Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 4620

1 Wednesday, 18 April 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva, you are to continue with your

7 examination-in-chief.

8 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President. Good morning to you and

9 to Your Honours

10 WITNESS: WITNESS W-116 [Resumed]

11 Examination by Mr. Sachdeva: [Continued]

12 Q. Good morning, 116. I think I have about 40 minutes left, so we

13 are going to try to be as quick as possible this morning. We finished

14 yesterday with your sketch that you produced regarding the incident in

15 Hrasnica on the 7th of April, 1995, and now I want to show you another

16 document.

17 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, just for your information, this

18 exhibit or this 65 ter document that I'm going to show the witness, I

19 indicated to the Defence just over 24 hours prior to the witness'

20 testimony, so, in other words, it wasn't within the 48 hours, but I have

21 discussed this with counsel and I understand that she was no objection to

22 me using this document. Just for your information.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Very good.

24 MR. SACHDEVA: Could I have 65 ter 787E brought up on the screen,

25 please, and if it could not be broadcast.

Page 4621

1 Q. Witness, while that is being brought up, after your investigation

2 in Hrasnica, did you produce a forensic report on your on-site

3 investigation?

4 A. Yes. I made a report on the criminal investigation of the scene.

5 Q. On the screen now, on the right-hand side, do you see the report

6 that you made on that day?

7 A. Yes, I do.

8 MR. SACHDEVA: If we could just move to the next page, please.

9 Q. Do you see your signature there, at the bottom of the page?

10 A. Yes, I do.

11 Q. Do you see a name there, "Borislav Stankov"?

12 A. Yes, I do. Borislav Stankov was my supervisor. He was an

13 electrical engineer and an expert in ballistics.

14 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I tender this document into

15 evidence, under seal.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: We admit it.

17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will become P553, under seal.


19 Q. Witness, yesterday, when we described the role that you would play

20 in these investigations, you said that you took photographs. Did you, on

21 this occasion, take photographs of the incident site?

22 A. Yes. I took photographs of the scene.

23 MR. SACHDEVA: If I could ask that 65 ter 00193 be brought up on

24 the screen, please.

25 Q. Do you recognise, well, firstly, this photograph as the one that

Page 4622

1 you took on the scene?

2 A. Yes, I do. That's the photograph of the place of impact of this

3 explosive device.

4 MR. SACHDEVA: If we could go to the next page, please.

5 Q. Witness 116, what do we see here on this photograph?

6 A. In this photograph, we see the house where the explosive device

7 landed; and in the background, you can see the neighbouring houses in the

8 same street.

9 Q. And did the neighbouring houses sustain damage as well?

10 A. Yes, they did. The roofs of the neighbouring houses were damaged

11 and, of course, windows were broken, more precisely, the 11 neighbouring

12 houses were rendered roofless.

13 Q. Now, in my office before you testified, did you review these two

14 photographs in addition to the series of photographs that you produced on

15 this incident?

16 A. Yes, I did.

17 Q. And do you recall that in that series of photographs there were

18 two or three photographs of a deceased person?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Did you take those photographs?

21 A. Yes, I did.

22 Q. Where did you take those photographs? Where was the person when

23 you took the photographs?

24 A. The persons had already been removed from the site, and they were

25 in a makeshift mortuary set up within the compound of the mosque in

Page 4623

1 Hrasnica.

2 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, in the interest the time, I tender

3 this series of photographs, if it is amenable to Your Honours, without

4 going through each one individual.

5 JUDGE HARHOFF: How many are there?

6 MR. SACHDEVA: There are about 31 of them.

7 [Trial Chamber confers]

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic, any comments on that?

9 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

10 According to my calculation, there should be 33 photographs. That

11 would be right. And we know who has taken the photographs so we do not

12 object to these photographs being tendered.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll admit them.

14 THE REGISTRAR: As P554, Your Honours.

15 MR. SACHDEVA: I'm grateful to counsel for the advice.

16 Q. Now, Witness, I'm going to play a video for you, and I want you to

17 first see it and then I'll ask you a question.

18 MR. SACHDEVA: If I could have V000-7160 played in the courtroom.

19 [Videotape played]


21 Q. Witness, do you recognise that location?

22 A. Well, based on this single shot, I can't say that I do. You just

23 started playing the video.

24 Q. Okay. Well, we'll keep playing it.

25 [Videotape played]

Page 4624

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. This is the house that had

2 been hit by an explosive device.


4 Q. And this house was destroyed in the investigation that you

5 attended; is that right?

