6901 Thursday, 28 October 2010
[The accused entered court]
--- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good morning to everybody. If there are no procedural matters, the witness should be brought in, please.
[The witness takes the stand]
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good morning, Mr. Rave.
THE WITNESS: Morning.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Welcome back to the court room. May I remind you that the affirmation to tell the truth still applies.
WITNESS: EVERT RAVE [Resumed]
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey has some re-examination for you. Mr. McCloskey.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President. Good morning, everyone.
Re-examination by Mr. McCloskey: [Continued]
Q. Good morning, Mr. Rave. I first wanted to start off and ask you just a couple of questions about some of the OPs. There was quite a bit of questioning on cross about the OPs and the various motivations that may have been at play in dealing -- in the VRS's dealings with the OPs. So I first want to take you to something Major Franken testified about on 16/10/2006 on page 2460 of the transcript, and Mr. Thayer asked him: "On this day Private van Renssen was killed. Do you recall OP Foxtrot finally falling that day, sir?" 6902 And Mr. Franken answered:
"Yeah, well, I already told that there was increased firings at the OP. It was hit several times. The defensive wall was blown away by tank fire so they asked permission to withdraw."
Is that consistent with the reports or any information that you got.
A. Yes, that's the same information that I've got, and at least they got the permission from the commander of the Bravo Company to withdraw.
Q. And Franken goes on to say: "I gave that because the BiH was not inside anymore. They didn't inform us they were gone but they were gone. Then they waited for a pause in firing to withdraw, but it was too late. They were run over by Serb forces but were allowed to withdraw to Srebrenica." And is it when the crew of OP Foxtrot withdrew towards Srebrenica that van Renssen was killed by a Muslim fighter?
A. Yes, it was at that time.
Q. So --
A. Yeah, not a Muslim fighter, a Muslim civilian who tried to stop the APC by returning to the road towards Srebrenica.
Q. So if that OP had not been assaulted like it was and the UN troop had not withdrawn, Renssen could very well be alive today; is that right?
A. Yeah. For sure, because the BiH and also the civilians in the enclave did not allow us to go back, and, well, because they were attacked they had to go back. That was the reason.
Q. All right. I also wanted to ask you a couple of questions about 6903 OP Echo as were asked on cross-examination, especially on page 6788 through 6791 and 6836 by General Tolimir. And I --
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Gajic.
MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Good morning to everybody. Just a clarification before Mr. McCloskey moves on to the second group of questions. Was he referring to P597 or the transcript, or actually is there a mistake in the transcript? Was he referring to anything that we heard in this case from this witness, i.e., the testimony of this witness in this case.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
MR. McCLOSKEY: If you are talking about Franken's quote, I thought I said that. But in case I didn't, it was in trial here on 16 October 2006. Mr. Thayer's question was on 2459. The answer I read was 2460. And I think I probably didn't give you the page numbers, so that is -- to be clear that is the page number that those things were said.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: This is not in question. You were referring to these parts of the transcript in this case. Mr. Gajic, I must confess, I didn't quite understand your position yet, and the same seems to be the case for Mr. McCloskey.
MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] I believe that things are clear. We are talking about P597, so we are not talking about the transcript of this case but the Popovic case transcript which has been admitted according to 92 ter. In 1996, we were not sitting, were we? 6904
MR. McCLOSKEY: That is correct. That's more precise, though for the life of me the differences are beginning to get lost.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Just to clarify the situation. Your quotation from a transcript was not the transcript of this trial but in Popovic; is that correct?
MR. McCLOSKEY: That is technically correct, but of course it is now a transcript of this trial, but I don't want you to think that he said that at this trial, that's correct, that's why I read the date out.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. Now we have it clear on the transcript. Please continue.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay.
Q. Now, as I think I was saying, I'd like to ask you a couple of questions about OP Echo because that was a significant part of the cross-examination. And I'd like to show you a document?
MR. McCLOSKEY: And if I could get the usher to give you a hard copy. It's two pages and it might be easier for to you -- it's P625, if we could get that up in both languages, though I've also provided the Defence with two hard copies. They've got it in English and in B/C/S. This is a document that is already in evidence, I believe.
Q. And just study that, if you could. I won't take long with it, but as you are reading it, I'll just, for help -- the English will come up for the Court. And given that the Defence has hard copies of this, it might be easier if we blew up just in English on the screen so that it could be easier read.
Okay. This is a document from the command of the Drina Corps 6905 from the forward command post at Pribicevac. And it's dated 2 June 1995. Can you remind us when OP Echo fell.
A. I think it was the 2nd or the 3rd of June.
Q. All right. And this, if we go to the end of the document, we see that it's done by the commander Major-General Milenko Zivanovic and he was the commander of the Drina Corps at the time that you saw at the Hotel Fontana; correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. And this is entitled: "Restoration of the control over the facilities and the Zeleni Jadar asphalt road." When it says, "facilities in Zeleni Jadar asphalt road," does that relate to any of the area that you talked about around OP Echo?
A. I think when they are speaking about the facilities, they are speaking about the factory south of OP Echo and the road, that's the road on which OP Echo was stationed and which he ordered us to leave because they wanted to use the road as a line of communication.
Q. All right. And this is -- it's an order, as we see, and it's to the command of the Bratunac Brigade and to the commander of the Drina Corps Manoeuvre Battalion, and it says:
"Considering from the military security aspect that the conditions have been created for the entry into the Zeleni Jadar industrial facilities down the road along the Jadar river, it is necessary, as soon as possible, to use the existing conditions and thereby enter the final phase of liberation of Zeleni Jadar in its entirety, so in that regard I hereby order ... on 3 June by 0500 hours he 6906 shall secure full combat readiness towards the enemy and the UNPROFOR check-point at his combat position."
Is there any other OP check-point in Zeleni Jadar besides OP Echo?
A. No, there only was the OP Echo.
Q. I won't read everything. Talks about moving Legenda's troops and to monitor UNPROFOR. And then we see the paragraph:
"Since Legenda and his troops shall allegedly search the terrain pretending not to see UNPROFOR, Petrovic's focal point shall be the behaviour of UN troops paying attention to the smallest change. When Legenda's troops receive warning from UNPROFOR to stop, Legenda shall inform UNPROFOR in English 'I am warning you: Do not stand in my way,' and according to his own assessment proceed towards UNPROFOR. If UNPROFOR points their weapons toward Legenda's troops, Petrovic shall fire warning Salvo and after that tell them in English: 'Hands up. Put down your weapons. ' If they do not comply with this order, fire a hand-held rocket launchers, Zolja, at the generator and be ready to neutralise the APC, paying attention not to hurt physically UNPROFOR soldiers."
Do you know what he means when he says "generator"?
A. I don't know what exactly what he means by generator. There might be a generator outside the OP.
Q. All right: "Petrovic shall vigilantly and intelligently monitor the situation and issue them an order, 'Hands up otherwise I'm not 6907 responsible for your lives.' At that time, Legenda's troops shall carefully approach the UNPROFOR position making sure that they are sheltered and physically far from UNPROFOR."
This is the moment you can expect UNPROFOR to surrender. If UNPROFOR soldiers continue to reach out to their weapons in order to use it against Legenda, disable the APC with the hand-held rocket-launcher. That's the moment when one can expect UNPROFOR to surrender. On a signal that any of the UNPROFOR soldiers wish to surrender, Legenda shall inform them in English, and I quote: 'You are absolutely safe, my friends.' After that, Petrovic shall call Nikolic who will take UNPROFOR soldiers. Legenda and Petrovic shall take over the UNPROFOR check-point and after detailed discussion with Petrovic continue moving down the asphalt road and cross the Jadar in order to link up with the remaining part of the forces in the area of Kamenjara."
Then there's another part of this order that I won't read. Have you ever seen this document before?
A. No, I've never seen this before.
Q. Does this, what is laid out in here, it starts with pretending or I would say deceiving UNPROFOR, then it suggests that UNPROFOR be threatened, and then it suggests that if necessary assault UNPROFOR, then it suggests UNPROFOR will surrender and it says to then become friends with UNPROFOR. So this deception, threat, assault, surrender, befriend, does this sound familiar to you at all? Anything in your experience sound familiar in this document?
A. Insofar, I think this is the way they acted, but in practice, of 6908 course, there was a little bit of different situation. In my memories they went to the OP Echo, started firing, threatened the OP and I don't know exactly how the fire fight was going on because I was not there, but I know there was a fire fight from UNPROFOR towards the attackers, I think. And at the end, the manning of the OP was able to get into the APC and not surrender but to withdraw and take -- try to take a new position a little bit farther up to the north.
Q. Okay. Thank you. There is also quite a bit of question about the Muslim people going towards Potocari or leaving the enclave. Did you ever happen to go in the spring of 1995 to the UNPROFOR garbage dump?
A. Yes, I've been there, yes.
Q. And what did you see -- or when did you go?
A. Then I should take a look in my diary, I think. I don't know exactly when I was there. I know for sure I wrote something down. But I could find the date, if it's necessary. But it was a terrible situation over there. We had our garbage from the compound in Potocari, and once in awhile, a garbage truck-loaded with garbage and brought under the protection of the civilian police of the enclave towards the garbage dump. On the garbage dump most of the time there were a lot of people who knew that the garbage truck was coming over there and when the garbage truck was unloaded, the people tried to get into the garbage to find if there was something they could use either clothes, food, or anything, plastics and all those kind of things. Of course, it was a dangerous situation and the local police who had to protect the guys on the garbage truck and the unloading of the garbage truck started beating 6909 the local population to get them away for their own security, but it was a terrible view.
Q. And just very simply, did the Serb forces restrict humanitarian aid to those people, the Muslims in the enclave?
A. I think so because a lot of times only small UNHCR convoys came into the enclave so there was not enough food and not enough supplies for them to live in a normal humanitarian way.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I apologise to Mr. McCloskey. May these proceedings and in keeping with God's will and not necessarily according to mine. I don't think that that issue was raised in cross-examination. I don't object to Mr. McCloskey asking this question, but he is the one who insists on everything being done by the book, according to the rules. Thank you.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, can you give us a reference to the relevant part in the cross.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Well, Mr. President, it was constantly suggested in the cross-examination that the reason that the Muslim population was leaving was because they left on their own free will, perhaps to get away from the combat. That was said repeatedly throughout the cross-examination, and I'm merely showing this as another motivation aside from the -- what the General was putting forward in his cross-examination.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: I am afraid, Mr. Tolimir, you didn't listen to the reasons given by Mr. McCloskey for his kind of question. But as you 6910 were not objecting, I would like to say please carry on, Mr. McCloskey.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you.
Q. You also said in cross-examination that at one point you went and spoke to General Mladic who was out amongst the crowd and General Mladic told you that these men would be taken to a POW camp near Bijeljina?
A. That's correct.
Q. Can you tell us how it was you were able to speak to General Mladic or communicate with him when you obviously don't speak Serbian?
