Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 25826

 1                           Tuesday, 15 November 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 10.33 a.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning,

 6     everyone in and around the courtroom.

 7             This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and

 8     Stojan Zupljanin.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

10             Good morning to everyone.  May we have the appearances today,

11     please.

12             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Joanna Korner and

13     Sebastiaan van Hooydonk for the Prosecution.

14             MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours.  It

15     seems I'm not wide awake yet.

16             For the Stanisic Defence team, Slobodan Cvijetic and

17     Deirdre Montgomery.

18             MR. KRGOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Dragan Krgovic and

19     Miroslav Cuskic, appearing for Zupljanin Defence.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

21             May we go into closed session so the witness could be escorted

22     back to the stand, please.

23                           [Closed session]

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)


Page 25827

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4                           [Open session]

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

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Before I invite Ms. Korner to wind up her

 7     cross-examination, I remind you, sir, of the solemn declaration that you

 8     made when you first began.

 9                           WITNESS:  SZ-002 [Resumed]

10                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

11             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Ms. Korner

12                           Cross-examination by Ms. Korner: [Continued]

13        Q.   Sir, I want to go back to the video we are looking at yesterday

14     of the men we suggest were being led towards the sawmill by a special

15     police officer.  You've identified him as a special police officer.

16             MS. KORNER:  But I think what we've done now is print off a still

17     from the video which, Your Honours, we've arranged for hard copies to be

18     given to everybody and one for the witness.  But it's got the ERN number

19     0704-7618.  So it can come up in e-court as well.

20             I'm also going to ask that Your Honours be given and the witness

21     have back the hard copy version of the photo-board of the special police

22     which -- I've forgotten what the exhibit number was.  P2417.

23             And if Your Honours go in that, because it's easier to do this,

24     to page with the ERN number 06785416, together with the still.

25             Right.  If I could ask the witness be handed that -- the two

Page 25828

 1     documents.

 2        Q.   Now, sir, it wasn't -- and I accept entirely it wasn't that easy

 3     when you were watching the video to identify the man, but are you now

 4     able to confirm that that special policeman leading those men is, in

 5     fact, the man you knew as Tomislav Miljkovic?

 6        A.   I remember him as a fat man.  This may be due to technical

 7     reasons, but he looks much slimmer here.  So I cannot be certain that

 8     this is him.

 9        Q.   Forget about the size of him.  The face.  Looking at his face.

10     It's a -- it's a fairly good, I would suggest, depiction of face.

11             Is that him, as he was in June of 1992?

12        A.   It's hard for me to remember what he looked like in 1992.  I

13     remember him from the time when he was prosecuted for some crime.  And I

14     know that he was -- well, chubby.

15        Q.   All right.

16        A.   But if he looked like this in 1992, as I said, he wasn't anything

17     like slim at the time when I -- from which I remember him, and he was

18     being prosecuted for some criminal offence.

19        Q.   Was that criminal offence rape?

20        A.   No.

21        Q.   Or murder?

22        A.   No.

23        Q.   All right.  Well I --

24        A.   It was a robbery.  The robbery of a gas station or something, as

25     far as I know.

Page 25829

 1        Q.   Overall, as a proportion of the police population, would you say

 2     there were a greater collection of criminals within the special police?

 3        A.   Well, I think that there weren't many.  We're talking about

 4     individual cases.  And, funnily, this one was discovered and ended up in

 5     jail.  Most people, most members of the unit, were conscientious men and

 6     didn't commit offences.

 7        Q.   All right.  Let's move on because I have just got three other

 8     matters I'd like to deal with you.

 9             I'd like to go back to the video, please, P2014, and just play

10     you a part of Mr. Ecim talking.

11             MS. KORNER:  All right.  If we can -- on the screen, sorry.

12     Thanks.

13             We seem to have lost... sorry.

14             Do we have any sound?

15                           [Video-clip played]

16             THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Another Ustasha stronghold in

17     Kotor Varos municipality has fallen and the commander of the special

18     detachment of the CSB Banja Luka, Ljuban Ecim, will tell us how the

19     action went.

20             "This was certainly one of the most organised and best

21     synchronised actions in the area of Kotor Varos.  In six hours, excellent

22     results were achieved.  I would especially like to point out the

23     assistance of the active-duty members of the CSB and they really lived up

24     to the name of Krajisnik.  We were able to destroy the core forces of the

25     HVO with only one casualty on our side and three wounded."

Page 25830

 1             MS. KORNER:  All right.  Can we stop.  I don't think the

 2     interpreter is keeping up.  There is a transcript of is because certain

 3     words have been missed out.  The transcript is at P -- tab 60.  So I'd

 4     like to go back and start again.

 5                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 6             JUDGE HALL:  I understand that the interpreters don't have a hard

 7     copy of the transcript, which is part of the problem.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Okay.  In which case, let me hand -- I see, it's

 9     already gone to them.  Where -- apparently, it was given -- it was handed

10     in this morning.  Yesterday.  So they should have it.  This is what

11     causes delay.

12             JUDGE HALL:  But is the transcript an exhibit?

13             MS. KORNER:  Yes, it's, Your Honours.  But you can't put it up at

14     the same time as playing the video.

15             In any event, already.  Let's just play it through.

16                           [Video-clip played]

17             THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] [As read] "Finally, another Ustasha

18     stronghold in the Kotor Varos municipality has fallen.  We're talking

19     about the Kotor local commune.  Ljuban Ecim will tell us more.

20             "Ljuban Ecim:  This was certainly one of the best organised and

21     best synchronised actions in Kotor Varos municipality.  In only six

22     hours, excellent results were achieved.  We have received excellent

23     assistance from the reserve forces and the active forces of the

24     Security Services Centre, many of whose members took part in combat for

25     the first time today but truly up to the name of Krajisnik in battle.  We

Page 25831

 1     were assisted by a certain segment of units of Serbian forces, Serbian

 2     troops of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  With only one victim and

 3     three wounded on our side, we managed to destroy the core of the HVO and

 4     kill the self-proclaimed HVO commander, Stipo Maric, also known as Sprzo,

 5     who has up until now inflicted heavy losses on us from many treacherous

 6     ambushes.  His victims include Colonel Milan Stevilovic and head of our

 7     police department, Stevan Markovic ... came to collect its dues, and

 8     today we destroyed the entire group and liberated a larger portion of the

 9     town so that now it can be said that the entire city of Kotor Varos is

10     finally free."

11             MS. KORNER:  That's all I need.  Your Honours, in the transcript

12     it wasn't translated, but I heard the word, and I would be grateful if

13     the witness could confirm it, or not I heard the words, I read the words:

14     Excellent results were achieved in some six hours of action under the

15     guidance of the special unit.

16        Q.   Did you hear those word, sir, said by Mr. Ecim?

17        A.   I heard it in the video-clip, but we need a complete translation

18     to understand what this is about.  This is a confirmation of the

19     statement that the special detachment was outside the CSB because their

20     staff were included for the first time.  The complete translation will

21     tell you all about it, and that's what I have been saying all along.

22        Q.   All right.  But what it doesn't say -- what Mr. Ecim is not

23     saying is that this unit was part and parcel of the military, because he

24     specifically, as you say, says that there was assistance from the Serbian

25     troops of the republic.  Didn't he?

Page 25832

 1        A.   He was speaking about the action itself.  It was one action of

 2     many.  And we can see who took part.  Everybody participated.  And he

 3     distinguishes between the participation of people from the CSB, on the

 4     one hand, and the special unit on the other hand.

 5        Q.   The whole thrust of your evidence, sir - this is the last time I

 6     want to deal with this - is this special police unit was nothing more nor

 7     less than a unit of the military under military command.

 8             Do you agree?

 9        A.   I agree that it was subordinate all the time, that they were

10     under the military in terms of command.

11        Q.   Right.  Now, two other matters.

12             First of all, you talked about the Doboj component of the special

13     police, and you said that they were seconded to Doboj CSB and therefore

14     the CSB Banja Luka had nothing to do with them.

15             Is that -- is that what you're saying?

16        A.   Yes.  They were seconded.

17        Q.   So do you have any explanation as to why the -- the request for

18     payment of their salaries should be sent to the Banja Luka CSB?

19        A.   It was because the headquarters of the unit was there, and, thus,

20     they could be paid.  They weren't in one place all the time.  They were

21     moving in groups of five.  They took shifts.

22        Q.   All right.  Yes, you explained to us.

23             So, in other words, the unit that went to Doboj also went to

24     other places and was also being paid by the CSB Banja Luka; is that

25     right?