6 A. I don't understand your question.

7 Q. I just want you to confirm that the house we saw in this video was

8 the house that was -- that sustained damage in the incident that you

9 investigated on the 7th of April, 1995 in Hrasnica?

10 A. Yes. Yes, that's right.

11 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I tender that into evidence, this

12 excerpt.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: We admit it.

14 THE REGISTRAR: As P555, Your Honours.


16 Q. Now, Witness, I'm going to ask you about other investigations that

17 you conducted.

18 Firstly, do you recall investigating an incident on the 24th of

19 May, 1995 at Safeta Zajke Street, number 43.

20 A. Yes, I do.

21 Q. If I was to show you a map, would you be able to mark the location

22 where you attended the investigation?

23 A. Yes, yes.

24 MR. SACHDEVA: Could I ask that 65 ter 2872 be brought up on the

25 screen, please, and if the central part could be enlarged.

Page 4625

1 Q. Witness, on this map, can you see -- well, firstly, do you see the

2 location of Safeta Zajke Street on that map?

3 A. Yes, I do. It's situated in the left-hand corner.

4 MR. SACHDEVA: Perhaps the map could be -- we could scroll towards

5 the -- fantastic. Thank you.

6 Q. Witness, if could you see the street, I would like you with the

7 assistance of the court usher to mark the street where the incident

8 occurred.

9 A. That's the street, Safeta Zajke Street.

10 Q. And do you know whereabouts on that street the number 43 or where

11 the incident occurred is?

12 A. Roughly speaking, in this area here.

13 Q. Can I ask you just to put the letters SZ above that spot, so to

14 speak.

15 A. [Marks]

16 Q. Now, in the investigation that you conducted, what -- what did you

17 do when you got to the scene?

18 A. When I arrived at the scene, the first thing I did was to make a

19 broad overview of the scene; then I photographed the general area of the

20 incident, and thereafter I photographed the place of impact of this

21 explosive device.

22 After that, I marked certain pieces of evidence with numbers; that

23 is to say, fragments of the projectile, and other physical evidence that

24 could be found around the place of impact; then I sketched the site, and I

25 photographed also the damage sustained by the surrounding houses as a

Page 4626

1 result of the impact.

2 Q. Do you recall if there were any casualties in this incident?

3 A. Yes, there were casualties.

4 Q. Were these casualties civilian or military personnel?

5 A. They were all civilians.

6 Q. I'm going to show you a document.

7 MR. SACHDEVA: Perhaps we can have this map tendered into

8 evidence, although I would ask -- I'm going to ask the witness to make

9 more markings on it, but it is probably better to have it tendered first.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We admit it.

11 THE REGISTRAR: As P556, Your Honours.

12 MR. SACHDEVA: If I could now ask for --

13 [Prosecution counsel confer]

14 MR. SACHDEVA: -- 65 ter 73, 00073, and I'm interested in pages 25

15 to 28; and, again, it should not be broadcast, please.

16 Q. Witness, on the right-hand side of the screen, do you see a

17 document, and do you see your name and signature there?

18 A. Yes, I do. That's the sketch of the site which I made on the 24th

19 of May, 1995.

20 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I understand that the translation is

21 not in e-court, but I do have hard copies for the benefit of the Bench.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please distribute them.

23 MR. SACHDEVA: If I could ask that we could move to the next page,

24 please.

25 Q. Witness, is this the legend to the sketch that you compiled on

Page 4627

1 that day?

2 A. Yes, that's the legend.

3 MR. SACHDEVA: If we could move to the next two pages and if they

4 could be put side by side.

5 Q. Is that the sketch that you drew, Witness?

6 A. Yes, it is.

7 Q. Can you say from that sketch where the projectile landed?

8 A. The projectile landed on Safeta Zajke Street. It's marked with

9 number 1, and this is where the physical evidence were concentrated.

10 That's the place of impact.

11 MR. SACHDEVA: I tender these -- these pages into evidence,

12 Mr. President, four pages.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We admit them.

14 THE REGISTRAR: As P557, Your Honours.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These two pages of the sketch should

16 be put together. These are actually two halves of one and the same

17 sketch.

18 MR. SACHDEVA: I don't know if that is possible in terms of.

19 THE WITNESS: Yeah, it's okay.

20 MR. SACHDEVA: Perhaps the Prosecution could provide a free

21 version to replace these two pages at a later date.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, let's proceed.


