1 Monday, 22 October 2001
2 [Pre-Defence Conference]
3 [Open session]
4 [The accused entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.30 a.m.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Call the case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Case number IT-98-32-T, the Prosecutor versus
8 Mitar Vasiljevic.
9 JUDGE HUNT: Now, before we get to the pre-Defence conference,
10 Mr. Groome, you've put a document in with some further exhibits which I
11 understand are being tendered by consent. Have you got any proposed
12 numbers? I've lost complete -- any sense of the numbering system you're
13 using, but we're happy to adopt whatever it is.
14 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour. I believe we've numbered them on
15 the bottom. The diagram of the court would be Prosecution document 57.
16 JUDGE HUNT: I see, the usual little slip, 148, and -- the
17 measurement on that plan, by the way, that's to where the person who the
18 witness thought was the judge sits in the Bench in front of us here,
19 that's the first of the measurements, and then the next one is to where
20 we're sitting; is that right?
21 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE HUNT: Yes.
23 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, if I can just point something out on the
24 Muslim calendar. There are two dates. The fourth day of Bajram, the
25 column on the left is the ordinary calendar. The number 13 on the right
1 of the fourth day of Bajram is a Muslim calendar. So to avoid any
2 confusion, it's the 14th, the Sunday, the fourth day of Bajram.
3 JUDGE HUNT: I'm sorry. What date is it, then, in the end?
4 MR. GROOME: It's the 14th of June.
5 JUDGE HUNT: The 14th of June, the fourth day of Bajram.
6 MR. GROOME: Right.
7 JUDGE HUNT: Right. Now, Mr. Domazet, according to the document,
8 you have no objection to these documents being tendered?
9 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]
10 JUDGE HUNT: I'm sorry. We're getting no translation. You have
11 to start again, Mr. Domazet.
12 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] That is quite true, Your Honour.
13 Can you hear me now? We do not have the -- we do not have any objections
14 except that, rather than Saturday, as I heard in the interpretation, it
15 was Sunday, the 14th of June. That was the fourth day of Kurban Bajram.
16 I see that the transcript says Sunday, and we heard from the booth
17 Saturday. Otherwise, we have no objections.
18 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Then the plan of the courtroom will be
19 Exhibit P57. The Muslim calendar will be Exhibit P148. The summary of
20 the videotape that we were -- that was tendered on the last occasion is
21 Exhibit P50, 5-0.
22 Now, Mr. Groome, one matter that slightly concerns us, you have
23 not tendered any of the reports that you produced or your expert produced
24 about the validity of the hospital records.
25 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, the result of the report is that there
1 was no finding that there was anything -- no obvious forgeries or other
2 irregularities regarding the documents. Because it offered no evidence
3 that there was anything irregular about the documents, they were not
4 tendered. I would be willing to make them available on consent to the
5 court should the court wish to see those two reports.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Well, if you make a concession that they demonstrated
7 nothing to show that the documents had been forged, it's not necessary to
8 have the reports.
9 MR. GROOME: I will make that concession.
10 JUDGE HUNT: Very well. That's good.
11 Now, is that the end of the -- oh, there's the transcript of the
12 accused's statement to the Prosecution.
13 MR. GROOME: That has been completed by Mr. Ossogo. It just
14 remains for Mr. Domazet to sign off on the redactions and we can have it
15 to the court this afternoon.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Right. Well, then, that's now your case, subject to
17 that one matter, right?
18 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you.
20 Now, Mr. Domazet, in relation to your pre-Defence documents, I
21 notice that a number of the witnesses shown as having safe conduct. Now,
22 I don't think this Trial Chamber has made any orders. Have you sought
23 them from somebody else?
24 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, no, but when these
25 witnesses concerned, we wish to apply for special measures. In the
1 submission, all that is said is that we are applying for that measure.
