relation to the procedures that

 2     were different from the ones that you had applied earlier on?

 3             "A.  I made unofficial suggestions that this was a different way

 4     of doing things, but I realised I was very much the visitor.  I had no

 5     official role there, that the exercise was now being run by the Bosnian

 6     Commission and that, well, I had -- I had little influence to change

 7     things."

 8             And now I'd like to ask you, professor, for your observations as

 9     an expert in this field about Dr. Clark's own description of his arrival

10     on the scene and lack of involvement in the processes that were under

11     way, that he himself said were being done in a different way.

12        A.   I cannot believe that he said this.  If he said it and you say

13     that he did, then it would be best if he were to withdraw his whole

14     report which is now in front of us and that we would at least have a

15     report on what the experts from Bosnia-Herzegovina did and what the

16     investigation service of Bosnia-Herzegovina did.

17             Firstly, there is no -- it's team-work led by the prosecutor in

18     this specific case.  The prosecutor co-ordinates all the activities.  You

19     as a pathologist come to the scene and together with other team members,

20     you can see the bodies which are taken out of a mass grave.  These are

21     not war-time conditions and not investigations about -- let me not say

22     anything disparaging.  I believed that he was present during the

23     post-mortem examination and that he communicated not only with

24     pathologists and forensic experts but also anthropologists and

25     prosecutors and everybody else because these are very complex issues.

Page 43311

 1     One cannot work like this and this statement shows that, in this specific

 2     case, Dr. Clark made a professional error and that after such a

 3     statement, this report is, in fact, I would say, such that it cannot be

 4     used in a trial proceedings.

 5             MR. IVETIC:  I think we're at the time for the last break.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, we are beyond that already.  But after the long

 7     quote, I didn't want to disallow you to put a question to the witness.

 8             We'll take another break and we'd like to see you back in 20

 9     minutes.

10                           [The witness stands down]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  We will resume at a quarter to 2.00.

12                           --- Recess taken at 1.22 p.m.

13                           --- Upon commencing at 1.44 p.m.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  We are waiting for the witness to be escorted into

15     the courtroom.

16                           [The witness takes the stand]

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

18             MR. IVETIC:

19        Q.   Professor, I'd like to stay for a few more moments with the

20     testimony we just went through of Dr. Clark from this trial.  In relation

21     to what he described, the cleaning of the remains that others did that he

22     wasn't involved in, do you have any professional comment as to the manner

23     in which it was said by Dr. Clark to have been carried out in relation to

24     Tomasica?

25        A.   The forensic expert should be present from the beginning of the

Page 43312

 1     post-mortem examination.  It should have been seen whether by the washing

 2     of the bodies some elements or evidence may be removed that might, for

 3     example, indicate a distance from which a projectile was fired because

 4     traces of gunpowder explosion may remain on the surface of the body and

 5     they may be partly removed but not completely.  There may be gunpowder

 6     elements that are suffusing the soft tissues and may be detected by

 7     microscopic analysis.  The projectile also has some dirt on its surface

 8     and by passing through clothes or the body, the dirt also leaves trace on

 9     the soft tissues or on the clothes so perhaps with this washing before

10     the insight of the pathologist, such traces may have been destroyed.  So

11     it's difficult to understand how a doctor who examines the patients is

12     not present during the exhumation where the body is exhumed when found

13     and that he has no communication from the anthropologist who would

14     indicate from his point of view whether certain segments of textile or

15     body parts would need to be specifically analysed or focussed on, but

16     rather come and see only a body that has been cleaned.

17        Q.   And now I wish to also read a subsequent part of Dr. Clark's

18     testimony, this time going from transcript page 36623, line 17, to 36625,

19     line 2.  And here begins the quotation:

20             "Q.  Could you please tell us now briefly how come you appeared

21     at that location where the autopsies are carried out.  You said

22     beforehand that you were a volunteer and now you said that you were a

23     visitor.  Could somebody else have come there as a volunteer or visitor,

24     whoever wished to do so?