A. The problem was, of course, that our Muslim interpreters were too afraid to go out of the compound and being amongst the VRS soldiers in the vicinity of General Mladic, but most of the time the Colonel Jankovic was over there, he spoke English and Serbo-Croatian, so most of the time when I wanted to talk to General Mladic, I was able to use the Colonel Jankovic as an interpreter. So I used him as an interpreter to ask my questions to General Mladic.
Q. So in the specific situation that I asked you about, that you testified about this POWs going to Bijeljina, who was your specific memory of your translator, who was that?
A. At that moment it was Colonel Jankovic.
Q. All right. General Tolimir also spent some time asking you about Camila Omanovic's brother and your claim that he talked about hanging himself. Did you receive any reports at that time of any Muslims hanging themselves in and around the area?
A. Yeah, I've got one report about the Muslim man who hung himself 6911 in one of the factories in the night, I think, the night from the 12th to the 13th of July.
Q. There was also General Tolimir, I think we'll all recall, asked you about the UN troops that were at the Hotel Fontana when you arrived there. Can you tell us when you and Colonel Karremans and Major Boering went back to your base in Potocari some 5 kilometres distance of Bratunac on that night of the 11th, did you take your troops with you?
A. No, we were not allowed to take troops with us. They had to stay over there. We had the only possibilities after the 8.00 meeting just to see them for maybe five minutes, shake hands with all of them, wish them good luck and after that we had to leave the hotel and go back to our compound in Potocari.
Q. All right. Now, yesterday during cross at page 6888, General Tolimir asked you this question in the context of talking about the Hotel Fontana meetings and your experience there: "I just want to ask the witness if he can remember any other threatening word from Mladic except his words, 'You can survive or disappear. Your fate is in your hands'?"
Do you remember that?
A. Yes, I remember.
Q. I won't take the time to play the video the first meeting. But I just want to go back to some of the transcript references and that is at P01008 and ask you since you were there at that first meeting.
MR. McCLOSKEY: I want to go now to a section that is at page 20, roughly lines 20 to 25 in the English, and page 17, about line 16 in the 6912 B/C/S.
Q. General Mladic says to Colonel Karremans: "Does he smoke?"
Interpreter says: "Do you smoke?"
Colonel Karremans says: "Yeah, normally I do smoke, sir. Normally I do smoke, but I smoke so much that last days."
Was Colonel Karremans a smoker?
A. Yes, he smoked. Yes, that's correct.
Q. General Mladic: "Have a cigarette. This is not your last cigarette in life." Interpreter says to Karremans:
"Light up. It's not your last one in this life." How did you take that comments as you were standing there listening to General Mladic say that?
A. I think this fits in this the first ten minutes of this meeting because a lot of things were said in the same way, a lot of small threats going on, in my opinion, as well as the shouting towards me and to Mr. Boering that gave me the feeling in the first ten minutes that we could end up in the garden and be shot. So it fits in the whole scene at that moment.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Now let me go in the English to page 21, lines 1 through 12, and page 17, line 24 in the B/C/S.
Q. Colonel Karremans says: 6913 "I'd like to thank the Bosnian Serb military for treating my soldiers well."
Interpreter says: "I'd like to thank the Serb military authorities for the good treatment of my soldiers."
General Mladic says: "No need for that, thank you."
Interpreter: "You don't need to thank."
General Mladic now says: "They are here, in the hotel."
Interpreter: "They are here at the hotel."
Colonel Karremans says: "Okay, no problem."
And General Mladic says: "But if you keep on bombing, they won't be hosts for a long time."
And then the interpreter says: "If you keep bombing, they won't spend long time there." Did you hear Mladic say that that night?
A. I can't recall this specific sentence. But as I stated before, I think this fits in in the first ten minutes of the meeting in which a lot of those things were said and gave us the feeling not to be safe over there, and not having anything in our own hands. 6914
Q. What did you take that to mean, that: "If you keep on bombing, they won't spend a long time there"? Who was he referring to?
A. I think he was referring to our guys in the Hotel Fontana, but of course, he also threatened already, and I don't know if he did it before or after this statement, that if air-strikes were going on, he would also attack again or shell the compound, the refugees, and in this case also hurt our soldiers in the Hotel Fontana.
Q. All right.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Let's go to another section. Page 27 in the English, lines 22 to 34. Page 20 around line 18 in the B/C/S.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Gajic.
MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I believe that on page 12, line 24, a wrong translation was recorded of the general's word at Fontana Hotel. It says here: "Keep on shelling. You won't be here for long," and I believe in the original it says: "You will not be host for a long time here," and the difference is huge.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think it's very clear from the transcript that Mr. McCloskey were reading the sentence translated by the interpreter, but before we have on the transcript both versions, the original words in translation of General Mladic and later on the interpreter's version. There is a difference of course, but I think the quotation of Mr. McCloskey was absolutely correct.
MR. McCLOSKEY: And frankly, Mr. President, I don't see a big difference between the: They are not going to be hosted there anymore and they are not going to be there any more, I think it's pretty clear 6915 what General Mladic is talking about. Now, let me go, as I said to those previous pages, thank you for getting them up there and I'll start --
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Just a moment. Mr. Tolimir.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, it has been established what Mladic says because we can hear it. I believe that the record has to be corrected. We shouldn't rely on what the interpreter said, but rather we should rely on the original words of General Mladic. And the word that he used was "host" and I think for that reason our records should be corrected.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, I already said this was part -- the part Mr. McCloskey was reading. The whole text we could see in the transcript and we have seen this video several times so that everybody knows what was to be seen and to be heard in the transcript. Mr. McCloskey please carry on.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Just briefly so it's completely understood, this is a tricky situation in terms of translation, the reason of course that we put the Mladic version and the interpreter version is so that it's clear what the people at the Hotel Fontana would have heard because they don't understand General Mladic, so they are all important, what General Mladic actually said, what the interpreter said. So just to be made clear, that's why it's all laid out in this particular transcript.
Q. Okay. Let's continue. And at one point General Mladic says: "Are you married? Do you have a wife and children?"
The interpreter says: 6916 "Are you marry the man, do you have wife and children?" Karremans says:
"I have two children." Interpreter says: "I have two children."
Was Colonel Karremans married at the time?
A. At the time, he was married, but I don't think that he had children.
Q. General Mladic goes on to say: "How long have you not seen them?"
Interpreter says: "For how long you haven't seen them?"
Colonel Karremans: "For half a year."
Interpreter: "Half a year."
General Mladic: "And you would like to see them?"
Interpreter says: "And you would like to?" Colonel Karremans says:
"I beg your pardon?" Interpreter:
"You would like to see them?" Colonel Karremans:
"Oh yes, of course." How did you take it when General Mladic asked would you like to 6917 see your children?
A. Exactly, yes, in the same way as he did before, it was just a hidden threat that if you don't work together with us, if you don't act in the way I like to, your life is in danger. That was the feeling, at least I got, what I still feel.
Q. Okay. A couple more.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Page 29 in the English, lines 23 through 29. Page 21 in the B/C/S.
Q. General Mladic: "Each of your officers and soldiers, just like yourself, has just one life."
Interpreter: "Every one of you and your soldiers has only one life." General Mladic:
"And I don't believe you want to lose it here." Interpreter:
"And I do not believe that you would like to leave it here." General Mladic:
"That's why I'm asking you to co-operate fully." Interpreter:
"That's why I ask for absolute co-operation." How did you take that when he says: "And I don't believe you want to lose it here"?
A. I think when you read also the next sentence, it's quite clear. When you don't co-operate, it might be possible to lose your life over 6918 here and that's what we felt, at least what I felt.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay, last one. Page 30 in the English, lines 24 through 33. Page 21 in the B/C/S.
Q. General Mladic says on the previous page: "I want to help you."
Then on the page here the interpreter says: "I want to help you."
And General Mladic says: "Although you don't deserve it."
Interpreter says: "Even though you do not deserve it."
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey I'm not sure that we have that portion in B/C/S on the screen. It doesn't look very familiar to me but I'm not sure about that. Are these the correct pages?
MR. McCLOSKEY: I see a reference to NATO.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: In the English text we have only General Mladic and the interpreter. In the B/C/S version we have only General Mladic and later on Colonel Karremans.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Could we take a break, I'll fix that.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: No problem. You said page 30 in English and page 21 in B/C/S, perhaps it was not correctly recorded. I don't know.
MR. McCLOSKEY: If that's page 21 in the B/C/S, it's my mistake. It shouldn't take us long to track it down. I apologise. It's the last one. Just a clarification while Ms. Stewart is looking.
Q. Did you say the last one was a hidden threat as we have on the 6919 transcript or something else, if you recall?
A. I don't exactly recall, but I think it was a hidden threat because of course he was threatening us all the time, but in his words he made the show so that we felt it was a threat, of course, all the time.
Q. All right.
A. Because he didn't actually threat us by saying, Well, I'll kill you.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: In the mean time, I would like to note my observation that we have in e-court three times page 17 but in LiveNote only one page 17. In e-court page 17, lines 1 through 5, then again 17, 1 and 2, and then page 17 starting with line 1. I don't know what happened there but in LiveNote it's perfect.
MR. McCLOSKEY: I apologise, Mr. President. We won't take any more of the Court's time, it's in the record, we'll argue it. So I have no further questions.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much, Mr. McCloskey. Mr. Rave, you will be pleased to hear that this concludes your examination, your testimony here in the courtroom. The Chamber wants to thank you for your attendance here and you are now free to return to your normal activities. Thank you very much again.
THE WITNESS: Thank you, Mr. President.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I just wanted to ask one question, but it doesn't matter that much because you've completed already.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Indeed. 6920
[The witness withdrew]
JUDGE FLUEGGE: The next witness should be brought in, please. Good morning, Mr. Thayer, welcome to the courtroom.
MR. THAYER: Good morning, Mr. President, it's nice to be back. Good morning, everyone.
While the witness is being brought in, just for the Court's information, the next witness, his testimony is relevant to the following paragraphs of the indictment, if the Trial Chamber wishes to take a look. It's paragraph 21.14, and the Prosecution's pre-trial brief at paragraphs 115 to 116, just to provide a little bit of context. I know we jump around from topic to topic and this witness primarily addresses the events that occurred in these paragraphs.
[The witness entered court]
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good morning, sir. Again, good morning, welcome to the courtroom. Please read aloud the affirmation on the card which is shown to you now.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
WITNESS: NEBOJSA JEREMIC
[Witness answered through interpreter]
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. Please sit down.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer for the Prosecution has questions for you.
Mr. Thayer. 6921
MR. THAYER: Thank you, Mr. President. Examination by Mr. Thayer:
Q. Good morning to you, sir.
A. Good morning.
Q. And welcome back. I think this is your third tour here in the Tribunal. Would you please state your name for the record?