2 For you -- it is for you, the Trial Chamber, to decide on that.
3 JUDGE HUNT: I confess I did not understand from the document that
4 you were applying for it. I wondered whether it had already been done by
5 somebody else. But clearly you would have to put a motion on and then we
6 will make the orders. But it is usual to make those orders for Defence
7 witnesses if they seek it, but it's the first we've heard of our duty to
8 make it in this case. So if you put a formal motion on, perhaps this
9 afternoon, and we'll make the orders. When is the first of them likely to
11 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Well, the witnesses for the Defence,
12 this week we've envisaged only Mitar Vasiljevic himself and his wife
13 Milojka Vasiljevic.
14 JUDGE HUNT: That's good. That will mean we have plenty of time
15 to make the orders. That's what I was concerned about. Are you seeking
16 any other protective measures, such as facial distortion, pseudonyms, and
17 the works, or are you taking a principled stand that you don't need them?
18 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my position in
19 principle is that we do not need that. I hope that none of the proposed
20 witnesses will ask for that at a later date, and I believe that they will
21 all testify under their own name and without any particular other
23 JUDGE HUNT: The problem --
24 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Except --
25 JUDGE HUNT: May I just say this: The problem that we face in all
1 of these cases is that that's their view when they leave their home. They
2 come here, they're staying in a hotel, a lot of the witnesses are there
3 together, they start to talk to each other, and all of a sudden we start
4 to get applications. The Prosecution have been instructed by the Victims
5 and Witnesses section to seek information from each of the witnesses
6 specifically about protective measures in advance. I think it might be a
7 good idea, if you have somebody on the ground, that they spoke to them
8 before they came here so that these orders can be made. There are a
9 number of problems in trying to make them at the last moment.
10 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, we shall do that.
11 The only problem, if I may call it that, is a witness who is on the
12 Defence list and who lives in the territory of the Federation of
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina, he's a Muslim, and with whom we had no contact, except
14 that at the time of disclosure we received from the Prosecution his
15 statement to the Prosecutor and his statement given to the police. In
16 other words, I'm not sure if that particular witness might ask for some
17 protective measures or not because that is the only witness that we have
18 had no opportunity to communicate.
19 JUDGE HUNT: Is that the witness whom you cross-examined one of
20 the investigators about and got him to identify the statements?
21 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Indeed, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE HUNT: Well, now, if you -- if you still have the fear that
23 you've expressed at that time, that he may not come, we are able to issue
24 a subpoena which may have some effect. I'm not sure quite what because
25 there's nothing to do we can to enforce it. Nevertheless, the paper
1 sometimes assists witnesses to consider their position, and if you want
2 one, you should make an application for one.
3 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do not know. Perhaps
4 somebody from the Victims and Witnesses Unit might try to talk to that
5 witness first in order to avoid the measures that the Trial Chamber may
6 take. So in case he refuses to come and testify, then perhaps in that
7 case the Chamber might decide to issue a subpoena.
8 JUDGE HUNT: You have already given the details of this particular
9 witness to the Victims and Witnesses Section, have you, so they can
10 prepare for visas and things? That means that they may well have been in
11 touch with the witness. May I suggest that you or your co-counsel speak
12 to the Victims and Witnesses section to see what the witness's attitude
13 is. That may save any problem at all.
14 Now, the next thing: You have two experts on your list of
15 witnesses. The second one, Professor Djurdjic, professor of criminal
16 law. There is no requirement that any of these offences with which your
17 client is charged be an offence also within the Federal Republic or within
18 Bosnia, but the sentencing practices of the relevant area certainly would
19 be relevant if we come to this issue of sentencing. I'm not quite sure
20 from the description here how far this professor of criminal law proposes
21 to go. Have you got his report yet?
22 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, we haven't, Your Honour. He was
23 preparing it, but he still has not given me his final report because he
24 doesn't know whether he will be called as an expert witness, and so he
25 didn't know whether to give it to me then or not. But the matters that
1 you have just raised will be covered by that report.