Page 25833

 1        A.   I don't think that the Banja Luka CSB paid the ones who were in

 2     Doboj.

 3        Q.   Well --

 4        A.   I think it was the other way around.  The Doboj paid.

 5        Q.   Well, sir, I'm not going to trouble to show you the actual

 6     document.  But there's a document that shows that a request for payment

 7     was sent to the Banja Luka CSB.

 8             Now -- and what you're saying they would have no responsibility

 9     for paying them, would they?

10        A.   Well, in principle, if somebody is seconded, then the one to whom

11     they are seconded should pay and everything.

12        Q.   Right --

13        A.   I remember that I drafted a request for somebody to be paid

14     because, by mistake, he wasn't on the list.

15        Q.   Yes.  You did; Mr. Kalamanda.  However, that's the point, sir,

16     that I'm making.  They're not seconded at all, are they?  They still come

17     under the authority of the Banja Luka CSB, and they were merely sent off

18     to do an operation in Doboj.  That's the reality, isn't it?

19        A.   No.  They were transferred there for use.

20        Q.   All right.  I want, then, to finally deal with one last document,

21     on whether or not the CSB -- whether or not the special police were, in

22     reality, disbanded on the 10th of August and sent to the military.

23             Could you have a look, please, at P1666.

24             MS. KORNER:  I'm going to remind myself what the tab number is.

25     It's tab 38.

Page 25834

 1             Now, Your Honours, our markings say this is under seal.  But I --

 2     it's one of the documents that I think needn't certainly be under seal.

 3     I don't know whether ... so I don't know what the situation is at the

 4     moment.

 5                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 6             JUDGE HALL:  The -- we'll proceed if there is -- if there's

 7     anything that would comprise the witness then we'd not publish the

 8     document.

 9             MS. KORNER:  No.  It has got nothing to do with the witness at

10     all, sir.

11             JUDGE HALL:  I -- I see.

12             MS. KORNER:  It was under seal.  It must have come in, I can't

13     remember now, through another witness who was in closed session.  But

14     there is no reason, on the face of the document --

15             JUDGE HALL:  So the status still is as under seal.

16             MS. KORNER:  Until, yes, Your Honours have lifted the --

17             JUDGE HALL:  [Overlapping speakers] ... so we'd lift it.

18             MS. KORNER:  Right.

19             JUDGE HALL:  We'd lift it.

20             MS. KORNER:  Thank you very much.

21        Q.   Now, sir, there is a 1st Krajina Corps report dated the 29th of

22     August 1992.  And let's go to -- in English, over the page, this is under

23     paragraph 4.  And it will be over the page in B/C/S:

24             "The Banja Luka CSB special detachment located in Kotor Varos

25     area has still not joined the 22nd Light Brigade and is causing serious

Page 25835

 1     problems on the ground."

 2             Now, earlier, yesterday, I showed you the Kotor Varos Crisis

 3     Staff report for, I think it was the 23rd of August [indiscernible] and

 4     now this one.  It's right, isn't it?

 5        A.   [No interpretation]

 6        Q.   Can I just finish the question.  It's right isn't it, sir --

 7        A.   [No interpretation]

 8        Q.   Just let me finish, please.  It's right, isn't it, sir, that the

 9     special police brigade were not disbanded on the 10th of August and

10     continued to commit crimes in Kotor Varos until the end of August, at

11     least?

12        A.   Could you please put up this document because you're showing

13     something wrong to me.  And what you're saying is not correct.  This is

14     not the document you're talking about.

15        Q.   I'm sorry?  This is -- we'll go back to the front -- I'll give

16     you the actual B/C/S copy and you can have a look at it.

17             The part I'm just referring you to is the last part of

18     paragraph 4.

19        A.   Mm-hm.  This is obviously a military problem.  We completed all

20     payments on the 31st of August and had no more authority over them.

21             It's a fact that at the time a number of people went to other

22     units on their own and regulated their status.  It can be verified that

23     they received -- that they found positions in some other light units and

24     had no more ties with the unit.

25        Q.   Yes, sorry, sir.  You misunderstand, whether deliberately or not,

Page 25836

 1     I don't know, but you've been asserting that, certainly from the 10th of

 2     August and, indeed, before the special police were no longer in operation

 3     as a unit.  I am saying to you from the evidence of the documents that

 4     the special police actually continued to operate certainly until the end

 5     of August.

 6             Now, there's a simple answer, either you say yes or no, you don't

 7     agree with that.

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   All right.

10             MS. KORNER:  Could I have that back, please.

11        Q.   Finally, sir, this:  You said at page 25539 of the transcript,

12     which was on the -- Thursday of last week, that:

13             "I know in that period," this is at line 9, "there were many

14     fighters who got killed or were wounded in both our ranks and theirs.

15     There was sniper activity on a daily basis from the opposite side."

16             Do you accept, sir, that in Kotor Varos, in which you were, the

17     casualties on the other side, of civilians, in particular, were far, far

18     greater than anything suffered by either the troops or, indeed, your

19     special police?

20        A.   I have already stated once that only on one occasion I saw dead

21     bodies and that was when I was called to identify our fallen soldiers in

22     the morgue.  I didn't see anybody killed up there.

23        Q.   No.

24        A.   I worked there on several occasions --

25        Q.   Not what I'm asking you, sir.  I'm not asking you what dead

Page 25837

 1     bodies you saw.  I appreciate you're going back and back to that video

 2     that you're so keen on.  But what I'm asking you is, as a matter of

 3     record, and at the time, were you aware of the hundreds of killed in

 4     attacks on villages and other areas?

 5        A.   No.

 6        Q.   You see, let's just look --

 7        A.   There were stories about war going on.  But, really, I am not

 8     aware of any mass murders of civilians.  I really don't know anything

 9     about that.  Because there were stories about fighting between our units

10     of and units under the command of a person called Sprzo.  They were also

11     armed.  Those are military activities, fighting between equals on both

12     sides, as far as I know.

13        Q.   You know perfectly well, sir, don't you, this wasn't even

14     remotely a fight of equals.  This was the might of the VRS aided by armed

15     police in an attack on villages and other places where the defenders, if

16     armed at all, were only armed with rifles.

17             That's the reality, isn't it?

18        A.   No.  I went to Vrbanci to agree negotiations, and when I came

19     there, I saw that people had a Zolja, which is an anti-tank weapon, and

20     some automatic rifle, which means that they were not unarmed.  I went

21     through their barricade.  I saw that they were equipped.  They were

22     armed.

23             I spoke to Sprzo himself, the one who was subsequently killed.

24        Q.   Before I show you a document to show just how unequal all of this

25     was, were you aware of the killing of over 200 unarmed men in the

Page 25838

 1     Grabovica school in November of 1992?

 2        A.   No.

 3        Q.   Never heard that?

 4        A.   No.  I never heard of that.  I don't even know where Grabovica

 5     is, to be honest.

 6        Q.   So between 1992 and today, that is the first time you're telling

 7     this Court that you ever heard of that massacre?

 8        A.   This is not what I'm saying.  A lot of times later I heard about

 9     reports and investigations that were taking place about certain events on

10     both sides.  However, when that was going on, I didn't even know where

11     Grabovica was.  I never went to Grabovica.  Not then, not later.  So

12     that's why I'm saying that I don't know where Grabovica is.

13        Q.   All right.  Let's just look finally then at the casualties.

14             MS. KORNER:  Could we go back, please, to the document, which is

15     at tab 31, and the number is P865.  This was the report done by the

16     inspectors on the formational activities of the Banja Luka CSB.  Can we

17     get in August of 1992.  Can we go in English to page 2; and it's the -- I

18     think it's the -- the -- the penultimate paragraph in B/C/S.  So if we

19     can highlight that, please.

20        Q.   "In co-operation with the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and

21     Herzegovina army units, the detachment" -- mark the words "in

22     cooperation":

23             "The detachment participated in combat on the territory of the

24     municipalities of the Bosanski Novi, Prijedor, Sanski Most, Kupres,

25     Kljuc, Donji Vakuf, Mrkonjic Grad, Sipovo, Derventa, Doboj, Modrica,

Page 25839

 1     Kotor Varos.  Nine members were killed during the fighting and 25

 2     wounded."

 3             Hardly, would you say, sir, a large casualty number?

 4        A.   Of those nine, I believe that eight victims hailed from

 5     Kotor Varos.  And that would be a lot for one unit.

 6             And for the rest, this is the standard version, as it were.  I

 7     don't know that the detachment participated in those other positions.  I

 8     believe that that was all before -- then things were promoted in that

 9     way.