A. Nebojsa Jeremic.
Q. And, sir, do you recall testifying over the course of two days in April 2007 in this courtroom in the Popovic case?
A. Yes, I do remember.
Q. And did you recently listen to all of your testimony in the Popovic case?
A. Yes, I did listen.
Q. And did that audio recording accurately reflect your testimony?
A. It does.
Q. And, sir, can you attest before this Trial Chamber if you were asked the same questions today that you were asked back in April of 2007, that your answers would be the same?
A. I confirm that.
MR. THAYER: Mr. President, the Prosecution would tender P1280, the witness's Popovic testimony from April of 2007, as well as the following exhibits: P1283, P1284, and P1286 to P1300. There's one exhibit on the list which wasn't included in the 92 bis package, and I will address that exhibit with the witness shortly, and that's P1285.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: I would like to ask you, what about P1281 and 82? 6922
MR. THAYER: Yes, Mr. President. Those are the transcripts, public and under seal version, respectively, of an additional day of testimony when Mr. Jeremic was brought back in the Popovic case as a Defence witness. That transcript was inadvertently not included in the 92 bis package, although all the exhibits that were shown to him during that testimony were occurred, so that was an oversight which I've already addressed some days ago with the Defence. My intention is to -- after I read the summary and should the Court accept the April 2007 testimony and the associated exhibits, to go through the same 92 ter procedure with respect to that Defence witness testimony and that will become an exhibit as well in the case.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: And what about P1285? You didn't mention that.
MR. THAYER: Yes, that is the exhibit that I referred to that was not included in the 92 bis package and I will address that during my supplemental questioning as well, Mr. President. That was the one gap in the list of be exhibits that I read out.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Another question, you are tendering P1298, 99, and P1300. They were not admitted in the Popovic case. I think you should consider to use them with the witness and tender them later because they are not part of the Popovic package.
MR. THAYER: Yes, Mr. President. I was certainly intending to use P1299 with the witness. I can tell you that with respect to P1298 and P1300, those were included on the list because they were used by Defence counsel during cross-examination of the witness in the Popovic case, they were quoted from by Defence counsel in the Popovic case, and 6923 in one case the witness, read to himself from his witness statement, which is P1298, so unfortunately nobody was -- is privy now to what he was reading, but for including it on the list. So that was my intention with putting them on the list was to provide the Trial Chamber with that -- with those documents that he was shown.
We've been in this situation before. I can think of something, some reason to -- additional reason to show these documents to him in this proceeding, but, again, the reason why we included them in the 92 bis package to begin with, even though they were not admitted as exhibits in the prior trial because they were used with the witness in the prior trial, but for whatever reason Defence counsel didn't seek to admit them. But without them before the Trial Chamber, I'm afraid, as we've seen with other documents, you won't have an idea or fully accurate idea of what he is looking at.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you for much for this explanation. The Chamber will receive as exhibits, the exhibits number P1280, P1283 and 84, P1286 through P1297. The Chamber will postpone a decision about admission of the additional three documents we were talking about.
MR. THAYER: Okay. Thank you, Mr. President. I do have a summary for the witness. May I proceed?
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes, please.
MR. THAYER: The witness was born and raised in Zvornik and worked at the tax administration there as a lawyer. He was mobilised in May of 1992 as an infantryman, and in spring 1993 joined the service for combatting crime, which was part of the Zvornik Brigade's Military Police 6924 Company.
The brigade's Military Police Company was commanded by Miomir Jasikovac, who in turn reported to the brigade's chief of security, Drago Nikolic. Nikolic was the witness's immediate superior for purposes of the service for combatting the crime, and Jasikovac was the witness's superior as regards any combat issues in the sphere of military police.
The witness's office was located on the ground floor of the Bratunac Brigade's Standard Barracks in Karakaj. His unit dealt with criminal acts committed by brigade members; for example, murders, desertion, self-infliction of wounds and thefts. As part of their regular tasks, he and other two members of his unit Goran Bogdanovic, and Cedo Jovic, took statements from soldiers, wrote orders in the name of battalion commanders and the brigade commander Vinko Pandurevic, and wrote criminal reports and drafted charges. For example, they would write orders for Pandurevic for punishment up to 60 days in military prison for more serious offences. The brigade did not have to wait for approval from the military courts to impose such a sentence. Drago Nikolic would direct the witness's unit to draw up criminal charges and Nikolic would sign off on the charges. Because Nikolic was chief of security, the witness and his colleagues had to keep Nikolic informed of their progress.
Each morning the unit would inform Nikolic of the situation in the military detention, after which Nikolic would report to Pandurevic for a daily morning briefing. Nikolic would then go to his own office 6925 and call the witness and his colleagues to hands down orders and instructions to them. On some of those occasions, when the witness reported to Nikolic's office, Jasikovac, the Military Police Company "komandir" was also there, receiving his daily instructions for his work from Nikolic. In Nikolic's absence, Nikolic's deputy, Milorad Trbic, would attend the daily briefing with Pandurevic, then pass on the orders and instructions to the witness and his colleagues.
In the time-period immediately following the fall of Srebrenica, the witness spent his days and nights in the Standard Barracks, because there was an alert situation. At some point during this period, he saw buses of Muslim prisoners pass by Standard, driving in the direction of Bijeljina. The prisoners had their heads bowed and held their hands behind their necks and were guarded by Serb soldiers. Some unknown number of days after that, he heard rumours going around Standard that there were executions of Muslims in Orahovac and Pilica. Many people were talking about it. No one in the brigade requested the Military Prosecutor's Office to conduct investigation into these executions, and no one in his unit was ever instructed to conduct such an investigation. If such an investigation were ordered, that order would be come from Nikolic.
The witness also testified about charges brought by the brigade against two brigade soldiers from the village of Lokanj; father and son Nesko and Slobodan Djokic. The chief of security Drago Nikolic told the witness that the two men had assisted the enemy, that criminal charges would be filed against them and that an order should be drafted for 6926 Pandurevic for 60 days' military imprisonment.
The witness then interviewed the son Slobodan, who denied the charges until Nikolic came in and struck him, at which point the son said that his father had given four Muslim men some food and clothing and helped them reach the confrontation line to reach the other side. Bogdanovic then took statements from the father and son. Statements were also taken from the four Muslim men who had been assisted by the father and son and who were later captured, or who had been, I should say earlier captured, after their encounter with the father and son and were brought to Standard and held in the military detention there. The witness took three of those statements himself and Jovic took the fourth.
The Muslim men were frightened, thin, and their clothes were in shreds. One of them said that he was from the village of Jagodnja in Bratunac municipality. Nikolic, Bogdanovic, and the witness then observed an identification procedure of the father and the son by the Muslim prisoners. The last time he recalls seeing the Muslim prisoners was in the office when they made their statements. He does not know how long they were kept at Standard or what happened to them. The statements of the father and son and four Muslims were taken between 23 and 26 July 1995. The witness went away on a work obligation for three months beginning on 26 July 1995.
Q. Witness, has the summary been translated to you? Have you receive the final portion of the summary as I've read it out in translation? 6927
Q. Is there anything that you would care to add or that I got wrong in the summary before we proceed?
A. The only thing that I would perhaps add is this: Statements were taken from Muslim prisoners as a future enclosure to the criminal report that would be written and then forwarded to the Military Prosecutor's Office. I think you skipped that in your summary and perhaps I should add it at this stage.
Q. Okay. That's helpful, witness. Now, I want to ask you a few additional questions. Do you recall returning to testify again in this courtroom on the 23rd of September, 2008 as a Defence witness for the Drago Nikolic Defence?
A. Yes, I recall that.
Q. And did you listen to that testimony as well recently?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And did you and I go over one error in the English transcript that was noted?
A. Yes, we did.
MR. THAYER: Let me just read it into the record and we'll take care of that. This is at page 26102 of the 23 September 2008 transcript which has been marked at P1281, and this is in open session, so it's okay. This is at line 8.
Q. You had been asked the question: "To this day, you don't know where your fellow MPs were sent over 6928 this one, two or even three-day period; is that fair to say?" And you answered:
"I didn't know at the time where they were. Now I do. I heard about that. However, while he was at the gate and around mid-July, I truly didn't know where the policemen had gone to."
Now, is it fair to say, sir, in this last line that I just read where the English transcript reads: "However while he was at the gate around mid-July," it should read "while I was at the gate around mid-July"?
A. Yes, it's fair to say that.
Q. Okay. Now bearing that one correction in mind, sir, can you attest that the testimony which you listened to of your appearance in September of 2008 accurately reflects what you said?
A. Yes, I can attest to that.
Q. And can you further attest that were you asked the same questions today that you were asked in September of 2008, that your answers would be the same?
A. Yes, they would be the same.
MR. THAYER: Mr. President, the Prosecution would tender P1281, the additional transcript, as well as P1282 which is the under seal version of that additional day of testimony.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think it's the other way around. 1281 is under seal, and 1282 is the redacted version.
MR. THAYER: You are correct, Mr. President.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Both documents will be received with these 6929 numbers. At this point in time, I would like to note that P1283 is a sketch with some B/C/S explanations. There's no English translation yet. I think it can only be marked for identification pending translation.
MR. THAYER: Okay. Thank you, Mr. President, we'll take care of that.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please continue.
Q. Sir, you were born and raised in Zvornik and do you still live there?
Q. And you are a Serb by ethnicity; is that correct?
Q. Now, the Standard Barracks are located in Karakaj. I'm not going to put you through map or sketch torture, but can you just generally describe for the Trial Chamber geographically where Karakaj is in relation to the town of Zvornik?
A. Well, the town of Zvornik is on the left bank of the Drina River and the Drina is the border between Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republic of Serbia. The Standard Barracks is located on the main road leading from Zvornik to Bijeljina. And according to my estimate, it is about 2 and a half to 3 kilometres away from the town of Zvornik.
Q. And when you say it's 2 to 3 kilometres away, can you tell us whether it's 2 to 3 kilometres to the north, south, east, or west of the town of Zvornik along that road leading to Bijeljina? If you can't remember that's okay. I think the Trial Chamber has been there recently. 6930 We don't want you to guess, so if you just don't remember, that's okay, I can move on.
A. I'm not sure about the side of the world. We over there don't talk in those terms. We never mention east, west, south, or north. I only know that it is on the left bank of the -- about 3 kilometres from Zvornik on the main road leading from Zvornik to Bijeljina.
Q. And do you remember is Karakaj between the town of Zvornik and Bijeljina?
Q. Okay. I think that does it for us, thank you, sir. And the Standard Barracks themselves, prior to the war what kind of facility was that building, if you recall.
A. I remember before the war it was a shoe factory. That's where shoes were made. That was a new building of the shoe factory facility. I am talking about the period before the war.
Q. And during your testimony in the Popovic case, you made references to both the chief of security Drago Nikolic, as well as his deputy, Milorad Trbic. In the Standard command building, where did they have their offices, if you recall? And did they have separate offices or did they share an office? Sorry to give you two questions in one, but ...