2 JUDGE HUNT: Well, the moment you have that report, if you give it
3 to the Prosecution, they may well say they don't require him for
4 cross-examination. It would be absurd to bring him here if the
5 Prosecution doesn't want to ask him any questions.
6 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I expect there will be
7 no need for his cross-examination in view of what he will be testifying
8 about. But of course I shall do my best to disclose his report to the
9 Prosecution as soon as possible.
10 JUDGE HUNT: Well, you know the Rule because you've taken
11 advantage of it, that it has to be served a certain time before he's
12 expected to give evidence. And whilst the Prosecution, I can't imagine
13 would go quite so far as to take the same objection that you did, if you
14 do give it to them within the time required by the Rules, then they've got
15 plenty of opportunity of telling you they don't require him to attend for
17 The other expert is a neuropsychiatrist. Have you got her report
19 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour, because the
20 neuropsychiatrist has gone through most of the written reports that we've
21 procured, and that is in addition to the evidence which can be found in
22 the record of 1992. There is also some evidence dating back to 1984 about
23 the treatment that Mitar Vasiljevic underwent for alcoholism. And as the
24 expert witness told me, she thought it necessary to also see the findings
25 -- both the findings of the doctors and the paramedics who had treated
1 him. And to write the report, she would also need to talk with the
3 JUDGE HUNT: Well, that's placing a great deal of pressure on the
4 Rule, if I may say so. When is she going to come to Den Haag to speak to
5 your client?
6 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Well, she could be here next week
7 already when we shall have no hearings. I've already applied for the
8 visa, and if there are no problems in that regard, or any other problem,
9 then she will be ready to be in The Hague as early as next week.
10 JUDGE HUNT: And are you contemplating, then, sending her home and
11 calling her later? Because this is a report in which the Prosecution may
12 have a little bit more interest than the other one. The relevance of it
13 is, to say the least of it, unclear. It depends upon what the report
14 says. It may be relevant to identification, of course, the identification
15 of your client as the person who was in hospital. But otherwise, the fact
16 that he suffers from alcoholism does not immediately suggest to me any
17 relevance. But that's something which can only be determined after the
18 report has been seen. I think the Prosecution, however, would be
19 justified in asking for it some time in advance of her giving evidence so
20 that they can seek some expert assistance in relation to that report.
21 That's the purpose of the whole Rule, to enable the parties to come to
22 some issue by being prepared in advance of the witness giving the
23 evidence. If you can keep that in mind, it may be necessary for your
24 neuropsychiatrist to have two trips to the Netherlands.
25 Now, the last of the doctors is an expert witness in relation to
1 the fracture of the lower leg. I was a little concerned, as you may
2 recall, to hear Dr. DeGrave say that the original x-ray had been
3 in his custody ever since it first arrived here in the Netherlands. That
4 suggests that your expert has had no opportunity of seeing it. Have you
5 made any arrangements with the Prosecution to obtain access to that x-ray
6 for your expert to see?
7 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour, I haven't, because
8 we first got in touch this morning. But I do not think there will be any
9 problems, at least insofar as the Prosecution is concerned. I don't think
10 there will be any problem.
11 JUDGE HUNT: Well, I hope not, because the Prosecution, of course,
12 has an obligation under the Rule to put its case in relation to these
13 x-rays to all of your doctors who are able to speak on the subject, and I
14 should imagine that each of the doctors would be able to speak on it
15 because they are doctors. Dr. DeGrave was only a general practitioner
16 himself, as far as I recall.
17 Now, there are a number of witnesses that you have identified as
18 giving evidence in relation to the persecution count. May I ask,
19 persecution of whom? Is it to answer the evidence of the Prosecution or
20 is it to raise this other issue of some form of attack upon the Serbian
21 civilian population?
22 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Well, precisely the witnesses
23 proposed by the Prosecution were called to testify about the persecution
24 so that the witnesses that I am proposing, I also want them to testify
25 about that count, except in the case of witnesses testifying about two
1 specific events, that is, the incidents with which the accused is charged
2 with. These witnesses should show not attacks on the population, that is,
3 the persecution of the population; they should be testifying about Mitar
4 Vasiljevic, that is, about what they knew about him during the relevant
5 period of time and who can also testify about the developments in Visegrad
6 at the time.