10        Q.   So I was about to come on to point out to you that of that eight

11     or nine -- sorry, nine members killed something like six or seven were

12     killed in that one ambush that so much publicity was made about at the

13     time.

14             Would you agree that if they participated in that number of

15     actions it was hardly a strong force on the other side?

16        A.   In principle, if people behave properly in conduct losses should

17     be smaller.  Because if a unit has up to 60 people and if they loss eight

18     men, that is over 10 per cent of its entire strength.  That means that

19     something went wrong.

20        Q.   Finally, sir, I go back to where I started with my questions some

21     days ago now.  Do you consider that you have any responsibility, at all,

22     for what happened to it the non-Serbs in Kotor Varos?

23        A.   No.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Krgovic.

25                           Re-examination by Mr. Krgovic:

Page 25840

 1        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, sir.

 2             Let's keep the document on the screen.  It's P10394

 3     [as interpreted].

 4             Sir, please look at the last paragraph, or, rather, the

 5     penultimate paragraph that Ms. Korner showed you.

 6             You just told us that you didn't know that the unit participated

 7     in the areas mentioned in here and that that was before the detachment

 8     was established.  Do you remember that you answered to that effect?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   You spoke about that in the interview.  I believe that the

11     document was shown to you during the interview.

12             Could you please tell me which units participated in those events

13     and were they attached to Colonel Stevilovic?

14        A.   The Red Berets participated in those events; i.e., units that

15     were under the direct control of Colonel Stevilovic.

16        Q.   Did some of the elements of those units later join the special

17     detachment?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Since we're talking about that, could you please look at the

20     document and tell us whether, among the municipalities where those units

21     were active, you can see Petrovac as well?

22        A.   No, I can't see Petrovac.  No.

23             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honours.  Please

24     bear with me for a moment.

25        Q.   Sir, a little while ago, you were shown a video.  And the

Page 25841

 1     Prosecutor suggested that the person whom you were asked to identify was

 2     escorting a group of prisoners.

 3             Can you tell us how prisoners are escorted?  How does the escort

 4     walk?  Does he walk in front of the prisoners, behind the prisoners?  In

 5     what manner are prisoners escorted?

 6        A.   Well, usually when a person is arrested or detained their hands

 7     are bound and the escort goes behind that person at a certain distance,

 8     for security reasons, the security of the person whom he is escorting,

 9     that is.

10        Q.   The person that was shown to you a little while ago, was he

11     walking in front of those persons or behind them?

12        A.   He was in front of the group.  I believe that he was first in

13     line or maybe one step ahead of the group.

14        Q.   Sir, the Prosecutor showed you a concern number of documents in

15     her examination.  I would show the witness P11097, under tab 23.

16             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can I give this to

17     the witness, please.  11091 is the document number.  I apologise.  11091.

18                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

19             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.  Just a moment,

20     please.  The document number is P1091; I misread the number yet once

21     again.  Tab 23.

22        Q.   I apologise, I don't know what you're looking at, sir.  Can you

23     look under 23, tab 23, please.

24             Maybe you would be better off looking at the screen instead of

25     the hard copy.

Page 25842

 1        A.   No.  This is not 23, whatever.

 2             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the document please be zoomed

 3     in?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This was already shown to me.

 5             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   You were suggested by the Prosecutor that this is about a request

 7     for setting these individuals free.

 8             Could you please read the document carefully.  It says here:

 9             "It is necessary that you release the individuals from detention

10     and inform them to report to the Banja Luka SJB tomorrow, 21 July, for

11     future operative steps, if necessary.  In other words" --

12             MS. KORNER:  [Microphone not activated] [Previous translation

13     continues] ... sorry, you ask him what he says, not what you say it says.

14     Can't lead.

15             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I am reading Your Honours.  I am

16     reading word for word what it says in the document.

17             MS. KORNER:  [Microphone not activated] I apologise, it may be

18     translation because you were being translating as saying:  "In other

19     words."

20             MR. KRGOVIC:  [Microphone not activated]

21        Q.   [Interpretation] "In other words, escort them to the Banja Luka

22     basic court investigative judge."

23             MS. KORNER:  That is exactly the complaint I was making.  It is

24     not what the document reads.

25             JUDGE HALL:  It is.

Page 25843

 1             MS. KORNER:  The bit that he was reading:  "It is necessary to

 2     release these individuals and inform them to report to the Banja Luka

 3     public security station."  That's the bit that was being read.

 4             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm reading the whole sentence.  I

 5     am continuing to read -- to read the entire sentence.

 6             MS. KORNER:  [Microphone not activated] I'm sorry, Your Honours,

 7     I see where he's -- I -- I thought he was reading that sentence and

 8     it's -- yeah.

 9             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] "In other words, escort them to the

10     Banja Luka basic court investigative judge."

11        Q.   Sir, are these people requested by this document?  What are they

12     requested to do?  Is this a request to liberate them or to speed up the

13     procedure?

14        A.   I already said that this was a request to speed up the procedure.

15     Then I went to Mr. Tutus to personally check what that was all about.

16     When I arrived in his office and when he told me what that about, I

17     accepted that they should be detained because there were serious

18     accusations which were not conveyed to us properly by certain members.

19     They thought that since they already had certain skirmishes with the

20     police that they thought was some sort of an ploy or a set-up.  And that

21     was prosecuted, that's for sure.

22        Q.   And after that, did you tell Mr. Zupljanin that the procedure

23     against them was justified?

24        A.   Yes, I did.  We had contact with Tutus and he told us what the

25     situation was and they were remanded in custody.  Nothing was changed in

Page 25844

 1     their status.

 2        Q.   And now can the witness please be shown 2D76, tab 37.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Right.  Both those questions were leading, which is

 4     why I got up originally too early, I accept.

 5             Is this is request to liberate them or speed up the procedure is

 6     a leading question.  Did you tell Mr. Zupljanin that the procedure

 7     against them was justified is a leading question.

 8             In both case, the answer he got was the one that he wanted.

 9             The proper way, even in re-examination, of asking questions is in

10     a non-leading form.

11             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I don't see my questions as being

12     leading.  It was just an open-ended question.  The question was whether

13     something was done.

14             MS. KORNER:  [Previous translation continues] ...

15             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] And whether he considered --

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've already answered questions

17     about that.  I was interrupted when I tried to elaborate.  But I said

18     that after the conversation with Mr. Zupljanin, I went to Mr. Tutus on

19     that occasion.  So my statement does not differ from what I testified

20     about today and that I accepted that factual situation.  However, you did

21     not want to hear the rest of my answer.

22             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   And now look at tab 37 in your binder.

24             The Prosecutor had a lot of questions about this man Boskan.

25             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] The ERN number in the Serbian

Page 25845

 1     version is 1D006407.  I apologise; this is in e-court.  6047 are the last

 2     digits.  It's page 15.

 3             MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated]

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Krgovic, is this tab 37 in your binder?

 5             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Prosecutor -- Prosecutor's binder.

 6             The same document but it should be page 15 in e-court.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Could the counsel please repeat the document

 8     number.  Thank you.

 9             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] 2D72, page 15.

10        Q.   In the corner, you will find a set up of digits 1D006047.  It's

11     the same document but several pages.  Look at the bottom right-hand side

12     corner.

13        A.   What number did you say?

14        Q.   6047.

15             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the document be zoomed in on

16     the screen.

17        Q.   It will be easier for you to look at the document on the screen.

18        A.   Please bear with me.  6472.

19        Q.   It's on the screen.  Maybe the hard copy is not that legible.

20        A.   Can you zoom in a bit more.

21        Q.   Yes.

22             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Please zoom in for the benefit of

23     the witness.

24             MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] What page is it in

25     English?

Page 25846

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can see the document.

 2             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Who signed the document?

 4        A.   Djuro Bulic.

 5             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, can we have the page in English,

 6     please.

 7             MR. KRGOVIC:  Yeah, I'm just ...

 8             [Interpretation] Page 19.

 9        Q.   It says in paragraph 1:

10             "The Banja Luka SJB informed you in a dispatch that a criminal

11     report had been filed against several members of the Banja Luka SJB

12     special police detachment."

13             Two persons are mentioned: Radomir Boskan and --

14        A.   Yes.  The security organ of the Banja Luka Corps was also

15     informed about that.