A. I understand, that's okay. The office of chief of security Drago Nikolic was on the first floor at the main entrance, and he shared his office with his second in command, Milorad Trbic.
Q. Again without putting you through sketch torture, can you tell 6931 the Trial Chamber where in relation to Commander Pandurevic's office, the chief of security's office was located? Just where in relation to each other, if you recall.
A. As far as I can remember, Drago Nikolic's office was on the first floor at the main entrance, as I've already told you. And that's where the brigade commander Vinko Pandurevic's office was as well. The only difference being that the commander's office was at the far end of the corridor, and a bit before that office on the left-hand side, there was Drago Nikolic's office. In other words, both the offices were located on the same floor.
Q. Now, in your experience as a member of the Zvornik Brigade, who in the Zvornik Brigade was responsible for escorting and guarding VRS soldiers who were being held in detention for these crimes that you testified about you were in charge of investigating?
A. The military police were in charge of that, the Military Police Company.
Q. And who in the Zvornik Brigade was responsible for escorting and guarding any prisoners of war who were brought to or detained at the Standard command?
A. When it comes to POWs who were kept at the Standard, the military police were in charge of them as well, and I'm talking about those who were kept at the Standard building.
A. And that also applied to VRS troops who were kept in custody at the Standard building. Again, the military police were in charge of 6932 them.
Q. Okay, sir, I want to take you through a couple of documents. And these mostly pertain to the charges that were brought against this father and son, Nesko and Slobodan Djokic, for helping these four Muslims who were trying to reach the free territory.
MR. THAYER: I'd first like to show you P1299, please.
Q. If you would just take a moment and re-familiarise yourself with this document and I'll ask you a couple of questions. Just let us know when you are ready to go to the next page, sir.
A. Now is the time to go to the next page.
MR. THAYER: I think we'll need to -- in the B/C/S there will be a blank page next and then we'll need to go to the page after that, please.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Okay. You can start putting your questions, sir.
Q. Okay. My first question is --
MR. THAYER: And we can go to the second page of the English for this first question.
Q. There is a signature there in -- underneath the Cyrillic name, do you recognise that signature and whose signature is it, sir?
A. I recognise the signature. It is Goran Bogdanovic's signature. We worked together in the office to prevent crime at the Zvornik Brigade.
MR. THAYER: Okay. If we could go back to the first page in both versions, please. 6933
Q. You testified in the Popovic case that you were present for the interview of the son, Slobodan Djokic; is that correct, sir?
Q. And you also testified that on or about the 26th of July, 1995, you left the Standard command to begin a work obligation elsewhere; is that also correct?
Q. So can you tell the Trial Chamber whether you have any specific recollection of being present when this particular statement was taken by Mr. Bogdanovic from the son, Slobodan Djokic?
A. I'm sure that I was there when the son, Slobodan Djokic, and his father Nesko were brought in. And when my colleague Goran was taking this statement from them, I can't remember, actually, but I was there when Slobodan Djokic was interviewed. I don't know when the statement was taken and signed. I can't remember. I only know that I was present during the interview with Slobodan who spoke about those things, and he admitted during that interview that he had, indeed, wanted to help Muslim soldiers.
And as for this statement and when it was typed up, I don't know. I can see that it was Goran Bogdanovic who took the statement and signed it. I wasn't there but I was there during the interview, I'm sure of that.
Q. And based on your review of this statement taken by Mr. Bogdanovic, how does it compare with your recollection of what the son, Slobodan Djokic, told you when you were present during the interview 6934 with him?
A. The statement and the interview pretty much tally. I think that everything that is indicated in the statement is true and correct because I, myself, interviewed Slobodan about the events and all that, all that he stated during his interview was then typed up and presented as a statement.
Q. Okay. Just one last question regarding this document before the break. If we look at the first paragraph that begins right under the date of 26 July 1995, I just noted that it refers to Slobodan Djokic, son of Nesko and mother Andjelka, born 1 December 1971 in Donji Likanj, Zvornik municipality. Based on your familiarity with this case, is this village, the name of this village here typed accurately, Likanj, or is it a different name?
A. The name of the village is Donji Lokanj, L-o-k-a-n-j.
MR. THAYER: Mr. President, at this time the Prosecution would tender P1299.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.
MR. THAYER: And I'm about to go on to another document, so perhaps this is a good time to take the break.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Indeed. We must have our first break now and we will resume at 11.00.
--- Recess taken at 10:31 a.m.
--- On resuming at 11.03 a.m.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes, Mr. Thayer, please continue. 6935
MR. THAYER: Thank you, Mr. President. May we have P1291 on e-court very briefly, please.
Q. Sir, what we have here is a statement taken from Sakib Kiviric, and it's dated the 23rd of July, 1995.
MR. THAYER: If we could just advance two pages in the B/C/S to the last page of the document, and the second page in the English.
Q. Do you recognise the signature there, sir?
A. Yes, my signature.
MR. THAYER: So if we could go back to the first page in both versions, please.
Q. I think you testified about this statement in the Popovic case. This individual, Sakib Kiviric, is one of the four Muslims who were brought to the Standard command and from whom you personally took the statement; is that correct?
Q. Okay. I just want to note a couple of things very quickly before we move on to the next statement. It indicates here that he was born on the 24th of June, 1964, in Jagodnja, municipality of Bratunac, and that he is a conscript, a member of the 283rd Eastern-Bosnian Light Brigade. So he has identified himself as a soldier, has he not?
MR. THAYER: If we could look at P1292, very quickly, please.
Q. Same exercise, very quickly. We have here a statement of Emin Mustafic, dated 23 July, 1995. He identifies himself as being a 6936 conscript member of the 280th Eastern-Bosnian Light Brigade, born 7 October 1969. Do you see that, sir, in the very top of the document?
A. I can see it.
MR. THAYER: Okay. If we could just go to the last page, which is the third page in B/C/S and the second page of the English, please.
Q. Again, do you recognise the signature there?
A. My signature.
MR. THAYER: Okay. May we have P1293, please.
Q. Here we have a statement of Fuad Djozic, dated 26 July 1995, born 2 May 1965, driver my profession, a member of the 280th Mountain Brigade as driver. If we could go to -- do you see that, sir, first, before we move on?
A. Yes, yes. I can see it.
MR. THAYER: If we could go to the third page in B/C/S and again the second page in the English.
Q. Do you recognise the signature there, sir?
A. Yes. Cedo Jovic, that's my third colleague. There were three of us in the crime prevention service of the Zvornik Brigade.
Q. Okay. And I think in your testimony before the break, you referred to these four Muslim men as soldiers, and clearly they've identified themselves in their statements, anyway, as such.
MR. THAYER: If we could look at P1294, please.
Q. We have here a statement of Almir Halilovic, dated the 23rd of July, 1995, son of Suljo and Dika, born 25 August 1980, in the village of Bajranovici, municipality of Srebrenica. You see that there at the top, 6937 sir?
A. Yes, I can see it.
MR. THAYER: Again, if we could just go to the third page in B/C/S, second page in the English, just to see who took this statement.
Q. Do you recognise the signature there, sir?
A. Yes, I recognise it. It's my signature.
MR. THAYER: Okay. If we can just go again back again to the first page in each version, please.
Q. The date of birth here, 25 August 1980 indicates that Almir Halilovic would have been just shy of his 15th birthday at the time he was brought to the Standard command; is that correct?
Q. And his young age probably explains why there's no indication that he is a member of any military unit; is that fair to say, based on your recollection?
A. You could say that. He certainly did not say himself that he was a member of any military unit.
Q. Okay. And I know it's going back over 15 years now, sir, but do you have any recollection as you sit here today at all in your mind's eye of this boy? And if you don't, that's okay, I'm just testing your memory a little bit to see if you do have any recollection of this boy.
A. I can't remember his face.
Q. Okay. That's fine, sir.
MR. THAYER: May we have P1290, please.
Q. In the Popovic trial, you were asked a number of questions about 6938 this document. We'll talk about it a little bit more in a moment, but you were asked a number of questions about this document which is a ruling ordering detention for three days for the father and son. And you also testified about Drago Nikolic instructing you and your colleagues to draw up an order for Vinko Pandurevic's signature, Pandurevic being the commander of the Zvornik Brigade, for 60 days' military imprisonment. So my question for you is: Can you explain to the Trial Chamber the relationship, as you understood it, between this three day detention and the 60 day military imprisonment? Did the three days cancel out the 60 days or supersede it, or were they to be served one after the other, if you know? Can you help the Trial Chamber by clarifying that issue just a little bit, sir.
A. Well, this ruling remanding Nesko Djokic and Slobodan Djokic in custody for three days does not cancel out the order of the brigade commander that we were told to write stipulating 60 days in military prison. I did not write this ruling, but I think it was written in order to be attached to the criminal report, in order to remand them in custody for three days, the time it takes to follow the procedure, take statements from them, do an identification and collect all the other evidence in order to send them to the Military Prosecution's Office along with a criminal report. I believe that's why this ruling was written, although I didn't write it myself.
And this ruling did not change the order of the brigade commander. The order of the brigade commander to put them in military prison for 60 days remained in force, but I don't know if it was written. 6939 I don't know if I was clear enough.
Q. That was very clear, sir.
MR. THAYER: If we could have P1295, please.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer, I was told that the last document, P1290 is in B/C/S a 20-page document. The English translation consists only of two pages. You used only that part which has a translation. What about the remaining pages?
MR. THAYER: There is an explanation, Mr. President. And that is, when these documents were seised, there were multiple copies in the original versions of the same document stapled together or attached. If you look at the original document, it is literally, and this is the case with the other statements that we just went through, in the files as the OTP investigators found them, there were multiple copies of the documents, virtual, identical, mimeograph, or however they were copied, they were copied and just stapled together. So rather than retranslating each version, only the first copy was translated. That's why there's the difference in page number.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: To have the record clear, I think we should only admit the first two pages in B/C/S as well. If the other pages are only copies, there's no reason for admission of these documents. Would you agree?
MR. THAYER: I would respectfully disagree that that suggestion, Mr. President, makes eminent common sense. Unfortunately, common sense sometimes isn't the most efficient guide in these cases. The documents have already been uploaded in full. If the Court wishes simply to admit 6940 those first three pages of the document and then choose to ignore everything else, then I understand that.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: I want to stop you. I'm persuaded. I think it's the best way to leave it like it is.
MR. THAYER: Mr. President, you'll also have noted that there are blank -- or what appear to be blank pages interspersed and that's just how we found these document, so those got an evidence stamp as well. With the Court's permission, I have a couple of more documents to use with this witness.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please carry on.
MR. THAYER: Thank you, Mr. President.
Q. Mr. Jeremic, do you see before you the statement of Nesko Djokic, taken on 25 July 1995?
A. I can see it.
Q. Okay. It indicates that he was born on the 1st of January, 1936 in Donji Lokanj, Zvornik municipality; do you see that there, sir?