7 As Mitar Vasiljevic is charged with being a member of a
8 paramilitary unit commanded by Milan Lukic and the Defence will endeavour
9 to prove through those witnesses that that was not the case, and that
10 during the time in question, he was either in the military canteen at
11 Prelovo as a member of the civil defence or was in the town itself engaged
12 in the cleaning of the town until his injury in 1992.
13 JUDGE HUNT: But, Mr. Domazet, I hope you won't mind if I say that
14 you still are leaving a very wide track when you say they are going to
15 testify about the developments in Visegrad at the time. Now, are these
16 witnesses going to answer the allegations made by the Prosecution
17 witnesses that the Muslim population was being attacked and persecuted, or
18 are they going to give evidence alleging that the Serb civilian population
19 was being attacked or being persecuted?
20 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] I expect, Your Honour, that these
21 witnesses who will be coming here to testify about the circumstances -
22 there are, I think, four or five - and I can say straight away that we
23 shall cut the list shorter. We expect to give up two of those witnesses
24 so we shall have fewer of them here. They will be testifying, among other
25 things, about what went on in April/May 1992 before the arrival of the
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Uzice Corps, during its stay there and after that.
2 JUDGE HUNT: During the period before the Uzice Corps arrived,
3 that leads me to your submission as to the relevance of the evidence to be
4 given by Mr. Simic, I think his name is. The whole of his evidence,
5 according to what you have said, relates to incidents before the Uzice
6 Corps arrived and I want to know just how you can make that relevant.
7 You see, the Prosecution's second response to your submission - which if I
8 may say so is a much better considered one than the previous one - draws
9 attention to the fact that, according to the Tribunal's jurisprudence, you
10 are required to identify for the Tribunal -- for the Trial Court the
11 particular issue to which that evidence is to go. Now, I have not
12 obtained, if I may put it this way, any satisfactory answer from you in
13 any of your submissions as to how that material is relevant to anything we
14 have to decide in this case. The Prosecution has conceded that if it were
15 relevant to any particular incident, they would have no objection to it,
16 which is perhaps less than helpful as narrowing the issue, but
17 nevertheless they have pointed to matters where we could see that there
18 would be some relevance.
19 For example, if it contested any of the Prosecution evidence - and
20 I don't remember any Prosecution evidence that it could contest - which
21 showed that Muslims were improperly terminated from their positions of
22 employment by asserting that it was in fact Muslims who suspended or fired
23 Serbs, they have conceded that if there was evidence that it was the
24 Muslims who prompted the division of the police force along ethnic lines
25 in March of 1992, then that would be admissible. But other than that, it
1 seems that there is no issue that any material about attacks upon the
2 Serbs would be relevant.
3 Now, how is this evidence, the 21 incidents, all of which occurred
4 before the Uzice Corps arrived, how could they be relevant to any issue
5 in this case?
6 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I was not thinking, and
7 I believe I already said so, with regard to those incidents which are
8 mentioned in the pre-trial brief. I did not think that they would be
9 subjected to proof -- subject to evidence, especially when we talk about
10 things that happened in -- prior to 1992 and 1991 and even in 1990. But
11 the incident which happened one of those days after the Uzice Corps had
12 arrived in the town, and it had to do with the occupation of the hydro
13 power plant, threats to open the sluices, threats to take Serb hostages;
14 all of these incidents were some of the matters of which the Prosecutor
15 showed evidence, and that is what we intend also to show evidence for.
16 Not those things that happened in 1991 or 1990, only those things that
17 happened as of April 1992, because that is the time relevant for the
19 And when it comes to the witnesses specifically, you mentioned
20 Witness Simic, he is not a witness who will be testifying about that. But
21 witnesses under 13 and 14 are people who, at the time, worked for the
22 police and who know whether the police was separated, was split into the
23 Muslim and the Serb police, and how it came about. Also, they can testify
24 about a number of things related to paramilitary formations which is of
25 great importance for my client.
1 The witness under 15 is a witness who was a councilwoman in
2 Visegrad, in the Visegrad Assembly at the time, but I'm afraid she will
3 not be coming now because she will probably make a deposition or perhaps
4 we shall simply decide not to call this witness under 92 bis.