16        Q.   And then could you please look at the last paragraph in the same

17     document where it -- Mr. Bulic says:  "A wanted notice has been issued

18     for Dusan Dragojevic and Radomir Boskan.  If they are found --"

19        A.   "They should be arrested and taken to the Banja Luka SJB where

20     operatives will investigate them in co-operation with the personnel of

21     the CSB crime prevention department.  Take care when making the arrest as

22     both men are armed and they may resist the arrest."

23        Q.   Sir --

24        A.   "Chief of sector."

25        Q.   First of all, let me ask you:  Boskan and Dragojevic, were they

Page 25847

 1     involved in the incident?

 2        A.   Yes, precisely.

 3        Q.   What was customary practice when somebody escapes?

 4        A.   A wanted notice is issued, and anybody who finds that person is

 5     duty-bound to arrest them and escort them to the police station.

 6        Q.   Djuro Bulic, who was he?

 7        A.   He was chief -- or, rather, deputy to Mr. Zupljanin.  It says

 8     here:  "Chief of sector."

 9             And that's the police sector.

10        Q.   And now, sir, let me show you one more document.

11             In answering the Prosecutor's question about 2D0072, and the

12     number on the document is 6041.

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Page 9 in e-court.

15             In answering the Prosecutor's questions yesterday or the day

16     before, you spoke about official IDs, and you said that they were pure

17     improvisation.

18             Tell me, the name of the person on this ID, can you please read

19     it?

20        A.   It says Radomir Boskov.

21        Q.   And what's the name of the person that we just spoke about?  Go

22     back to the first page of the document, page 37.

23        A.   His name is Radomir Boskan.

24        Q.   When it comes to regular police ID documents, aren't such

25     mistakes possible, i.e., that somebody's family name is misspelled?

Page 25848

 1        A.   No, that is impossible.  Because that person would react to such

 2     a mistake.

 3             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown

 4     Exhibit P567.  That's tab 11; another document in the Prosecutor's

 5     binder.

 6        Q.   The Prosecutor -- tab 11.

 7             The Prosecutor showed you this document.  Could you please look

 8     at the first paragraph here.  The date is 11th of May, and then the

 9     events that were described took place on the 15th of May.

10             You have told us that you joined the unit after the parade.  What

11     was the date of the parade?

12        A.   The 13th of May.  That's when the Day of the Police is

13     celebrated.

14        Q.   On the 11th, 14th, or 15th of May, were you with the unit?

15        A.   No, I only joined later.  If I'd been there, I would have taken

16     part in the parade.

17        Q.   Please take a look at exhibit -- I have a 65 ter number; 2733.

18     It's 15A.  I think you doesn't find it last time.  Take a look at the

19     end.  There may be an annex, 15A.  But it will also appear on the screen.

20             I've -- I asked you a short while ago whether this unit was in

21     the area of Petrovac.  When somebody is admitted to the police, any part

22     of the police, what is the practice when such a document is received?

23        A.   I can tell you right away this document obviously didn't go

24     through the entire procedure because once a document is received, it is

25     stamped.  It gets an entry stamp.  And either the chief or some senior

Page 25849

 1     officer makes a note as to who it should be handed to.  That's standard

 2     procedure.  Alternatively, he invites one of the senior officers to talk

 3     about it.  That's how it went.

 4             So if it was received regularly, it must have received an entry

 5     stamp and -- or reception stamp, and then it would have been forwarded,

 6     according to the lines of work.

 7        Q.   Can we tell from this document whether it was received anywhere?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   Please take a look at document, the document at tab 12 in the

10     Prosecution binder; P2409.

11             You were answering the Prosecutor's questions about this

12     document.  Please read the subject line.

13        A.   Proposal for permanent employment.

14             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Please zoom in on the handwritten

15     remarks that's beside the names.  And the same in the English translation

16     too, please.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is an instruction.  Request

18     applications with biography and the required documentation.

19             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   What is the purpose of this document?  What is it about?

21        A.   The purpose of this document is to put forward some public

22     security employees from other areas to be received as permanent employees

23     of the CSB.

24        Q.   Was it required for them to submit applications, CVs, and other

25     documents?

Page 25850

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   The person who's proposing that on the left, who is that?

 3        A.   It's Dusan Rokvic who worked on defence preparations at the CSB.

 4     He was able to draft such a proposal, but he couldn't decide himself.  A

 5     procedure was required for that.

 6        Q.   Does this procedure differ from the regular procedure to receive

 7     people into employment?

 8        A.   This is the standard procedure.  [Indiscernible] application, a

 9     CV and other documents are always required, then the person is vetted and

10     then a decision is taken.  This is merely a proposal.  This is nothing

11     final.  He got some sort of approval for this proposal, but there're also

12     instructions what needs -- what still needs to be done.

13        Q.   Take a look at Exhibit P659.  It's in the Prosecution binder at

14     tab 13.

15             Do you have a problem with the chair?

16        A.   The back of the chair is ... isn't right.

17        Q.   Do you need assistance?

18        A.   I've a problem with my neck so maybe this can be fixed.

19        Q.   The same question as before.  Does this document show that it was

20     received by anybody?

21        A.   No.

22        Q.   Please take a look at document P1096.  I don't have a tab number.

23     I don't think I have one.  But it will appear on the screen.  It may be

24     tab 45.

25             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] The next page, please.

Page 25851

 1        Q.   When the Prosecutor showed you this document, she put it to you

 2     that this is Stojan Zupljanin's signature.

 3             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we zoom in on the signature,

 4     please.

 5        Q.   Now take a look at it.  Is this Mr. Zupljanin's signature?

 6        A.   No.  It begins with an A, but I don't know whose it is.  It

 7     certainly isn't Stojan's.  Or maybe the first letter is Dz.  But Stojan's

 8     signature begins with an S.

 9        Q.   Please take a look at another document, P20323; tab 54 in the

10     Prosecution binder.

11             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.  I read out the 65 ter

12     number.  It's 20323.

13             I need the last page.

14        Q.   It says here:  "Deleted from the special detachment."

15             And we see a list of 16 persons.

16             Under that, there are a few more names.

17             What does this mean, "deleted"?

18        A.   It means that he was -- or that they were thrown out of the

19     detachment.  It was mostly due to something they -- something they did,

20     something wrong, or due to death.  But in 90 per cent of the case, it

21     meant that the person in question was thrown out.  All of these were

22     probably thrown out of the detachment.

23        Q.   Take a look at tab 17, please.  It's P2401.

24             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.  It is actually 2410.

25             I need page -- the page with the ERN 0077432.  It's the last but

Page 25852

 1     one.

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 3             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Please wait a second for it to appear on the screen.

 5             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] The 65 ter number is 20317.  The

 6     last-but-one page.  The ERN in e-court is 0077432.

 7             Please enlarge this.

 8        Q.   The last person you talked about with Ms. Korner,

 9     Novak Zeljkovic, who was paid out pursuant to a special approval.  Do you

10     know what happened to this man, Zeljkovic?  Is he still alive?

11        A.   Novak Zeljkovic died of leukemia.

12        Q.   Was he wounded?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Did his injury have anything to do with his death?

15        A.   Yes.  He was hit by a bullet with a contaminated jacket, and he

16     developed leukemia.

17             MS. KORNER:  I'm so sorry, could perhaps Mr. Krgovic tell me

18     where I discussed this gentleman with the witness.

19             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   If you look at the following page of this document, the special

21     payment for Mr. Zeljkovic.  It says here:

22             "Novak Zeljkovic was paid based on the approval given by the

23     chief of the centre."

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   If you remember, you discussed the chief's approval and asked the

Page 25853

 1     witness whether he spoke to Mr. Zupljanin about this case.

 2             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown

 3     Exhibit P81.  That's at tab 16 in the Prosecution binder.

 4        Q.   The Prosecutor asked you a series of questions about this

 5     document, and she then put to you that the number of killed persons was

 6     about 18.  You began to answer but were interrupted.

 7             Does this document mention 18 shot people anywhere?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   Please look where it says Nedjo Djekanovic said that:

10             "... last night he had told Dubocanin about everything going on

11     at the health centre and in the town and had been assured by him that it

12     would be prevented."

13             There any complaints or did you complain to -- to

14     Captain Dubocanin about the conduct of his men?

15        A.   While his men were a bit more relaxed when it comes to their

16     conduct but he always shifted the blame to the Burcani.  I can see from

17     this that this may have been the reason of some reactions.  We see here

18     that Serb houses were set on fire.

19             And talking about Dubocanin, I have already said that he a lot of

20     influence.