25             "A.  Perhaps I've used the word 'visitor' loosely.  I mean it to

Page 43313

 1     I was there with permission to be there but I was not in a position to

 2     change anything.  The reason I was specifically involved was, it was

 3     suggested by Professor Sarajlic in Sarajevo that Dr. Durmisevic would

 4     probably welcome, very much welcome my assistance, given my past

 5     experience and my past interest in this work.  So he was very welcoming

 6     and made arrangements for the Prosecutor to get permission for me to be

 7     there, so I wasn't just a casual visitor.  I was there with specific

 8     permission because of expertise; but at the same time, I was conscious

 9     that I was there, I was taking my own -- making my own observations and

10     that the two Bosnian pathologists were doing the official observations

11     for their -- for their purposes for the Prosecutor.  So -- and nobody

12     else could have been there without permission.

13             "Q.  How come you became involved before permission was given?

14     Was this at your own initiative?  Did somebody ask you to do that?

15             "A.  Partly it was my initiative.  I was in discussions with

16     Professor Sarajlic about doing research on cases that both of us had

17     seen -- had been involved in previously in Bosnia, particularly north of

18     Bosnia, and he happened to mention that there was going to be work at the

19     Tomasica site.  It was quite a coincidence that it all happened at the

20     same time, and he suggested that it would be good for me to be involved.

21     I was able to be, and so it went on, and that -- that request was made

22     into formal permission for me to be there.  So it was a chance

23     circumstance of time and availability.

24             "Q.  Could we say that it was actually your own initiative?

25             "A.  Yes, I didn't have to be there.  The work would have gone on

Page 43314

 1     had I not been there, certainly.  My involvement was also encouraged by

 2     both ICMP and ICTY.  It just happened that, at that time, at that

 3     particular time, it was during a major conference actually here in

 4     The Hague involving ICMP and ICTY, so there was direct discussions during

 5     the conference, and they both encouraged and facilitated my involvement."

 6             Now, professor, from the standpoint of your profession, how do

 7     you regard Dr. Clark's definition of his role into the Tomasica

 8     investigative efforts as he described here in this part of his own

 9     testimony?

10        A.   This part of his testimony is contrary to what he wrote in the

11     report itself.  Because in the report he writes that his role was

12     unofficial, and now we are getting a different picture of his role.  I

13     think that it was really good that he came to the location to help the

14     people who were working there and who did not have experience with

15     processing mortal remains from a mass grave, but I also believe that his

16     role, as described by him, including his arrival to the scene, is

17     unacceptable.  I would never agree to come and work in this manner,

18     whoever invited me.  I would have requested for the prosecutor of

19     Bosnia-Herzegovina who was in charge of the investigation, ask for the

20     approval of ICTY, not ICMP, because they are not important.  They may

21     request it, but the role and position of ICTY are important.  So they

22     should have been asked for approval of my presence because someone's

23     responsibility was discussed before this Tribunal and perhaps also before

24     a court in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  And it was only after that, that it

25     should have been asked for the prosecutor or investigating judge to issue

Page 43315

 1     an order and determine the role and mandate that I would have as part of

 2     the examination and processing of mortal remains of the bodies from the

 3     Tomasica mass grave.

 4        Q.   Now, if we can focus on the next item from your Tomasica report

 5     part A that is labelled as number 3 and that's at the -- whoops, at the

 6     bottom of the page in the Serbian and goes onto the next page in the

 7     Serbian.  And it reads here:  "If Dr. Clark co-operated with the forensic

 8     pathologists from Bosnia and Herzegovina '(usually) agreeing' with them,

 9     as he states in the report, then it follows that there were also some

10     disagreements that are not mentioned in the report, and so the question

11     arises as to whose finding and opinion the ICTY Trial Chamber accepts and

12     why it has not ordered a harmonisation of various findings, or, if

13     necessary, a new expert analysis?"