5 The same also goes for the witness under 27. So that we shall
6 only have two witnesses to testify as to the circumstances, people, that
7 is, who will be coming here, who will be called to come here and make
8 their testimony here.
9 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Domazet, there is no suggestion in anything that
10 I've said that you cannot call these witnesses. My concern is that you
11 keep their evidence to what is relevant in the case.
12 Now, Mr. Simic's 21 incidents, I still have got no idea from you
13 how that can be relevant in this case, the 21 incidents. Only one of
14 them, I think, happened in 1992. That was the incident lettered R.
15 That's in your pre-trial brief.
16 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] But, Your Honour, I do not know --
17 when you say that Witness Simic is supposed to speak about 21 incidents, I
18 don't know which Simic you have in mind. I have one Simic, one witness
19 Simic, who is supposed to testify about Mitar Vasiljevic himself and what
20 he knows he did during the relevant time. So we have not proposed any
21 witness for these incidents, the 21 incidents. And yesterday -- last time
22 I indicated that, as regards these witnesses, we will be conducting their
23 examination only in respect of the events which took place after the month
24 of April 1992.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Well, what you said, I think, answers now the
1 question I have been posing I think since this case began. You are not
2 going to call evidence about the 21 incidents; is that so?
3 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] You're right, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE HUNT: Well, thank you very much for that. That will
5 certainly save a lot of time.
6 Now, the last matter I want to raise with you at this stage:
7 You've given fairly substantial estimates for these witnesses' evidence.
8 I suggest that you have more here than you may have anticipated so that
9 we can keep going. We don't want to run out of evidence during the week.
10 Let's assume that they are going to speak about the three or four relevant
11 issues which you have identified, I can't imagine anybody's evidence
12 taking a full day, except your client, of course. But I can't imagine any
13 of them taking a full day, and some of them for which you've identified a
14 half day, they don't seem to have sufficient in their evidence to last
15 that long.
16 So you better talk to the Victims and Witnesses section about
17 this, but when you do start calling your witnesses, other than your client
18 and his wife, you better have quite a few of them here so that we can see
19 how we go. We don't want to run out of evidence each week. If, in the
20 first week, you have some that aren't called that week, then they have to
21 spend the weekend in this cold and rainy country, I'm sorry, but
22 nevertheless I think we've got to keep going if we can. And after that
23 first week, we'll have a better idea, probably, as to the rate at which
24 the witnesses will be taken through.
25 Now, I propose to ask Mr. Groome what's happening about the
1 authenticity of your documents. But other than that, those were the only
2 questions which I have at this stage.
3 Mr. Groome, you'll see in the filing that we got on Friday that
4 they are awaiting your assent or otherwise to the authenticity of some
6 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, although this was filed on Friday, I
7 only received it yesterday, I would propose the court would grant me a few
8 hours after this conference to review these documents and convey our
9 either agreement or disagreement with the admissibility of them to both
10 your clerk and Mr. Domazet later on today.
11 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, that would be satisfactory. I realise the
12 problem of these filings. For once we did get a document the same day it
13 was filed. In fact, I think I got mine about 3.00 in the afternoon, and
14 the Chambers area in this building is usually the last to get anything.
15 So you were unfortunate.
16 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I do have some questions to raise, or
17 issues to raise with regard to these issues.
18 JUDGE HUNT: Oh, yes, certainly, in a moment.
19 Mr. Domazet, is there any other matter you want to deal with
20 before I turn to Mr. Groome -- Mr. Groome's questions?
21 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] I'm not quite clear what you have in
22 mind, Your Honour. I'm sorry.
23 JUDGE HUNT: I was just asking, was there anything that you wanted
24 to raise at this stage before your case starts? I'm going to hear what
25 Mr. Groome wants to say and you'll get the opportunity to reply to that,
1 but is there any other issue that you want to raise at this stage?
2 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, except as regards the schedule
3 for the trial. But I don't know whether this is the right moment to
4 discuss that particular issue, the calendar.