21        Q.   What about his men?  How were they dressed?

22        A.   They had the same kind of equipment as the special police.  It

23     wasn't possible to distinguish.  He was able to provide stuff for them by

24     his own connections, and most of his men had similar equipment.  I've

25     said that already.

Page 25854

 1        Q.   We can see below that Zarko Mikic asked Lieutenant-Colonel Peulic

 2     to intervene on this occasion.

 3             Could you please comment.

 4        A.   Probably there were some problems between the units.  Otherwise,

 5     he wouldn't have turned to Peulic.  There was some friction between

 6     members of different structures.  That's nothing unusual.  Everybody

 7     boasts about themselves and slights others, and then there would also be

 8     fights among the members.  That was rather widespread in military units.

 9        Q.   Were there mutual accusations for offences?

10        A.   Yes, that was a common occurrence.  I was able to hear several

11     times that what I had heard before was wrong, and sometimes I was able to

12     check and found out that it was, indeed, wrong.  Other times, it was

13     right.  And when it was right, we would take people off the war-time

14     assignment.

15             But there was -- there were mutual accusations.  You know, like

16     children pointing fingers at each other.

17        Q.   Talking about Kotor Varos, did you ever receive a report or any

18     information about some serious offence allegedly committed by members of

19     the special detachment?

20        A.   No.

21             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm not sure when the

22     break is due.  I only want to deal with the interview with this witness,

23     which will talk about ten minutes, so we might as well take the break

24     now.

25                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

Page 25855

 1             JUDGE HALL:  The -- if this would be convenient, Mr. Krgovic,

 2     we -- we -- I was going to -- we started a little early so I was going to

 3     take the break a little early but not quite as early as this.  But this

 4     would be fine.

 5             So we rise now and come back in 20, 25 minutes.

 6             Could we go in closed session.

 7             Ms. Korner.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Is it then Your Honours's intention to go straight

 9     on into the next witness [overlapping speakers]?

10             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

11             MS. KORNER:  Right.  That's what I wanted to know.  Thank you.

12                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

13                           [Closed session]

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 25856

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12                           [Open session]

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

14             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   Let's go back to an issue that you discussed with the Prosecutor.

16             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown

17     Exhibit P1502 under Prosecutor's tab 33.

18        Q.   Sir, please look at the last paragraph on the page.  This

19     document is actually a report and it says that the special detachment of

20     the police is composed of 100 members and the detachment is placed at the

21     disposal of the 1st Krajina Corps under the command of General Talic.

22             Can you tell me about this document?  Whether, when you were in

23     Kotor Varos during the hand-over of the unit, was it ever discussed that

24     they should actually be transferred to the 22nd Light Assault Brigade?

25        A.   I don't know that anyone ever mentioned that.  It was said that

Page 25857

 1     they would be put under the command of General Talic.  That's all.

 2        Q.   The military police, in general terms, and special units, under

 3     whose command are they in the corps, in general terms.  Do you know that?

 4     Who is their professional commander?

 5        A.   It was the military security that played the co-ordinating role

 6     in that.  The very top, in other words.

 7        Q.   And when it comes to the assignment of the unit, whether it will

 8     be assigned to the command or the brigade, was that issue ever raised?

 9     Does it have anything to do with the centre?  Who decided on that?

10        A.   It was the military command, more specifically, General Talic who

11     could decide on that if he thought that it was necessary -- necessary to

12     issue an order for them to be sent into a unit, as far as I know.  As far

13     as I know, that was agreed, and they were transferred onto the command of

14     General Talic.

15        Q.   Sir, on the first day of the cross-examination, the Prosecutor

16     asked you a lot about your interview.

17             Could you please tell me something about the course of that

18     interview.  Did you ask questions?  How did it evolve?

19        A.   As I've already told you, the questions were answered in advance.

20     The questions were always leading.  For example, did you finish that

21     school; you were in that position at the time, weren't you, and so on and

22     so forth.  Whenever I wanted to correct something, rectify something,

23     they would ask me something else, something different.  And now that

24     I'm -- look at the interview, I can see that the interpretation was

25     always a bit tendentious because it turned out that the Serbs attacked

Page 25858

 1     the Serbs.  Doesn't make too much sense, does it?

 2        Q.   Sir, did you ask any questions?  Did you put any questions to

 3     them?

 4        A.   It was them all the time, that they -- that put questions to me.

 5     And effectively they tried to put answers into my mouth.  I didn't accept

 6     a lot of their answers, because they did not have anything to do with

 7     logic.

 8        Q.   The Prosecutor also told you that you didn't volunteer

 9     information about your affiliation to the detachment.  Please look at one

10     part of your interview, page 48.  It is P2405.

11             The page will appear in front of you on the screen.  It's at

12     tab ...

13             JUDGE DELVOIE: [Microphone not activated] ...

14             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] 53.

15                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)


Page 25859

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7                           [Private session]

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 25860











11 Page 25860 redacted. Private session.















Page 25861

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7                           [Open session]

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

 9                           Questioned by the Court:

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Witness, on the first day of your testimony,

11     you described an ARK decision to the formation of a special police

12     detachment within the Banja Luka Security Services Centre when you said

13     that the special-purpose police detachment was organised into platoons:

14     Three military and one police platoon.  I just wanted to clarify this.

15     In distinguishing between military platoons and a police platoon, do you

16     refer to where these men came from; or do you refer to functionality of

17     the platoon?

18        A.   Well, I meant the personnel.  The personnel came from all the

19     different public security stations.  Those were volunteers.  They

20     volunteered to join the special detachment.  According to plans, the unit

21     should have become a platoon, but I don't think that there was ever a

22     sufficient number of men to make up a platoon, because --

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  That sort of police platoon -- you're talking now

24     about the police platoon; right?

25        A.   Yes, yes.  That was a platoon which was attached to --

Page 25862

 1             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay, and a military platoon, you call it a

 2     military platoon because the members of those platoons came from the

 3     military.

 4             Did I understand that right?

 5        A.   Yes.  This is a numerical indicator.  Approximately three

 6     platoons or a bit more came from the military.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.

 8        A.   And somewhat less than one platoon came from the police.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  But, no doubt, wherever they came from, they were

10     all part of a police detachment, were they not?

11        A.   They were all members of the special detachment of the CSB, the

12     Security Services Centre.

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So even the platoons that you call military

14     platoons were, in fact, police platoons; right?

15        A.   I have already stated that they were considered a special unit,

16     de jure.  De facto, it was a military unit that performed military tasks.

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

18             I'm a little bit unsure about the command structure in and around

19     the detachment.  You said -- and I'm sorry, I don't have -- I don't have

20     the exact transcript reference.  I think it was on the first day of your

21     testimony.  Stevilovic was basically in charge of the operation.  I think

22     it was Vihor 92.  That would be the name of the -- of the operation.  The

23     commander would be Colonel Peulic.

24             Can you clarify for me, was Stevilovic the commander of the

25     police detachment, or was Peulic the commander of the police detachment?

Page 25863

 1        A.   Well, as far as I knew, Peulic was on the ground, de jure.

 2     However, de facto, the complete operation was commanded by the security

 3     officer which -- who had more authority than General Peulic.  That's how

 4     things are in the army.  If somebody is a security officer, even if at a

 5     lower grade, his position is considered higher.  At least that's how

 6     things were where I come from.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So if I understand you well, Peulic had the title

 8     of commander of the special police detachment at a certain point in time;

 9     but Stevilovic never had that title, never that that -- well, I don't

10     call it a rank, I call it title, he was never --

11        A.   No, you didn't understand me well.

12             I'm talking about General Peulic.  He was the commander of that

13     Military District.  Whereas, Colonel Stevilovic was, I believe, even more

14     than that, in -- in terms of security.  He had more responsibility.  And

15     all plans or activities were planned pursuant to his instructions, which

16     means that Peulic was in a position to implement Stevilovic's

17     instructions and nothing else.  He may have had some general plans

18     co-ordinated with the Army of Yugoslavia.  I don't know any details.

19     However, I know that there was a big problem when he killed

20     [as interpreted] because he had all those documents and secret codes and

21     everything of the sort with him.

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So now I understand that Stevilovic, as well as

23     Peulic, had broader commands than only the special detachment -- they had

24     a special detachment under them but they were higher in the hierarchy

25     than only commander of that special police detachment; right?

Page 25864

 1        A.   Yes.

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you for that.

 3             Then you said about the beating of detained persons, that they

 4     were being beaten by either the TO or the local force.