A. I see it.
Q. If we look at the statement, it begins on 18 July, 1995: "I got up early in the morning to bring grass for my cattle from a field which is about 150 metres from the house. On my way there, four men appeared before me under an apple tree. I knew immediately that they were Muslims, since they were covered with blood and also by their clothes, because they had been fleeing from Srebrenica towards their territory at that time."
And I think just to save some time, there's no dispute that this 6941 statement was taken by Goran Bogdanovic on this date. My question for you, sir, is: You described in the Popovic trial the clothes that they were wearing as being in shreds and that they were thin and they looked frightened. By the time that they arrived at the Standard command on or about the 23rd of July, do you recall any blood being on their clothes or on their bodies?
A. I did not notice that they were bloodied. I said already they were exhausted, fearful, their clothes were torn, but I didn't notice any blood on them. Perhaps a few minor scratches, but I don't remember any serious injuries or wounds.
Q. Okay. That was my next question, sir. So did you observe that they had required or received any medical treatment?
A. I really can't remember that they received any medical attention. I made them tea, if that counts as attention, but as for sending them to the infirmary that was available in the brigade, I don't remember.
Q. Okay. So it's fair to say from what you recall, you didn't see any injuries or wounds on these four individuals?
A. If I remember correctly, I didn't see any serious injuries. For instance, that someone was bleeding or that they had a fracture on any part of the body. I don't think that was the case.
MR. THAYER: May we move to P1184, please.
Q. Sir, what we have here is a report dated the 26th of July, from the security organ of the Zvornik Brigade command to the military prosecutor in Bijeljina, and the heading of the report is "Collaboration 6942 With the Enemy" You've seen this document before, I don't think there's any mystery about that, you saw it in the Popovic case and reviewed it during your proofing; is that correct, sir?
A. Yes, I saw it.
MR. THAYER: If we could go to the third page in B/C/S and the second page in English, please.
Q. Do you recognise the signature on this page, sir?
A. I do. It's the signature of Drago Nikolic, chief of security of the Zvornik Brigade.
Q. Okay. Now, I just noticed this morning what I believe is a translation error, maybe you can help clarify this for us. In the original B/C/S right next to the signature page there is a stamp.
MR. THAYER: And if we could just blow up that stamp so it's a little easier for Mr. Jeremic to read, please.
Q. Can read what that stamp says, looks like "vojna" something. Can you read that into the record and tell us what those words mean there?
A. The stamp says military PO box. I think the number is 7469, Zvornik. That's the number of the military PO box. It's a bit smudged but I think the number is 7469, military PO box, Zvornik.
Q. Okay. And that, to your recollection, belongs to the Zvornik Brigade as a whole? When you say that that is the military post or PO box, you are referring to the brigade itself; is that fair to say?
A. To the best of my recollection, yes.
Q. Okay. Because I just --
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Just to clarify, are you referring to the right 6943 side of this stamp offer the words on the left side?
MR. THAYER: The words on the left side in Cyrillic where it begins with a letter that looks like B-o-j-h-a.
Q. Is it fair to say that that is "vojna," that word there, and the next word is "posta"?
A. Yes, it's "vojna posta" written in Cyrillic.
Q. Because it's been translated incorrectly as stamp of the military police and what is the word in your language for military police, sir?
A. "Vojna pilicia," there's no other word for police.
Q. Thank you, sir, that was just a little correction I wanted to go through with you on this document.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: I would like to clarify that. "Posta" is not the same word as police are, could you clarify that please.
MR. THAYER: Yes, Mr. President.
Q. Mr. Jeremic, in your language what does the word "posta" mean?
A. "Posta" is an institution that receives and sends letters, telegrams, and parcels. It's post, "posta," in our language. Has nothing to do with the military police. How shall I explain it? The post receives parcels, letters, telephone communications, and communicates these further to addressees, that's a civilian institution post office.
Q. So in your experience, sir, did each brigade have a different military post number? You said here it's listed as 7469, so in your experience, for example, would the Romanija Brigade, or some other military unit like a brigade or a corps have a separate post office or 6944 post number assigned to it?
A. I didn't come across the numbers of any other military post. I believe that every brigade has its own military post number. I really wouldn't be able to tell you that. I'm not a military professional, but it would only be logical for each brigade to have a different post number. And now why the term "military post" is used for that, I really don't know. You should ask somebody else who is a career soldier who would be able to explain that better than me. I don't know why it is called a military post and whether each brigade had its own number. Our brigade number was what I told you and I suppose that the other brigades had other numbers. I really can't tell you.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I add one last question. Did Mr. Drago Nikolic use this stamp usually?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer.
MR. THAYER: Okay. Your Honour, I believe that P1184 has been provisionally admitted through the testimony of Kathryn Barr, so I am not sure if it's technically in sort of the MFI netherworld as a result. If it is, I would take the opportunity to tender this exhibit P1184 at this time.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received as an exhibit.
MR. THAYER: Okay.
Q. Sir, there were a couple of documents that were shown to you during the last trial but that weren't offered by the parties that used them during the last trial into evidence. So I want to go over a couple 6945 of matters with you regarding another one of them.
MR. THAYER: And this is P1298, please.
Q. What we have here is a copy of your statement to the OTP taken on 12 January 2006. And if we look at the English version, do you see your signature anywhere on that first page in the English version on the right, sir?
A. Yes, I can see my signature.
Q. And prior to signing the English version, sir, do you recall that the statement was read to you by an interpreter?
A. Yes, it was read to me.
MR. THAYER: If we could go to page 4 of the English. I think that's going to be page 6 of the B/C/S. We'll be looking at paragraph 17 in any event. Great, we got it. Sorry, page 5, for the record, for the B/C/S.
Q. In the Popovic trial, this is at transcript page 10445 to 10446, one of the Defence attorneys asked you to read your statement. He actually quoted to you from the statement, and in particular I want to focus on paragraph 17. So if you could just take a moment and read that to yourself.
A. I've read it.
Q. The beginning of the paragraph states: "After this investigation, the prisoners were returned to the detention room at the brigade. I knew that the prisoners remained there for a time as I used to walk down that passage on occasion. Some days 6946 later, I noticed that the prisoners were no longer there. I do not know what had happened to the prisoners and have never received any official explanation as to what became of them."
My first question, sir, is: This portion of paragraph 17 refers to which particular prisoners, just so there's no confusion in the record?
A. It refers to the Muslim prisoners.
Q. The four Muslim prisoners who were assisted by Nesko and Slobodan Djokic, sir, is that -- just to put a finer point on it?
A. I believe that the first three or four sentences do refer to the four Muslim prisoners, yes.
Q. Okay. This paragraph goes on. You say: "In my opinion, the brigade commander or the chief of security were the ones who made the decisions about the prisoners." Can you just -- you don't need to go into any great detail about this, sir, but can you share with the Trial Chamber upon what experience is your opinion based that the brigade commander, Vinko Pandurevic, or the chief of security, Drago Nikolic, were the ones who made the decisions about the prisoners?
A. I said here that that was my opinion, which doesn't really mean that -- I mean, since the detention unit was under the control of the military police and that the military police were in charge of the detention unit and the chief of security was the one making decisions in respect of the military police, I think that he was also responsible for all the detainees who were taken by the Zvornik Brigade, including the 6947 Muslim prisoners. That's my opinion, although he never issued orders either to me or to my service with regard to the Muslim prisoners. The only exception being our task to take the statements from those four who had been brought in.
And since the brigade commander was superior to the chief, I concluded that he also made decisions about that. That's simply my opinion.
Q. Okay. Thank you, sir. Now, do you recall whether there were any occasions when members of the Military Police Company failed to discharge their duties properly and were removed from the company as a result? And we don't need particular names. You don't need to put anybody's particular name on the record. I'm just asking you if you recall such occasions.
A. I think that some were indeed removed. I don't know why, whether they breached the military discipline. In any case, it was not that they refused to carry out an order. It was always a matter of breach of discipline of some other kind and for those reasons such policemen would be removed from the company.
Q. And do you recall which officer in the brigade took that action to dismiss those members?
A. The chief of security who was also responsible for the military police, he was the one who dismissed military policemen from the company and it was most often as a result of their behaviour and a breach of discipline.
Q. Okay. Let's continue in this paragraph 17. You say: 6948 "I was not at any meetings where the fate of the prisoners were discussed."
And then, and this is what I believe the Defence counsel in the Popovic trial was directing your attention to:
"I do recall at one stage, soldiers from the Bijeljina Brigade arriving in trucks to transport between 80 and 100 Muslim prisoners away. Some of these prisoners were wounded. Someone mentioned that they were being transported to Batkovici prison, although I never received any confirmation that this was the case. I cannot recall if the prisoners I took statements from were transported with these trucks or were taken away separately."
First question is: Do you stand by what is contained here in the statement paragraph 17 that I just read out? Is that accurate? Does that reflect your recollection of events?
A. Yes, what I stated is accurate, but I would like to add something else. I'm not sure that those were soldiers from Bijeljina. The information that I had was not really accurate. There were just rumours. Or soldiers said that they were being transferred to Batkovic and Batkovic is close to Bijeljina, and that's why I concluded that they originally came from Bijeljina, from one of the brigades over there. That was just my conclusion. I'm not sure about the exact name of the brigade that took them away. That was just my conclusion. Otherwise, I stand by my statement.
Q. And can you provide any further detail in terms of the date when this occurred, and let's just start with the fall of the Srebrenica 6949 enclave as one marker in your mind? Can you help the Trial Chamber at all approximately when you recall these soldiers arriving to take these prisoners?
A. I'm sure that that happened after the fall of the Srebrenica enclave. A long column of Muslims was moving from Srebrenica in the direction of Tuzla on foot. There were civilians and armed fighters among them. I didn't see the column myself, but I heard it from those who did see it, and many got lost on the way. There was fighting, the column split. Some crossed the line, some didn't, some stayed behind and wandered around.
Those who were captured were brought to the detention unit at the Standard Barracks in Zvornik, and one day, and I'm sure that that was after the fall of Srebrenica, some soldiers who were unknown to me came in lorries, and according to my estimate, and I stated here that there were between 80 and 100, I didn't count heads, but I did not know exactly how many detainees from the Zvornik Detention Unit were taken away, and rumour had it that they were taken to the camp in Batkovici. I don't know whether that's correct or not, I never learned the truth, and that would perhaps explain where the Muslims had come from, how come that they were detained in our barracks, the barracks of the Zvornik Brigade.
Q. Okay. How about in relation to the dates that we were just dealing with, with respect to the four Muslim prisoners who you had contact with, let's say the dates from approximately the 23rd of July to the 26th of July when you left the brigade, can you help the Trial Chamber at all in placing when in relation to that date ranged, the 6950 23rd to the 26th, you saw these trucks arrive to take away these 80 or more prisoners?
A. I really can't be sure of the date. I know that I didn't leave the brigade to go to my work obligation. I was still at the brigade, which means that that happened before the 26th. And as to the exact date, I really wouldn't be able to tell you when that happened.