5 JUDGE HUNT: Well, I've been reminded that this Wednesday is a
6 United Nations holiday, about the one benefit we get out of being an
7 organisation of the United Nations, I think. So we can't sit on that day.
8 So we'll start your case tomorrow, resume it on Thursday and on Friday.
9 Then the following week, as we've told you, we can't sit, and then
10 thereafter we'll sit four and a half days a week unless either party seeks
11 a lay day or a lay week. If they can give us some decent reason for it,
12 we'll give you time. Otherwise, we want to just keep on going.
13 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if we are talking about
14 four weeks of uninterrupted hearings, I don't think I would have any
15 objections to that. I'm fully prepared to proceed in that manner.
16 However, I have a personal problem with the week of the 5th of November.
17 I have some personal commitments which are of such a significance that it
18 would be very difficult for me to work during that week. As regards all
19 other weeks, I'm fully prepared to work without any interruption. So my
20 question would be, would that be possible?
21 JUDGE HUNT: Your difficulty is for the whole week, is it, the
22 week of the 5th of November?
23 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Yes.
24 JUDGE HUNT: Well, that's fair enough. After four weeks of solid
25 sitting, we probably could all have a break, and you may rest assured that
1 we will not sit on that week of the 5th of November.
2 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] The week of the 5th of November,
3 Your Honour.
4 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you very much.
5 Yes, Mr. Groome.
6 MR. GROOME: In light of that new schedule, that may meet some of
7 the concerns I have.
8 Your Honour, under Rule 67, the Defence is required to notify the
9 Prosecution prior to the commencement of trial of any special defence,
10 including a psychiatric defence. As I said to the Court yesterday, I
11 received this filing and in it there are six witnesses who are proposed to
12 talk about the psychiatric condition of the accused.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, but what's the special defence in the Rules that
14 you're referring to?
15 MR. GROOME: Well, under Rule 67, the special defence including
16 that of diminished or lack of mental responsibility. Until I see the
17 report filed by the primary expert, the short little couple of sentence
18 summaries that I have of the other doctors don't give a clear indication
19 of what they will testify to other than the fact that they will testify to
20 their psychiatric treatment of Mr. Vasiljevic during the time that he was
21 in Uzice hospital.
22 JUDGE HUNT: That seems to me to be relevant, if to nothing else,
23 to the issue of identification that he was the person who was in
24 hospital. It would be relevant that he had this treatment. But then if
25 they want to go further, we may want to know what it's about. I've
1 already expressed my view that I am unable at this stage to see what the
2 relevance of alcoholism is to any issue in the case other than the fact
3 that he was in hospital receiving treatment for that illness at the time
4 when these events were alleged to have taken place.
5 MR. GROOME: Well, we know from the medical records that he didn't
6 go into the psychiatric ward until July, so I guess I wonder is it going
7 to be relevant to this issue of alibi or is it primarily going to be
8 offered to show some type of diminished mental capacity of which the
9 Prosecution had the right to be aware of at the commencement of trial? I
10 think the Prosecution is prejudiced in a number of ways. The Prosecution
11 certainly would have asked some questions of the witnesses regarding their
12 observations regarding his mental state during the time these crimes were
13 alleged to have been committed. Also, I found that --
14 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel slow down, please.
15 MR. GROOME: I'm sorry. I was told at the end of last week that
16 Mr. Vasiljevic will be the first witness. Certainly it prejudices me in
17 my examination of Mr. Vasiljevic not knowing what it is that's going to be
18 alleged regarding his mental state at the time that these crimes were
19 committed. So in a number of ways, I have been prejudiced, or the
20 Prosecution has been prejudiced by not being notified of this special
22 I'd also call to the attention of the Court that after the
23 Prosecution first received these medical records and noticed that
24 Mr. Vasiljevic had been admitted to a psychiatric facility, I specifically
25 asked the Defence would there be a psychiatric defence and was told that
1 there would not. And that was approximately one year ago.
2 So --
3 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Groome, I understand everything you say, but we
4 can't deal with anything until we see what's in the report. Certainly, if
5 there is something in the report that you would have wished to
6 cross-examine the accused on, he will be recalled for you to do so.