 5             What did you mean by "the local force"?  The "local forces"

 6     sorry.

 7        A.   Well, during that period of time, there were also men who were

 8     outside of the military composition.  However, they were involved in all

 9     those activities.

10             I know that there were men who wore civilian clothes but still

11     carried weapons, and they participated in those activities, to bring in

12     people.  I really could not distinguish them from others.  I didn't know

13     who they belonged to.  There were also those who wore all sorts of

14     uniforms.  The times were not well defined which is why practically

15     everybody participated in those activities.  When I say "everybody," I

16     mean everybody who were in town at the time, as well as those who were

17     not even members of any units.

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Do you include in "local forces" local police

19     officers, local policemen?

20        A.   Yes, yes.  Local policemen, reserve policemen, TO members,

21     members of the army, members of the detachment, members who were under

22     the command of Captain Dubocanin.  Everybody who was there in town, they

23     were all included and involved.

24             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So when -- when you said that detained persons

25     were being beaten by either TO or local forces and you included

Page 25865

 1     policemen, then my question would be:  Did you inform anybody within the

 2     police hierarchy; and I just -- I -- I noticed that Mr. Krgovic only

 3     asked you whether you informed anybody with regard to the TO.  So now I'm

 4     asking you:  Did you inform anybody with regard to members of the police?

 5        A.   At that moment, in that building, in addition to the police,

 6     there was also the TO centre.  That's where Captain Dubocanin's office

 7     was and he had a team there --

 8             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. -- Mr. Witness.  Mr. Witness, will you please

 9     answer my question.  It's a simple one.  Did you inform anybody within

10     the police hierarchy about policemen participating in beating detainees?

11     Did you or did you not?

12        A.   I said that I could not distinguish those men from each other.  I

13     didn't know who they belonged to.  I'm -- I was not from that town.

14             Second of all, I spoke about that with Captain Dubocanin.  I

15     believe that some other of his men were there.  And I was told that the

16     so-called Burcani, that was the popular name of the Territorial Defence,

17     I was told that they simply could not be controlled - in the

18     interpretation I heard the word "prisoners" - however, those were people

19     who were brought into the SUP building.  They were not prisoners.  They

20     were just brought in.  A prisoner is somebody who is --

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Witness no need to go into that.

22             Just one more clarification, please.  Captain Dubocanin, you

23     mentioned, he is not within the police hierarchy, is he?

24        A.   No.

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

Page 25866

 1             When asked by Ms. Korner about Mr. Zupljanin's request for

 2     helicopters and other equipment, your answer was:  I have not seen this -

 3     the document Ms. Korner showed you - I have not seen this before, but

 4     this corroborates my version that they requested helicopters, APCs and so

 5     on, but never got any.  So everything stayed the way it was, and the unit

 6     was basically taken over by the army and we were available to them for

 7     combat activities.

 8             Do you remember that answer?

 9        A.   Yes.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Do I understand you saying there that, initially,

11     the special detachment was created by the CSB as a CSB detachment and was

12     taken over by the army only later on, after the helicopters and the other

13     equipment initially asked for by Mr. Zupljanin were not delivered; is

14     that right?

15        A.   No.  This was misunderstood, I'm afraid.

16             I said that from the very beginning, we were, de jure, in the

17     police, but, de facto, we were under the control of the army.

18             And I wanted to say that this only corroborated my claim that

19     that unit for which it was claimed previously that it had four

20     helicopters, that that unit never had -- received four helicopters.

21     Those stories were used only for propaganda purpose, nothing else.

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

23             In the beginning of your testimony, you told us that there were

24     members of the state security centre that joined the special police

25     detachment.

Page 25867

 1             Could you give a few names of -- of people from state security

 2     that were members, let's say, in August 1992?

 3        A.   From the state security?

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes.  That's what you said in the beginning of

 5     your testimony, the first day.

 6        A.   That people from the state security?  In the month of August?

 7     Impossible.

 8             In the month of August, that unit was already disbanded.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  In July then.

10        A.   I said that in the area where we were, employees of the state

11     security were involved in some operative tasks.  They were under the

12     command of the war department, i.e., Chief of Kotor Varos State Security

13     Department, Zdravko Mijic.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Can we go into private session for a moment,

15     please.

16                           [Private session]

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 25868











11 Page 25868 redacted. Private session.















Page 25869

 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                           [Open session]

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

15             MS. KORNER:  The composition of the platoons and the three

16     military and one police.  I actually asked him a number of questions

17     about that with some interruptions on the Friday, starting at page 25668.

18     And it may well be that there's a slight contradiction now because what

19     he said then was that although one was said to be a police platoon and

20     the others military, because I put to him in terms, at page 25669,

21     line 1:

22             "You're not suggesting, sir, are you, that one part of the

23     special police was reporting through the police chain of command and

24     another part of the special unit was reporting through the military chain

25     of command?"

Page 25870

 1             And he said:

 2             "No, they were all reporting to the military.

 3             And earlier on he said that he thought there might have been

 4     police in what is called the military platoons.  So I simply put that at

 5     the moment there may be a slight contradiction.  I don't know whether

 6     it's worth clarifying.

 7             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

 8             Mr. Witness, I have just one clarifying question regarding a

 9     topic that we have already touched upon at several occasions during your

10     testimony.  Namely, the issue of the uniforms that were worn by the

11     special police detachment.  Because I think you testified early on that

12     the members of the special police detachment were wearing camouflage

13     uniforms and had blue berets.  Yet all the photos that we have seen of

14     them seem to show that they were actually wearing red berets.

15             Are you able to clarify this or is it still the fact that

16     sometimes they were wearing one sort of berets, and at other times,

17     different berets.

18             But the appearance that we have seen suggests that they were

19     wearing red berets.  Can you confirm that?

20        A.   The standard headwear should have been blue berets.  But some of

21     them, by private means, procured red berets.  And at that time, nobody

22     heeded official regulations much.  Some people would wear berets, other,

23     other types of hats, and different colours.  Not even military units

24     always wore helmets in theatre of war or regular hats when they were on

25     other assignments.

Page 25871

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Is there anything arising from the Judges'

 3     questions?

 4             If not, Mr. Witness, we thank you for your testimony before the

 5     Tribunal.  You are released, and we wish you a safe journey home.

 6             We aren't going to adjourn before the next witness comes, but we

 7     do have to go into closed session to permit the witness to be escorted

 8     out.

 9                           [Closed session]

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15                           [Open session]

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

17             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, and can the new -- can the next witness be --

18     please be escorted to -- yes, Mr. Demirdjian.

19             MR. DEMIRDJIAN:  Your Honours, before the next witness is brought

20     in, we do have a small application to make.  So perhaps it is better for

21     the witness to be kept out.

22             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

23             MR. DEMIRDJIAN:  First of all, good afternoon Your Honours.

24             As Ms. Korner announced before conclusion of the testimony of --

25     last witness, we do have an objection with relation to the next witness.

Page 25872

 1             Now, on Sunday, at 6.59 p.m., about seven hours after the

 2     deadline you had set for the transmission of the proofing note, we

 3     received an additional proofing note with relation to the next witness.

 4             Now, this proofing note was received following objections we

 5     raised that same afternoon about the vagueness of the -- of the first

 6     proofing note we had received.

 7             Now, the seconds proofing note includes some details but it also

 8     includes new topics.  One of the new topics being the killing of

 9     prominent Serbs on the 12th of June, including Mr. Djekanovic, and a

10     number of other named prominent Serbs.

11             Now, first we say this is a new topic which was not included in

12     the 65 ter summary which was filed on 28th of March, earlier this year.

13             Secondly, we say that this is it a violation of Rule 90(H)(ii)

14     Mr. Djekanovic was a Prosecution witness.  You will remember that he

15     testified in early 2009.  And this matter was not put to him at all on a

16     topic that we would say is quite an important topic.  Following that, we

17     had two witnesses who testified from Kotor Varos who could have dealt

18     with this issue because the proofing note indicates that this was -- this

19     killing reached or spread across the town of Kotor Varos generally.  We

20     had Witness ST-197 and we also had a member of the police force, ST-167.

21     These matters could have been put to these witnesses as well.

22             On the 12th of May, 2010, you issued a decision in relation to

23     Rule 90(H)(ii), and at paragraph 20 you indicated there would be

24     consequences should there be a violation of Rule 90(H)(ii).

25             Now, you said that there will be consequences to a decision of

Page 25873

 1     the Defence not to put the nature of its case to a Prosecution witness.