14             And the first question I have for you, professor --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Before you put that question to the witness, could

16     you first seek clarification as to what the "it" in the semi-last line

17     refers to.  Is it that the Trial Chamber or is it ...

18             Who should have ordered a harmonisation of various findings?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The person who was in charge of the

20     investigation should have asked for harmonisation, in this specific case

21     the prosecutor of Bosnia and Herzegovina or if the document was presented

22     to ICTY, then the Prosecutor from ICTY.

23             The Prosecutor was the one who presented the document to the

24     Trial Chamber so he should have requested the harmonisation.  If they

25     didn't, then there is a possibility for the Trial Chamber to request that

Page 43316

 1     the findings be harmonised between the pathologists who have different

 2     opinions or then a new expert analysis that would then be presented to

 3     the Trial Chamber in the form of a document that would not include

 4     opposite opinions about the post-mortem examinations that were carried

 5     out.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic.

 7             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I have another question before you ask the

 8     question.

 9             Professor, is it so that, indeed, the ICTY received two

10     unharmonised reported or did they receive only one report?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this specific case, I only had

12     at my disposal one report, the report of Dr. Clark which was given to me

13     for review.  I did not see the reports of Bosnian pathologists or the

14     prosecution of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  And as far as I have been informed,

15     it is inexistent.  But analysing the documents that were submitted to me,

16     I compared autopsy reports drawn up by Dr. Clark and autopsy reports

17     drawn up by Dr. Durmisevic and Dr. Sarajlic.  In these autopsy reports,

18     there are great differences about the situation, and I list them at the

19     end of my report relating to Tomasica.

20             This is why I thought and believed that it was necessary for

21     Dr. Clark, Dr. Sarajlic and Dr. Durmisevic to sit down together and

22     harmonise all the inconsistencies and then submit the results to ICTY.

23     If Dr. Sarajlic requested that Dr. Clark should come because of

24     Dr. Durmisevic's expertise, I can say that there are drastic differences

25     between the findings of Professor Sarajlic and Dr. Clark.  I found that

Page 43317

 1     when analysing their autopsy reports.  I photocopied or rather printed

 2     out ten such autopsy reports drawn up by Dr. Durmisevic and Dr. Sarajlic

 3     and compared them with the findings, which I have here on the desk in

 4     front of me in a closed folder, so I compared them with the contents of

 5     Dr. Clark's report and I noticed the differences.  And I believed that

 6     such an important Tribunal, founded by the most important global

 7     organisation, the United Nations cannot pass a judgement on the basis of

 8     such a document until the findings of the pathologists who were in charge

 9     of autopsies were harmonised.

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  [Previous translation continues] ...

11             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Is it your position that where two experts give

13     two divergent opinions on an issue, it's open for either of Prosecution

14     of this Court or of Bosnia and Herzegovina or the Tribunal to order them

15     to harmonise their differences?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that's not only my

17     position.  I think that's generally accepted rules, that applies in all

18     courts, including the ICTY.

19             JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... thank you.

20             MR. IVETIC:

21        Q.   And if we can talk some more about this generally accepted

22     process of harmonisation, how is it carried out in the ordinary course of

23     forensic medical work, the harmonisation and the new expert analysis?

24     How does this usually work out?

25        A.   After completing the post-mortem, if there are experts who were

Page 43318

 1     present and whose positions differ, then the leader of the

 2     investigation - that is to say, the investigative judge or the

 3     prosecutor - is notified, and he has the duty of recording these

 4     differences, trying to get the experts to agree.  If that is impossible,

 5     then he commissioned a new forensic examination by different experts who

 6     have higher professional integrity and, thus, they obtain a new report,

 7     new findings, that can be accepted by the Trial Chamber.

 8             After providing such a report, the expert must defend their

 9     findings, be it on the instructions of the prosecutor or the Trial

10     Chamber, but in any case, it all happens before the Trial Chamber.

11        Q.   And in your review of Dr. Clark's report and the other materials

12     that you reviewed, was there evidence of any such process of

13     harmonisation -- attempted harmonisation or engagement of a third

14     independent expert considered or utilised?