Q. Okay. One last try. Do you remember the occasion -- not putting any dates on it, do you remember the occasion when you were assigned to stand at the gate for a period of, I think you've testified, it could have been 24 to 36 hours or so, when you were assigned to be at the gate at Standard, can you tell the Trial Chamber whether you saw these prisoners being taken away before or after that occasion when you had been posted at the gate?
A. Again, I can't tell you whether it was before or after. I know that I was not at the gate when I saw that. I was in my office. I was not at the gate. I really can't tell you whether that happened before or after. Most probably after my gate duty. I'm saying most probably, I'm not sure that it was after my gate duty.
There were a lot of Muslim soldiers who got lost on the way who didn't manage to break through, who wandered into Serbian villages, and people from the battalions brought them in, and their numbers mounted within the perimeter of the Zvornik Brigade, and that's where the 80 or 100 had come from. I don't know what date it was, but I believe that it was probably after I was assigned to stand at the gate.
Q. Okay. Last document for you, sir. 6951
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Earlier today you tendered this document.
MR. THAYER: Yes, thank you, Mr. President.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Now you've used it, and it will be received as an exhibit.
MR. THAYER: Thank you. I neglected to get to the punch line, as it were. Now, sir, if we could look at P1285. This will be the last document. And if we could go to page 4 in the original, and I think it will be page 7 in the -- yeah, okay. Perfect.
Q. Sir, do you remember providing a statement to the Drago Nikolic Defence team on the 8th of May, 2009?
A. Yes, I can see both the date and my signature.
MR. THAYER: If we could just advance a page in both versions.
Q. As we can see, you were asked by the Drago Nikolic Defence team a number of questions about whether you recall ever seeing Momir Nikolic at the Standard Barracks at a particular time. My question simply is: Do you stand by this statement that you gave to the Drago Nikolic Defence team in 2009?
A. Yes, I do. I stand by my statement.
MR. THAYER: Mr. President, just by way of background, this statement was tendered by the Drago Nikolic Defence team in the Popovic trial as a 92 bis statement and it was accepted as such. And it was at the very end of the Popovic case, I think it may have actually post-dated the filing of various Rule 65 motions in this case. It was not part of the 92 bis package for Mr. Jeremic, in any event. I thought it was important to include this as part of Mr. Jeremic's overall testimony. 6952 The Drago Nikolic's Defence team took the statement and offered it as evidence to challenge the credibility of another witness in the case, Mr. Momir Nikolic. I think it's important for the Trial Chamber at the end of the day when it's assessing the credibility of Mr. Nikolic, for example, to make sure that it has before it this document as well, which came in through Mr. Jeremic. So I would tender P1285 at this time.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received with this number.
MR. THAYER: And I have no further questions for Mr. Jeremic. Thank you, sir.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much, Mr. Thayer. I would like to come back to the document P1300.
MR. THAYER: Yes, Mr. President.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: It's rules on military discipline of the JNA.
MR. THAYER: Just to save time, Mr. President, I don't think there's any benefit in making up, frankly, some other reason to use that document with the witness. In the Popovic trial, he was shown the document. He, frankly, couldn't remember much about it or the portions that were read to him, and he made that clear to the Defence attorney who was examining him, but I included it in the package so that the Court would have everything before it. But I'll leave it up to the Trial Chamber.
I just don't see any utility, in terms of the Court time, in asking further questions on a document he knows nothing about. So it will probably come in through another witness at another time, and if at the end of the day it doesn't and the Trial Chamber or the Prosecution 6953 thinks it really is important for the Trial Chamber to have that document before it, then maybe we'll just throw it into a bar table motion. But for today's purpose, if it's all right for the Court, I won't tender it and take up further time.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: I take it that you withdraw your motion to with tendering this -- because it was the relevant part of that document was read into the record, which is already in evidence?
MR. THAYER: That's correct, Mr. President. And I do withdraw that.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. Mr. Tolimir, your cross examination, please.
[Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
[Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to welcome the witness and thank him for coming to testify here. And since Mr. Thayer was very thorough in examining this witness, I have no questions. The Defence has no questions for this witness. Mr. Thayer's examination was quite sufficient.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. In this case, there will be no re-examination, I suppose.
Sir, you will be pleased to hear that this concludes your testimony today. You are now free to return to your normal activities. The Chamber would like to thank you for your attendance here in The Hague and we wish you all the best. Thank you very much again. 6954
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. Good-bye to everyone.
[The witness withdrew]
MR. THAYER: And Mr. President, that concludes my business with the Court today. May I be excused for the remainder of the proceedings?
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes. Have a good day. Mr. McCloskey, surprisingly, that was a quite short testimony. How is the situation?
MR. McCLOSKEY: Ms. Gallagher is on her way here. You remember, I think we were getting close to the last bits of her testimony about the various authentications for the videos, and we have discussed this briefly with Mr. Gajic, so I hope they are prepared for cross-examination on that point.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, is that a good explanation of your position? Mr. Gajic?
MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we didn't exactly say we are not ready to cross-examine the witness because we know he has a lot of evidence to give. We have to hear the remaining evidence.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: I am afraid I didn't quite understand you. You said, "We didn't exactly say we are not ready ..." That means you are now in the position to continue your cross-examination; is that correct?
MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] It's not about cross-examination. As far as we understood, Ms. Gallagher has more evidence to give in direct examination, that's how we understood the position.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Sometimes it's confusing for me to recall if we are in direct and re or cross. I think Mr. Gajic is quite right. We 6955 should continue the examination-in-chief.
[The witness takes the stand]
JUDGE FLUEGGE: First of all, welcome back to the Court room, Ms. Gallagher, and Mr. McCloskey has more questions for you.
WITNESS: ERIN GALLAGHER [Resumed]
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President. Good afternoon, Ms. Gallagher. If I could clear up one point, Mr. President. On the last -- the exhibit, the transcript of the Hotel Fontana meeting, the first one, I have been informed that page 21 was, in fact, the correct transcription and did, in fact, reflect the English. The problem was that because it was a B/C/S transcript, it didn't translate the interpreter's words, so it made it look like it was a Mladic monologue without interpretation, which is why we all thought was not the correct one. But anyone understanding the substance of it would have seen while it was up there for five minutes that it was the same. That is normally not a problem when attorneys with, that are bilingual are representing accused. That clearly in our context we now see is a potential problem, so I have sent that transcript back so that the English interpretation can be translated so that the General will see what was said by the translator. The translator did a pretty good job at the time, but for small points it's best to have it fully translated so we don't have that problem.
But what was on there for five minutes was what we saw. Why that 6956 was not alerted to us, I don't know.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: That is exactly the reason why I tried to find out what is the long speech of Mr. Mladic on the B/C/S page, but I think this is a good explanation. And when you will have uploaded the new translation of that page, that will be then part of this document.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President. Examination by Mr. McCloskey: [Continued]
Q. All right. We stopped the video at 02.45.54.3. We were, as you recall, if you do recall, going along the road. I believe we had just seen some Pragas shooting at the hill-side. I had skipped through a bit of the still book IDs, getting your confirmation that they were accurate, so I think we'll just continue to play the video. We are still to remind everyone, this is the Petrovic video; is that correct?
A. That's correct. This is the footage from Zoran Petrovic.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Are you in the position to give, for the sake of the record, the P number of this?
MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, that's a good point. It is P00991. Yes.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
Q. Ms. Gallagher, I don't want to go through each of these soldiers, but can you just confirm for us that many of these soldiers who we have good facial shots of are in the still book and have been able to be identified as such in the still book accurately?
A. That's correct. 6957
Q. Now, this person in particular who is on page 87 of the still book, can -- just as one example, it's -- the still book is P00624. Did we ever get a name for this person?
A. No, we have actually never been able to identify him other than that he was a member of the deserter Jahorina unit.
Q. And that shows that he was identified as such by the commander of that unit, Dusko Jevic?
A. That's correct.
Q. And it says in an OTP interview?
A. Right, in October 2000. And there have been other witnesses that I have spoken with that were members of the deserter unit that also identified him as being part of a unit, but they didn't know his name.
Q. Can you remind us of these soldiers or people in uniform that we are going to see along the road. What units are they from?
A. They are all going to be a part of the police, so they are either -- most of the ones that you are going to see in the road in the upcoming footage are either deserters from the deserter Jahorina unit or they are from the 1st Company PJP Separate Police units, and then you've seen a little bit of footage where there have been several identified from the Special Police Sekovici unit.
Q. Were you able to identify any of these people that we had faces for as members of any army unit?
MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. And I think in that event we'll just play that and for any specifics, I think we can go to the book, but I 6958 think it's probably a good idea to play without that. And we are at 02.47.58.3. I may stop it here and there, but otherwise, let's just continue to go forward.
MR. McCLOSKEY: We are at 02.48.36.5.
Q. It's hard for anyone seeing this for the first time, but do you recall whether or not any individuals could be seen during this little clip?
A. Yes. If you do watch closely, you'll see just at the very top of the ridge people that are, and as they point out, members of the column that are walking across, you'll see the upper halves of their bodies going from right to left.
MR. McCLOSKEY: If Ms. Stewart could just go back a bit. To -- so we can see that section and take a look. And if you can see anyone, just call out.
THE WITNESS: Okay, right there.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay. I'll say 02.48.32.8.
THE WITNESS: It's a little hard to see, he has just moved towards the taller trees that are in the middle there, so you only see him to the right side. A split second before, you see him walking.
Q. All right. And is this ridge top that he is walking, we know it's a long ridge top paralleling the road, is it the same general ridge 6959 that the Pragas were firing at?
A. Correct. It's further east as you are heading back towards Bratunac, but it is the same ridge area that extends all along the road.
Q. All right.
MR. McCLOSKEY: I think we can continue it, and, of course, I encourage any questions, Your Honours, if there's something that comes up.
THE WITNESS: You see another person.
MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. And you said you saw another person, as did I, about 02.48.38.8. We can continue.
THE WITNESS: You see more there.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay. For the record, that's 02.48.44.2.
Q. And it sounds like the guys in the video are also counting them; is that right?
A. That's correct.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay. At 02.49.17.4.
Q. Just to remind everyone, who is that on the far left of the screen?
A. That's Ljubisa Borovcanin. He is the deputy commander of the Special Police Brigade.
MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. Thank you. 6960
MR. McCLOSKEY: Now, we'll continue playing this, but we are at 02.50.15.5, and this is page 94 of the book, but I'd like to just leave this still up here, I think.
Q. We see a blue helmet. Does the investigation determine what unit that person belonged to?
A. No, we know he is a Bosnian Serb officer, but we don't know whether -- we don't know specifically who he is.
Q. How do you know he is not a UN soldier?
A. Well, Ljubisa Borovcanin himself said he was not a UN soldier, that the man he spoke with, he didn't identify him, he had gotten the blue helmet off of a UN transporter that had passed by. And Mr. Borovcanin is speaking to him in Serbo-Croatian, but he didn't specifically say who he was.