 2     Now, at this stage, we would say that this is, as you quoted -- as you

 3     cited in the decision, a sufficiently egregious violation of the Rule.  I

 4     leave it to Your Honours as to what should be done about this violation

 5     but I believe that this comes at quite a late date and this matter should

 6     have been put directly to the witness.

 7             You have two alternatives.  One would be to give no value to --

 8     to this contradiction evidence.  You may also preclude the Defence from

 9     adducing this evidence.  That's also part of paragraph 21 of your

10     decision.

11             That would be our application.

12             JUDGE HALL:  I do understand, Mr. Demirdjian, that you say that

13     in our earlier decision to which you referred we went to far as to

14     suggesting that we would preclude the side calling the witness from

15     leading the evidence and not -- and the consequences being something

16     other than, of course, giving little or no weight to evidence which could

17     have been -- well, adumbrated beforehand.

18             I appreciate that we have given a decision, but you would

19     appreciate that sitting here several months later we can't remember the

20     details of what we would have said, although presumably, we all have it

21     at our breast.

22             MR. DEMIRDJIAN:  Yes, Your Honours.  We do have a copy, although

23     it is marked, of the decision.  I mean, I could read the paragraph of the

24     decision itself if that would assist Your Honours about what was said

25     specifically.

Page 25874

 1             JUDGE HALL:  That would be helpful while we are getting -- thank

 2     you.

 3             MR. DEMIRDJIAN:  Right.  Now, if I begin at paragraph 20,

 4     Your Honours say that the Trial Chamber -- I don't know if Your Honours

 5     already have a copy.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes.  But, unfortunately, we don't.  So, please, if

 7     we can have it on the record, please.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Please continue reading.

 9             MR. DEMIRDJIAN:  Yes.  Yes.

10             Your Honours said the Trial Chamber does not consider

11     Rule 90(H)(ii) as requiring to compel the Defence to present the nature

12     of its case in contradiction of the evidence of Prosecution witnesses.

13     So at that stage you decided you were not going to compel the Defence.

14             However, you continue, the Trial Chamber holds that there will be

15     consequences to a decision by the Defence to not put the nature of its

16     case in contradictory to the evidence of the witness on the stand.

17             That is paragraph 20.

18             Now, paragraph 21, you develop also a number of matters.  And you

19     also said you will take into account the fact that the Prosecution

20     witness was not given the opportunity to comment on the contradictory

21     evidence.  Now, again, we're talking about a witness who was here, I

22     believe, in October or November 2009, and two years later another witness

23     will come and testify about the fact that this person was a subject of a

24     threat or may have been killed on the 12th of June.

25             And you continue saying that the Trial Chamber could ascribe no

Page 25875

 1     probative value to contradictory Defence evidence, the nature of which

 2     was not put to the Prosecution witness while on the stand.  Moreover, if

 3     the circumstances are sufficiently egregious, the Trial Chamber may

 4     preclude the Defence from adducing such contradictory evidence and avoid

 5     recalling witnesses.

 6             So this is what you decided on the 12th of May, 2010.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you for reminding us, Mr. Demirdjian.

 8             Are you suggesting -- is it your submission that the situation

 9     with which we are faced today, that is, the, quote/unquote, sufficiently

10     egregious set of circumstances that we anticipated?

11             MR. DEMIRDJIAN:  Your Honour, yes.  I mean, this is an issue that

12     is very important because we are dealing with, essentially, the president

13     of the Crisis Staff himself who gave evidence before Your Honours.  And

14     we say this is sufficiently important in the context of the takeover.

15     This is alleged to have happened the day after the takeover.  And with

16     respect to, again, what the Defence allege, the presence of Muslim and

17     Croat armed forces in the municipality.  This is something that should

18     have been put to the witness while he was on the stand.

19             JUDGE HALL:  And if I may link this to the first part of your

20     objection, is it your position that you are so caught by surprise that

21     you are practically wholly unable to deal with this in cross-examination?

22             MR. DEMIRDJIAN:  Your Honours, yes.  Had we had notice of this

23     matter, at least when the 65 ter summary was filed on the 28th of March,

24     we would have had sufficient time to investigate, to look into the

25     matter.  We were given this proofing note pretty much at the eleventh

Page 25876

 1     hour at 7.00 on Sunday night after we requested additional information.

 2     This was not even included in the first proofing note we received at 1.00

 3     in the afternoon.  So not only -- I mean, this is a brand new topic out

 4     of an additional proofing note.

 5             So, as I say, had we had enough notice, we would have been able

 6     to investigate the matter and look into it.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 8             Mr. Krgovic, what -- why should the -- this wholly new evidence,

 9     why should you not be precluded from being able to lead this, having

10     regard to the circumstances that Mr. Demirdjian has highlighted?  That's

11     a short question.

12             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Prosecution was

13     informed as soon as we received the information in question.

14             The Defence was unaware of it when it called the witness to

15     testify and when it drafted its 65 ter summary.  Only when the witness

16     arrived in The Hague, he volunteered this information to us.

17             At the same moment, around 1.00 on Sunday, this information was

18     given to the OTP.  The OTP requested details, and we also gave them the

19     details a few hours later.

20             As Ms. Korner has said several times, what the witnesses will say

21     is a living thing.  It can change and we cannot anticipate what they will

22     say.  It has happened before when -- during the OTP case, when ST-241

23     from Kotor Varos testified.  And then we were faced with new information

24     which was not in the 65 ter summary of the OTP; namely, that

25     Mr. Zupljanin was at a prison somewhere.

Page 25877

 1             The OTP then admitted that that was new information but the --

 2     this evidence was still allowed.  The OTP can re-call the witness and

 3     request him about the circumstances.  This way, the prejudice to the OTP

 4     could be remedied.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Well, the -- in the earlier ruling of which

 6     Mr. Demirdjian reminded us, one of the practical things that we're trying

 7     to avoid is going through the expense and inconvenience of having to

 8     re-call a witness.

 9             But faced with the situation and I -- I fully appreciate what you

10     say about the nature of evidence and nature of witnesses is that

11     things -- you discover things for the first time at a very late stage.

12     But, for example, and I'm not reducing what you are saying to the absurd,

13     if a witness -- if a witness was only on the stand and he volunteered

14     this, he probably would have been prevented from leading that evidence.

15     Today is Tuesday.  What we are dealing with -- a situation is that just

16     two days ago you learn of this for the first time.  So my question is

17     whether we should not simply forget about it in the same way that we

18     would have -- had he attempted to volunteer it on the stand.  Or is it

19     your submission that this evidence is so relevant and necessary for the

20     Trial Chamber to arrive at a just decision, that, despite the very late

21     arrival, for want of a better expression, of this evidence you should be

22     permitted to lead it and then we will hear what the Prosecution has to

23     say as to how they can put themselves in a position to cross-examine?

24             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it is my duty as

25     Defence counsel to represent the interests of my client to the best of my

Page 25878

 1     ability.  To my mind, this information is essential for the understanding

 2     of the events in Kotor Varos and for the Defence of my client, as well as

 3     the whole context of the events in question.

 4             Although I learned it very late, I still must request the

 5     Trial Chamber to allow the leading of this evidence; otherwise, my

 6     client's right to a good Defence would be prejudiced.  It is my duty to

 7     try to present this information which I got before this Trial Chamber.

 8             MR. DEMIRDJIAN:  Your Honours --

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  Sorry, if I may be heard on the matter as well,

10     Your Honours.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I fully agree with the words of my

13     learned colleague, Mr. Krgovic.

14             I would like to remind the Trial Chamber of at least three

15     situations during the -- the -- the case in-chief, where the Office of

16     the Prosecutor produced some documents which were never given to us

17     prior -- during the testimony of the witnesses.  And then the -- the

18     testimony of the witness was -- was heard in the court, and we were

19     supposed to -- to prepare our cross-examination within -- overnight.  And

20     on numerous occasions, we accepted to do so, understanding that these

21     situations are possible in cases like this.

22             In this case, Mr. Demirdjian received the information on Sunday.

23     He is likely to start his cross-examination probably at the end of

24     tomorrow and continue on Thursday.  So basically he will have four days

25     to prepare his cross-examination and, therefore, it cannot be considered

Page 25879

 1     as -- as a totally new matter and he will have enough time to prepare

 2     with the -- prepare his cross-examination on this matter.