7 There's no doubt about that in the world. But I don't understand how
8 alcoholism itself is relevant to any "special defence." You may or may
9 not be aware, but the Appeals Chamber has ruled that there is no special
10 defence of diminished responsibility in the sense of a defence to the
11 Prosecution. It's relevant only to the issue of sentence.
12 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE HUNT: And I can only say, as having been involved in the
14 partial defence of diminished responsibility in another place, that
15 alcoholism itself can never establish that anyway, according to all the
16 medical evidence that you can imagine.
17 But that's a different matter. Let's wait until we see the
18 report. Mr. Domazet, of course, is in a difficult position because he
19 hasn't seen it either. But if you are prejudiced in relation to your
20 cross-examination of the accused, you will be given the opportunity to
21 cross-examine him further later in the case. It is, however, worth
22 stating that Mr. Domazet is probably the first counsel for a very long
23 time to take the very sensible course of calling his client first, which
24 is what one would expect most counsel to do but which most counsel,
25 unfortunately, do not do, and thereby lay their client open to the comment
1 that his evidence has been tailored to suit the evidence which has
2 preceded it.
3 So I don't want to criticise Mr. Domazet for calling his client
4 first. I think he's done a very sensible and proper thing to do so. But
5 we keep in mind the problem that you may or may not have.
6 MR. GROOME: That meets my concern, Your Honour.
7 The one other is regarding the alibi witnesses. Yesterday, for
8 the first time I learnt of nine different witnesses who will testify
9 regarding alibi. Rule 67 also requires that in the event of alibi, the
10 Prosecution be provided with the names and addresses of alibi witnesses to
11 properly investigate and prepare for the examination of these witnesses.
12 It now appears that we will have a two-week hiatus starting next week. I
13 will endeavour to have investigators --
14 JUDGE HUNT: One week. I hadn't realised Mr. Domazet's week off
15 followed it immediately, but, Mr. Domazet, you can still have it.
16 Yes, well, you'll certainly have a good chance to do so. But you
17 are entitled to the names and addresses of any witnesses, and I suggest,
18 Mr. Domazet, that those names and addresses be supplied this afternoon.
19 MR. GROOME: And I will withdraw my rejection to the late notice
20 of these witnesses if we're able to --
21 JUDGE HUNT: It's unfortunate you didn't have them earlier. But
22 two weeks, I suppose, will be enough for you to find out what you need to.
23 MR. GROOME: I would also request, if there are statements in
24 addition to these very short summaries of the witnesses, I would
25 appreciate being supplied with the statements of those witnesses and also
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 the order in which they will be called so that we can more adequately
2 prepare for the examination of the witnesses.
3 JUDGE HUNT: Well, when you say you want the statements, I suggest
4 you negotiate that with Mr. Domazet. There's no power we have to order
5 him to supply them.
6 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour. I'm just requesting that.
7 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. Not only you, but we would like to know the
8 order of the witnesses as well, and if you could -- Mr. Domazet, if you
9 could provide each Friday a list of the witnesses you propose to call the
10 following week and the order in which you propose to call them to the
11 Trial Chamber and to the Prosecution, it will be of substantial
12 assistance. The names and addresses you should supply to the Prosecution
13 this afternoon.
14 Now, is there anything else you want to raise, Mr. Groome?
15 MR. GROOME: No, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE HUNT: How about you, Mr. Domazet?
17 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. Well, I'm sure that most of us will have an
19 awful lot to do in those two weeks, not necessarily to do with this case,
20 but we will certainly be busy. So we'll get at least three days in before
21 we go. I would like, if possible, to sit through on Friday afternoon to
22 get some more -- especially if it's to finish off one of your witnesses.
23 But if we finish at lunchtime, that's all right. Don't bother about
24 bringing any other witnesses along this week.
25 Well, we'll start tomorrow morning at 9.30 with the opening
1 address and the accused's evidence. We will now adjourn.
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 10.20 a.m.,
3 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 23rd day of
4 October, 2001, at 9.30 a.m.