Q. And you said a couple of things. You said that Borovcanin said that he was a Serb soldier. When did Borovcanin say that?
A. Sorry, that was during his interview in February and March 2002, and he was played the Petrovic video to identify who some of the people were and this was one section that he looked at.
Q. Okay. And you also said that Borovcanin spoke to this person in Serbo-Croat, where do you get that from?
A. Well, besides the fact that Mr. Borovcanin stated that himself in the interview, you do see him speaking to him here as well.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay. Let's just then continue to play that, please. 6961
Q. Can you tell us, at 02.51.49.9, where is this area where we are seeing these obvious Muslim men?
A. It's near Sandici meadow, and as you mentioned before, the destroyed white house that is across from the meadow and this is behind the destroyed white house as they are looking down into the valley below where the men have -- the men are coming up the hill towards the destroyed white house.
MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. And this will be the subject of Mr. Blaszczyk very precise testimony, on precise locations for you, Your Honours. If we could continue.
Q. We just saw at 02.52.29.6 a shot of a familiar figure. Do you know how that got in, in that part of the tape? I think we can all agree that's Radovan Karadzic.
A. Mr. Zoran Petrovic himself testified that this was a tape that he had used a number of times and recorded over and that this was an underlaying recording of Mr. Karadzic giving an interview that did not get recorded over when he was filming the road. That was his explanation.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay. Thank you. I think we can continue.
MR. McCLOSKEY: 6962
Q. Just to be clear, after that Karadzic break, it's 02.52.44.5. What area is this?
A. The men have now come up alongside the side of the destroyed white house and now are crossing over in front of it towards the road, and you'll see in just a moment, Sandici meadow is directly across from them.
MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. If we get a shot of the white house, we'll try to stop it.
MR. McCLOSKEY: We are at 02.53.28.2.
Q. You talked about, a bit last time, edit points where I think you said some rations were shown. Is this what you were talking about?
A. This is one of the -- yes, one of the edits to this ration.
Q. And can you just -- was there an explanation of by Mr. Petrovic of this?
A. His explanation in the Popovic trial was that, once again like the footage you just saw with Radovan Karadzic, is that it was taped over many times and this was underlying footage that kind of appeared during his filming of the road.
MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. Let's continue.
Q. Again, do you know where this is?
A. I know it's in Srebrenica and this is actually footage the next day, July 14th. 6963
Q. How do you know that?
A. You will actually -- it's through his -- Zoran Petrovic's testimony as well as other statements, and you'll hear from Tomasz Blaszczyk. He will explain more of this footage as well.
Q. Can you remind us at 02.54.30.9 where this is?
A. As you now see they are in Potocari.
Q. What direction are they going in?
A. They are -- you'll see they are heading towards Srebrenica.
Q. All right.
MR. McCLOSKEY: 02.55.51.2.
Q. Again, according to the investigation in the transcript, do you know who are talking here in the car now?
A. Yes, who you hear speaking is Zoran Petrovic and Ljubisa Borovcanin.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you.
Q. Okay. Now we've gone, we are at 02.56.13.4. I think we probably recognise the same tune on the radio. Now it says Studio B segment. Again, remind us what we've now changed to?
A. Correct. Now this is the presentation of Zoran Petrovic's video of an edited documentary that was televised on Studio B, and so this is 6964 the broadcast of his 30-minute documentary which includes most of the footage that you've just seen. And what will be coming up is some additional footage that was shown by Studio B that was not a part of the footage he, himself, gave to us.
Q. So what are we --
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, there's a question of Judge Nyambe.
JUDGE NYAMBE: Thank you. I wonder if you can say who the people seen in this footage with horses are? Thank you.
THE WITNESS: I don't know specifically who they are, but I believe that they are Bosnian Serbs that are moving back into the area that are either moving back in or looting or, you know, taking possessions that were left there by the Muslims when they left.
JUDGE NYAMBE: Thank you.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, is that perhaps an appropriate time for our second break?
MR. McCLOSKEY: If we could go about 30 seconds to a minute, I think we'll get this out of the way. That would be a good idea.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: No problem, please continue.
Q. Ms. Gallagher, can you tell us what physical building location we are about to see, just so the Court is prepared, because they've been there?
A. Right. This is -- what you are seeing now is around the Srebrenica area. What is going to come up shortly is going to be footage 6965 of driving by the Kravica warehouse, and then you will see a slow motion footage of that same -- of the warehouse.
Q. And who made the slow motion footage?
A. That would have been Marta Fracassetti, would have slowed that down for the purpose of the trial video. You'll see that noted shortly.
Q. And towards what town are they driving when they drive by the Kravica warehouse, what direction are they going in, do you remember?
A. Sure. So it now jumps. It will jump shortly to driving past the Kravica warehouse, and it's going to jump back to July 13th, that's when that footage was taken. They are going in the direction from Konjevic Polje to Bratunac, so you'll -- they will be driving -- the warehouse will be to the right side of them as you will see.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay.
MR. McCLOSKEY: I think that's a good place to break, Mr. President. We are at 02.57.00.5.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. We must have our second break now on technical reasons and we will resume five minutes past 1.00.
--- Recess taken at 12.33 p.m.
--- On resuming at 1.06 p.m.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes, Mr. McCloskey, please continue.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you.
Q. As we noted, we'd stopped the film at 02.57.00.5. I don't think I'll play any more of the warehouse and the bodies, but I did want to ask you where did we get the Studio B segment from? You may have said that 6966 already but can you tell us that now?
A. We actually got that from Ljubisa Borovcanin during his interviews in February and March 2002, somebody had taped the Studio B broadcast, and he turned it over to us, to Allistair Graham, at that time during his interviews.
Q. And do you recall in his interview if he said -- if he was in the car that is obviously driving by the warehouse when the bodies and the automatic gun-fire can be heard?
A. Yes, he did. He did explain that footage as well as Zoran Petrovic, and also Ljubisa Borovcanin's driver, Mico Jovicic, all three of them -- both stated that they had seen the bodies in front of the warehouse and they had stopped at that point.
Q. Okay. Just to be clear, did Mr. Borovcanin acknowledge that he was actually in the car when it was driving by the bodies?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Okay. Then I think we'll just play it out and continue.
Q. Okay. We've finished with the Petrovic film and now we are at 02.57.90.1 and what is entitled on our screen, "Survivors of column arrive in the free territory (Nezuk) 16 July 1995 and Antelope footage." So again can you just remind us what this Antelope is?
A. The Antelope footage is from the documentary that was made -- called "A Cry from the Grave," and this was a footage that they had turned over to us, to ICTY, in 1999. 6967
Q. All right. And we've seen that some of the segments of the video that we've shown which we -- which I think you know as the trial video or the old trial video, some of those segments were not subtitled. Has the investigation team endeavoured to now subtitle all the remaining segments?
A. That's correct, and this is one segment that has now been subtitled.
Q. But it's not in this particular version we are about to see, I take it.
A. Correct, not in the older version of the video.
Q. All right. Is there a newer, updated, trial video that's almost ready to be presented in court?
A. That's correct. It is almost finished.
Q. And just roughly what other kind of things will it include besides what we've just seen, just very roughly so the Court understands what is coming their way?
A. It will include everything that you've already seen so that's nothing that's been taken out. It will include some new footage of Potocari on July 12th. It will include some footage of Boksanica on July 26th. The footage on July 12th, where you saw General Zivanovic speaking on St Peter's day, it will include that. It will also include the withdrawal of DutchBat from Srebrenica and Bratunac July 21st. Off the top of my head, those are the main additions.
Q. Some of that the Court has already seen through Mr. Janc's testimony? 6968
A. I believe so.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay. So, Your Honours, I think I'll play a bit of this so you can see what it's about. There will be a version coming that is subtitled. I think it may makes more sense to wait until we get a better version of it. But you can just see this. It's not long, but I recall there's some B/C/S talking, and so I think at this point if we watch a bit of it, then we'll call it quits.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, if I recall correctly, we have seen that part already. I don't know if with the witness or it was tendered, I don't recall that. But to use the court time in a most appropriate way, I'm thinking about why we should see this now and later on again with subtitles?
MR. McCLOSKEY: That's actually another good reason to just play if for about five or ten seconds. You can see where it end up so that -- and then just shut it down because you've already seen it. That will help remind you where it was, but I agree, no point in seeing the next three minutes. You've already seen it and would rather have you see it, if we do it again, with the subtitles. So that, I think, is a good idea, just another five or ten seconds and we'll shut it off.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: That's fine.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Great.
MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. We'll shut down at 02.57.27.2. And, Mr. President, I do not have any further questions and the trial video, P991, and the transcript, P008, are already in evidence -- 1008 are 6969 already in evidence. The stills book which is P00624 has some stills in it from some of the video that you have not yet seen, so I think to be correct, we should just MFI this and we'll provide you with a complete stills book that reflects all the video you've seen which basically acts as a guide for the video. If we could keep this MFI'd, I think it would be more appropriate because it has stills in it of material that has not been entered into court that she has not spoken about.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: That's fine P00624 will be still marked for identification.
MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I need a small clarification. Does the Prosecution intend to submit a new book of stills or Srebrenica trial video? Are they preparing something additional, something new, are we talking about the compilation of stills that have already been disclosed to the Defence?
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
MR. McCLOSKEY: As I hope we all recall, Mr. Janc has testified, in fact, I think he needs to be cross-examined on points related to videos that he saw. There was some of Mladic and others. So there's video that we had recently that we got after the creation of the trial video. And so what we are proposing to do is make one big complete version of all our video in chronological order, put it on DVDs, and get it to the parties and get it into evidence so that there's these DVDs with the complete version so we don't have to fish through e-court for the various segments. And along with that complete version of the DVDs 6970 of the video, we will have the stills. I think 80, 90 per cent of them are already in this book, but they will just be stills from the video that the Defence has had for ages. And so there will be nothing new, nothing the Defence hasn't seen, but we just think it's always a good idea when you are watching a video to have the still book so you can see who these people are, where the locations are. So nothing new, just an updated version to reflect the material that's come in more recently after these exhibits were made. That's the idea.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Gajic, does that clarify the situation for you? Thank you.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Just one last question, just for our planning purposes. We do have Mr. Janc available to continue his cross-examination on his forensic report or begin his cross-examination on his video testimony, and if we could get an estimate of how long the cross of Ms. Gallagher might take, that will help us plan and everyone know what is in store for us.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir or Mr. Gajic, are you in a position to give such an estimation?
MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] As far as Mr. Janc's cross-examination concerns with regard to mass graves and the DNA identification processes, we spoke to the OTP and we thought that it would be best to continue that after we have heard all of their experts. Let me just confer with Mr. Tolimir with regards to the cross-examination 6971 of Ms. Gallagher.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to welcome Ms. Gallagher and everybody else. Let's answer Mr. McCloskey's question by saying that we will probably be able to end by the end of today. We will just have a few questions about the technical editing of the film and then we can move on. Thank you.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think now the situation is clear. Mr. McCloskey.