 3             And this is just, Your Honour -- I wanted to remind Your Honours

 4     of the standard that we had during the case in-chief, and I believe that,

 5     with all due respect, we will have to have the same standard for the

 6     Defence case as well.

 7             Thank you very much.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 9             Yes, Mr. Demirdjian.

10             MR. DEMIRDJIAN:  Yes, Your Honour.

11             Just one final thing on this matter.  I think what Mr. Zecevic

12     just referred to is quite a different matter in relation to adding

13     documents to the 65 ter list or receiving them a few days in advance.

14     This is an issue of violation of Rule 90(H)(ii) that we're referring to,

15     having a brand new topic of their summary.  Now, the problem that we're

16     having, Your Honours, as you've -- you've noticed over and again is that

17     we are not able to have any notice of what the witness is going to say.

18     The first proofing note, if you've seen, it says little about the

19     witness's evidence.  It announces topics, and it is only when we request

20     additional details that we're able to receive something, little detail

21     here and there, but nothing that would actually put us on notice of what

22     the witness is actually going to say.

23             Now, it may just be that we have to call additional witnesses in

24     rebuttal to deal with this matter if Your Honours let the witness testify

25     to these events effectively, but effectively as Mr. Zecevic is saying

Page 25880

 1     that I have four days to prepare, we're talking about actually

 2     investigating this matter, not just looking in our filings or the

 3     existing evidence.  If that was the case, I wouldn't rise on my feet if

 4     we already had that information.  We're saying we're at a disadvantage

 5     here.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 7                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 8                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 9             JUDGE HALL:  We thank counsel for their indulgence.

10             Having considered the explanation which has been proffered by

11     counsel on behalf of Mr. Stanisic, we are not satisfied that we could, in

12     fairness, preclude the Defence from leading this evidence but we are

13     alive to the disadvantage which is occasioned to the Prosecution by the

14     very late notice which they would have had of this evidence.  And we

15     intend to have the witness begin his evidence in-chief, and following

16     that, the cross-examination will begin, and, at that point, counsel for

17     the Prosecution would be in a better position to assess his ability to

18     continue to explore and test these areas, these new areas with the

19     Defence, and we would see what application he feels compelled to make

20     when we reach that point.

21             So we would ask the witness -- we -- we're going to be able to do

22     precious little other than formally have the witness take the

23     declaration, but we would call him in now to use the ten minutes

24     remaining before we adjourn for the day.

25                           [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 25881

 1             JUDGE HALL:  I'm grateful to my brother, Judge Delvoie, for

 2     pointing out that where we say at line 20 of page 53 having considered

 3     the explanation that we should expand on that, that the -- an important

 4     factor in our decision was this was something that was only newly

 5     disclosed to counsel for Mr. Stanisic.

 6             Sorry, for Mr. Zupljanin.  And -- which means that I should

 7     correct myself at line 21, when I said "on behalf of Mr. Stanisic," it's

 8     Mr. Zupljanin.

 9             Thank you.

10                           [The witness entered court]

11             JUDGE HALL:  Good afternoon to you, sir.

12             Could you please make the solemn declaration --

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.

14             JUDGE HALL:  -- on the card that the usher is handing to you.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I?

16             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, please.

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

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

19                           WITNESS:  OBRAD BUBIC

20                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

21             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, sir.  You may be seated.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

23             JUDGE HALL:  Your responses to what I have said so far, confirm

24     that you are hearing me in a language that you understand.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

Page 25882

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Well, I would begin by apologising for the delay in

 2     having you escorted into the courtroom.  I know that you would have been

 3     on notice that your testimony would have begun early this morning, but

 4     the nature of court proceedings, not only here but universally, are that

 5     it is not always possible to determine how long the witness preceding you

 6     would be on the stand, and in addition to that there are procedural

 7     matters which arise from time to time which have to be resolved and that

 8     is one of the reasons why you are coming on a time just before we take

 9     the adjournment for the day.  We are going to be able to do little more

10     than formally have you identified as a witness before we take the

11     adjournment because the -- and the -- the ordinary sittings of the Court

12     are that morning sessions end at 1.45 so that usually the courtrooms have

13     to be made available for other trials, so in five minutes we will taking

14     the adjournment for the day and resume with your testimony proper

15     tomorrow morning at 9.00 in this courtroom.

16             The solemn declaration which you made when you came in imposes

17     upon you an obligation to speak the truth, under the pain of the penalty

18     for perjury which this Tribunal is empowered by its statute and rules to

19     impose should you give false or misleading testimony, and that is a

20     factor that I would -- I'm obliged to remind you of at the beginning of

21     each day's sitting.

22             Would you, for the record, please, sir, tell us your name.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My name is Obrad Bubic.

24             JUDGE HALL:  What is your date of birth, what is your profession

25     or former profession, and what is your ethnicity?

Page 25883

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was born on the

 2     14th of May, 1949.  Should I tell you where?

 3             JUDGE HALL:  If you wish.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the village of Maslovare,

 5     Kotor Varos municipality, in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 6             I graduated from the secondary military school, and I'm currently

 7     employed as the general secretary of the alliance of former inmates in

 8     the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  And your ethnicity is ...

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm a Serb.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Thanks.

12             Have you testified previously before this Tribunal or before any

13     of the courts in the countries that make up the former Yugoslavia?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

15             JUDGE HALL:  The -- I -- I would briefly explain to you the

16     procedure that is followed.

17             You have been called by counsel for Mr. Zupljanin, who would

18     begin by questioning you, and following that, counsel for his co-accused,

19     Mr. Stanisic, would have the opportunity to cross-examine you, followed

20     by counsel for the Prosecution.

21             When -- and then counsel calling you can re-examine you and, at

22     that stage, usually, but, indeed, at any earlier stage, the members of

23     the Bench may have questions of you.

24             The -- it is estimated that your testimony would extend into

25     Friday of this week, because counsel calling you has indicated that they

Page 25884

 1     would be -- their examination-in-chief would last for about six hours.

 2     Counsel for Mr. Stanisic has indicated an hour and a half, and counsel

 3     for the Prosecution has indicated six hours.  The day's sitting is broken

 4     up into sessions of not more than an hour and a half.  It is it usually

 5     an hour and 20 minutes for technical reasons having to do with the system

 6     that records these proceedings, and the breaks that that allows

 7     facilitates the convenience of counsel, witnesses and everybody else.

 8     But if at any point before a scheduled break you need us to break, you

 9     would indicate that to us and we would accommodate you.

10             The -- there is -- as I said, we are at the time for the

11     adjournment, and the -- you, having taken the solemn declaration, you

12     cannot, until you are released, have any communication with counsel from

13     either side in these proceedings, and in such conversations as you may

14     have with persons outside of the court, you cannot discuss your

15     testimony.

16             Do you have any questions as to the preliminary observations that

17     I have made?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I have understood you quite

19     well.  There's no need for me to put any questions to you at this point.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

21             The -- when I indicated to the witness the length of time it is

22     expected that he would be in examination-in-chief, do I understand that

23     there may be a revision by counsel calling him?

24             MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

25             I believe that my examination-in-chief will not be longer than

Page 25885

 1     two sessions tomorrow.  Maybe that estimate is not good enough.  It will

 2     all depend on the speed at which the witness proceeds to answer.  But I

 3     believe that in three hours' time I will be able to bring my

 4     examination-in-chief to an end.

 5             I have already informed my learned friends from the Prosecution

 6     about that.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 8             Mr. Cvijetic.

 9             MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I feel the

10     obligation towards the Trial Chamber and my learned friend from the

11     Prosecution that, after I've had brief conversation with the witness, I

12     have concluded that he is not that relevant for Mico Stanisic's Defence,

13     so I will most probably have no questions for him unless something arises

14     from Mr. Aleksic's examination-in-chief.  In that case, I will ask your

15     permission to put one, two, or three questions at the most.  That's why I

16     reserve a slot of 30 minutes, just in case I need the time, but I don't

17     expect I will.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

19             So, Mr. Witness you will be relieved to hear from what has passed

20     between counsel and the Bench, that you would be -- it is anticipated

21     that you will be released much earlier than I indicated to you earlier.

22     And although I didn't invite Mr. Demirdjian as to whether he was reducing

23     his estimates, no doubt there will be a consequential reduction in the

24     time that he would spend with you.  So your time with us will be much

25     shorter than we first thought.

Page 25886

 1             So we take the adjournment, to reconvene in this courtroom

 2     tomorrow morning at 9.00 in this courtroom.  Thank you.

 3                           [The witness stands down]

 4                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.,

 5                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 16th day of

 6                           November, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.