15        A.   No.  In the case file, there is no mention of any harmonisation

16     of positions.

17        Q.   Is there any explanation by Clark or the Bosnian pathologists of

18     why it was not done in this case relating to Srebrenica -- relating to

19     Tomasica?

20        A.   In the documents that I have, there is no explanation.

21        Q.   And then if we look at the next of your observations in

22     paragraph 4, which is to be found on page 3 in English and page 4 in the

23     Serbian original --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Ivetic, would you allow me ask one question in

25     between.

Page 43319

 1             MR. IVETIC:  Yeah, go ahead.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  You are pointing at the -- sometimes disagreement

 3     between the experts Dr. Clark and the BiH experts.  In your report, you

 4     list, to start with, nine cases, where you say some of the cases in which

 5     inconsistency has been observed between the autopsy reports of Dr. Clark

 6     and the pathologist commissioned by the prosecutor of BiH and then you

 7     have one other example, which then follows, I think, in -- it's Annex C

 8     where you give cases of unacceptable conclusion and, as a matter of fact,

 9     you say "cases" but it is one case.

10             Could you tell us, how many other cases you find similar

11     substantial differences?  So if these are examples, I would like to know

12     how many in total you found?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I made an analysis of the entire

14     documentation, but I listed only these nine, in fact, ten examples that

15     are typical, that involve differences in findings, and I thought -- I

16     didn't record the exact number of discrepancies.  That is to say,

17     opposite findings, and I'm not able to tell you how many there are now.

18     But I analysed all of them, and I singled out these as typical examples

19     where we find completely opposite findings between Dr. Clark and the

20     autopsy experts from Bosnia-Herzegovina because this is a sufficient

21     number to show that differences exist.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I would be interested to know whether these

23     are the ones that could be detected or whether there were far more on a

24     total of how many?  Do you remember how many in total you compared?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I think I compared about 100

Page 43320

 1     cases.  And among these hundred, not less than 20 involved differences.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So you would say the ten you listed, at least

 3     there is a double number which shows similar inconsistencies?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Would you be so kind - we'll adjourn in a second -

 6     would you be so kind to identify those other tens you say -- those other

 7     ten you say are certainly there so that we can get a better impression.

 8     You said "at least another ten."  But perhaps even if you find more, we'd

 9     be interested to assess the proper size of the inconsistencies you have

10     found and not only by way of examples but -- have a full insight in how

11     many there are.

12             Would you be willing to spend part of your own free time to do

13     that exercise?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Judge, Your Honour, I came here at

15     your request, and I will do whatever you want me to do.  My free time

16     doesn't matter.  So tomorrow ...

17             JUDGE ORIE:  That's highly appreciated.

18             Mr. Ivetic, we are at the time where we have to adjourn anyhow.

19                           [Trial Chamber confers]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But Judge Moloto -- yes, Mr. Ivetic, you had a

21     question.  I'll not -- we intervened, if you think it's important to put

22     that question now right away, then --

23             MR. IVETIC:  No.  It will take at least four minutes, I think, so

24     it will put us well over the time to go to that new point.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, you -- and you can live with it?  It doesn't

Page 43321

 1     disturb your --

 2             MR. IVETIC: [Microphone not activated] I can live with it.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I'm at least glad to hear that.

 4             Mr. Stankovic, we'll adjourn for the day.  I give you the same

 5     instructions as I did before for the breaks, that is, that you should not

 6     communicate, not speak, in whatever way, not communicate with whomever

 7     about your testimony, and we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning at

 8     9.30 to continue to hear your evidence.

 9             You may now follow the usher.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

11                           [The witness stands down]

12             JUDGE ORIE:  We will adjourn for the day, and we'll resume

13     tomorrow, Tuesday, the 19th of April, 9.30 in the morning, in this same

14     courtroom, I.

15                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.17 p.m.,

16                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 19th day of April,

17                           2016, at 9.30 a.m.