MR. McCLOSKEY: There's one part, the -- remember Mr. Janc has testified about various videos, you remember the Skorpion video. I mean, he testified at length. That's not forensic. He is ready to be cross-examined on that, and I think he should be cross-examined if they want to end -- and we need tomorrow. We need to be in court tomorrow so could that be addressed as well.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Gajic.
MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] We wouldn't have a problem with continuing the cross-examination of Mr. Janc regarding video-clips and other exhibits that were shown during his testimony. Let's just confirm that the person who actually took the video is also coming to testify and hopefully he will be here soon.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. Mr. McCloskey.
MR. McCLOSKEY: If we could go into private session, I can answer part of that. I think it might be of interest.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Private.
(Private session) 6972
(page redacted) 6973
(5 lines redacted)
THE REGISTRAR: We are in public session, Your Honours.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. Mr. Tolimir, your cross-examination, please.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. Cross-examination by Mr. Tolimir:
Q. [Interpretation] Ms. Gallagher, at the outset of your testimony, when your summary was read out, you said that you were a member of the San Francisco police. At least that's what I noted. I may be mistaken. And then you said that you were transferred to the prosecutor's office here in order to work on the Srebrenica case. Am I correct? That's the 32nd minute of this film when you said that. It's not that important. I would like to confirm that for your own benefit.
A. I actually worked for the San Francisco Police Department, then I transferred to the district attorney's office, the prosecutor's office in San Francisco and worked there for eight years before I came to the OTP here.
Q. Thank you. Were you transferred or did you just simply join a new institution, did you simply take a new position?
A. Between the police department and the district attorney's office 6974 in San Francisco, it's initially a transfer and then I actually resigned from the police department and was then re-employed by the district attorney's office.
Q. Thank you. At first did people join the OTP by having been assigned to work there by their original employer and only then did they actually become hired properly by that new institution?
A. Well, they will be hired by the OTP. They can -- in my situation as I took a leave of absence initially from the district attorney's office in San Francisco for two years, and then after two years decided to resign from the district attorney's office, I think there are other cases where people will have longer leaves from, let's say, their national, local police departments, but they are hired by the ICTY. But they can -- afterwards they have the option after a certain number of years to return to their -- their local police or their local office.
Q. Thank you for the explanation. I just wanted to know whether you were a member of the San Francisco institutions and the OTP at the same time, and you provided a valid explanation. Thank you. On page 8 of the transcript in the first part of your testimony, line 11, said Ms. Fracassetti, and I don't know whether I remember the name correctly, worked at the OTP and her task was to compile videotape about Srebrenica. Did I quote you properly and is that correct?
A. When she was hired to make the video, she was hired by the OTP. It wasn't at a time I was working for the OTP. I didn't actually start here until 2006. And at that time she had already -- was already employed by the Registry here at the ICTY. So just to clarify, we did 6975 not overlap working for the OTP at the same time.
Q. Thank you. On page 10, lines 11, 12, and forward, you answered to the Prosecutor's question about the video materials, you said that when she was making that video, she corrected some previous mistakes. I don't think that I understood you properly, what did you mean when you said that?
A. I have to admit, I don't know what that means, the sentence about she corrected some previous mistakes. Maybe I can look exactly at what I said, but there wouldn't have been any mistakes in the video footage. She edited footage from, you know, original raw footage and made this compilation video, so there wouldn't have been any prior mistakes that I can think of that could possibly have existed. So I'm not quite sure what that means.
Q. Thank you. The Prosecutor also asked you how you got hold of that video footage and you told him that the Muslim side provided it to you. My question is: Why did you not take these videos from the Serbian radio and television because this footage had been broadcast?
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Could we get some specificity. There was a lot of footage provided by Muslim sources, Serb sources, international sources. For her to be able to answer that, we need to know what he is talking about.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Transcript page 5992. The witness may see what she said and then perhaps answer. Lines 8 6976 through 10. Thank you, Aleksandar.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Ms. Gallagher, are you now able to see this specific part of your testimony?
THE WITNESS: Yes, I am. In particular to this footage that was seised in 1995 in Sarajevo by Jean-Rene Ruez and the interpreter, I think it was a matter of access, that is where they were able to get it at that time and it had been compiled by the police in Sarajevo off of the TV and off of Srpska Radio TV. A little bit later, I know that investigators had gotten footage from SR Srpska Radio TV directly, but not at that time in 1995.
MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
Q. Thank you. Immediately after that, and you can follow the transcript, you say to Mr. McCloskey that part of the material originates from 1995 and it came from the movie "Cry From the Grave" made by Antelope. What kind of material is it? Are these original -- is this original video footage or was it filmed for the purposes of the movie?
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Gajic.
MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] We need page 5993, lines 8 through 14. I believe that's the passage that Mr. Tolimir meant to quote from.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. We have it now on the screen.
MR. McCLOSKEY: And for the record, he said 1995 and we clearly see this is 1999, and if those mistakes are going to be made constantly, it's going to be really very difficult for this witness to be able to sort this out and I know the General can be precise. 6977
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Ms. Gallagher, the question was: "What kind of material is it? Are these original -- is this original video footage or was it filmed for the purposes of the movie?"
THE WITNESS: The footage that we got from Antelope Productions in 1999, what has been used in the Srebrenica trial video, is the original footage that they had obtained from various sources from 1995. So there's nothing in the video that was filmed in our trial video that was filmed in 1999.
MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
Q. Thank you. Is there anything that was directed in this "Cry From the Grave" movie? Like, for instance, Zoran Petrovic did when he was driving and talking to people, staging his own scenes?
A. In terms of the documentary "A Cry from the Grave," at least to explain this a bit more, the footage that was taken from that documentary that we received is raw footage from 1995 and there's nothing directed in that that is in our trial video. In terms of Zoran Petrovic's video, footage, is anything directed, no, I would say it's raw footage and he will be able to explain that better for you. In terms of the -- perhaps the staged incident that you are speaking of, that was what we spoke about the other day with the Pragas shooting up into the hills. It was staged, let's say, by Ljubisa Borovcanin for the cameras, but I don't believe that neither Ljubisa Borovcanin or Zoran Petrovic would say that it was -- he directed it or it was -- that Zoran Petrovic himself directed it. It was for the effect for the cameras to capture it. And I don't think specifically for a documentary, just for -- to have such 6978 footage.
Q. Did they shoot randomly or did they shoot at some predefined targets? Did you investigate into that?
A. I did speak with the -- as I mentioned before, the aimer of the Praga, and he said that they were shooting indiscriminately into the hills. It just coincidentally happens to be at when the column was also walking through.
Q. Does that mean that they were not aiming at the column, that they were, in fact, shooting indiscriminately, randomly, as he said?
A. I would have to answer I really don't know.
Q. Then you explained why something is edited, and you said to the Prosecutor in order to leave out irrelevant or unnecessary material, does that mean that by the same token you can add something to the footage?
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Again if he could be made clearer. He was first talking about the Petrovic video where there was quite a bit of testimony about adding and editing and shell casings and meals ready to eat. Now, I think he is referring to Ms. Fracassetti's work, but if he could be made clear so the witness does not have to guess, because it's not -- it's just not clear and she shouldn't have to guess.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, could you respond to that.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. The witness does not have to speculate. Mr. McCloskey stopped the movie at 22.11.25 and then there was discussion about editing. I'm just asking in the process of editing, you can leave something out, but does that mean you can also add 6979 something? My assistant will check the page reference. The first question was of general nature about editing because the lady explained that long footage was shortened.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: You wanted to give a reference, but it seems to be not possible. I think it's really a quite simple question. Let the witness answer, Mr. McCloskey.
THE WITNESS: Well, with editing it's always going to be a choice of what is -- what is placed or added or put into a video and what is taken out. It's a choice of what -- of the raw footage of what you use. It's not -- perhaps you mean adding, as into adding something new or something current, that is not the case with our trial video. I know that the director of the video had to make choices of all of the hours and hours of raw footage ever what should be -- you know, what should be used to make the trial video. And obviously there's a lot that needs to be left out, otherwise we'd have just too long a trial video and it wouldn't be very coherent. But in terms of -- there's nothing that is added per se that is taken from some place else or something new that's put in. It's just a selection process of what is compiled for the current video.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, the problem with that is, we've had testimony here about editing done by Mr. Petrovic and editing done by Ms. Fracassetti. In a closing brief, we don't know which one that could refer to, and the Defence will take that and refer it to one or the other, when she is just guessing and speaking in general terms. So 6980 unless he can -- he can tell us what is he talking about, we don't know what her answer means. She went to Ms. Fracassetti because it seemed like that is what he meant, but he -- unless he gives her a precise way, the answer will get taken and be twisted out of context. That's why questions must be more precise than that, in my view.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Everybody will be in a position to check the transcript and to have the best understanding of it. Mr. Tolimir, carry on, please.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
Q. Please, I'm not trying to be difficult. I just want to elicit information from you as an expert and you are also more expert than Mr. McCloskey because you investigated this. I'm not trying to put you in a difficult position. If you don't know, just say you don't know. What I want to know is if I have doubts about the veracity of this shortened version of the video footage, can I check the omitted parts of the video which would change the meaning of what was left? It's like editing a transcript. When you take out certain passages, it may change the context of what remains.
A. Absolutely. Everyone should look at the raw footage that is -- that is underlying, that was used to make the trial video, and, you know, that's what I did myself before coming in here so that I had a good sense of what was edited and the complete footage that exists out there. So absolutely, you'll see it stays very true to the nature of the raw footage. It's shortened and if I can clarify my answer before, I really 6981 was speak being the entirety of the trial video. And that is separate from, I think -- maybe just to clarify Mr. McCloskey's point, too, about what is an addition to a video, I think he, in particular, was speaking about the additions in Zoran Petrovic's footage, such as the ammunition that was shown or the food ration. Those bits were added in by him. That's not what I'm talking about in terms of our trial video. It's a very separate matter. The trial video is decisions of looking at raw footage and deciding what gets used to make the trial video.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. The time was running. I think we have to adjourn for today. If you have some more questions, you may put them to the witness tomorrow and the Prosecution -- please wait a moment.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I just --
JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please wait a moment. Mr. McCloskey must have the chance for re-examination and we are not so much under time pressure that we must finish today. If there's only one question left, perhaps you make a -- but you have the possibility to continue tomorrow.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have more than one question. I just thought that I would put one additional question on this subject, but if there's no time, I'll do it tomorrow.
JUDGE FLUEGGE: We should and have to adjourn for today. Ms. Gallagher, please be reminded no contact about the content of your evidence to either party, please. We adjourn on resume tomorrow morning 9.00 in courtroom.
--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.46 p.m. 6982 to be reconvened on Friday, the 29th day of
October, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.