24 Q. Witness, thank you.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic.

Page 4628

1 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

2 I have the same question as yesterday. Could we number the pages

3 of the 65 ter document, the pages that comprise document P554 [as

4 interpreted].

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: What are the pages, Mr. Sachdeva?

6 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I believe I read them out when I

7 asked for the pages to be brought up, but they are pages 25 to 28 of the

8 composite exhibit.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.


11 Q. Witness, did you also produce an on-site forensic report for this

12 incident?

13 A. Yes, of course.

14 MR. SACHDEVA: Could I ask that pages 29 and 30 of exhibit -- 65

15 ter 73 be brought up, please.

16 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: The exhibit previously

17 referred to is P557 and not P554.

18 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, the translation should be in the

19 bundle that was handed out.

20 Q. Is this your report, your forensic report, Witness?

21 A. Yes, it is.

22 MR. SACHDEVA: May we just go back to the first page, please.

23 Q. Witness, I want you to look at this paragraph and in the

24 penultimate sentence, it says -- it reads, "The projectile was fired from

25 the south-east." Do you see that?

Page 4629

1 A. Yes, I do.

2 Q. On what basis did you include that in your report?

3 A. When I arrived at the scene, fragments of the projectile were on

4 the asphalt surface of the street where it landed, and this is the part of

5 the street where cars pass by. These fragments were embedded in the

6 asphalt under a certain angle, indicating the south-easterly direction.

7 It also made a funnel-shaped crater in the same direction.

8 Q. Was it you who determined this? In other words, was it you who

9 observed the funnel-shaped crater and determined the direction of fire, or

10 were there other people in the team that did that?

11 A. Yes, I established that. However, in most cases, we had

12 ballistics experts on the team with us who gave the ultimate conclusion

13 about the direction and origin of fire.

14 Q. And was that the case in this instance?

15 A. In this particular instances, no, it wasn't. I don't think it

16 was.

17 MR. SACHDEVA: If we could go back to the map, please, the one

18 that has just been marked.

19 Q. Witness, from the place where you've marked -- where you've marked

20 that the incident took place, can you draw a line in the direction from

21 which the projectile came; in other words, from south-east?

22 A. [In English] Approximately, like this.

23 MR. SACHDEVA: I tender this map into evidence.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: We admit it.

25 THE REGISTRAR: As P558, Your Honours.

Page 4630

1 [Trial Chamber confers]

2 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, could the witness

3 be a little -- could the witness be a little bit more specific, please.

4 The arrow showing this direction, what direction is it? South-east?

5 South-west? North? We see an arrow, but did he not really explain

6 anything.


8 Q. Witness, in your report, it's indicated that the direction of fire

9 was south-east. Can you explain what this arrow represents ?

10 A. [Interpretation] That's something I assumed that it came

11 approximately from that direction. I'm not completely sure that it came

12 from that direction because I was a scene of the crime officer, not a

13 forensic ballistics expert that could determine the trajectory precisely.

14 My job was to make an on-site investigation of the scene, collect

15 all the clues and evidence, all the fragments of shells, and all the other

16 evidence related to the event. Determining the direction and the

17 trajectory of the shell was not strictly my job.

18 Q. Let me ask you, Witness, on this map, are you able to indicate

19 north and south and east and west?

20 A. Roughly, this is north, and this is south.

21 Q. So in relation to that, where would south-east be?

22 A. Well, it would be like this.

23 Q. So the first arrow you drew, to your knowledge, is that correct or

24 incorrect?

25 A. Not correct.

Page 4631

1 Q. Can you put a P at the bottom of the second arrow that you drew,

2 please.

3 A. I can.

4 MR. SACHDEVA: Does that clarify for Your Honours?

5 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you, Mr. Prosecutor.

6 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Your Honour. I would like to tender

7 this map into evidence, please.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's admitted.

9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this map with the new markings will

10 remain Exhibit P558.

11 MR. SACHDEVA: May I also tender pages 29 and 30 of 65 ter 73 into

12 evidence, under seal.


14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be P559, under seal.

15 MR. SACHDEVA: Could I ask that pages 31 and 32 from that same

16 exhibit -- same 65 ter number be shown on the screen; again, not to be

17 broadcast, please.

18 Q. Witness, do you see a document there on the screen?

19 A. Yes, I see it.

20 Q. And in the middle of document, do you see your name?

21 A. I do.

22 Q. What is this document?

23 A. It is an official report concerning the events of the 24th of May,

24 1995, when a modified air bomb landed, and it lists the persons present at

25 the on-site investigation.

Page 4632

1 Q. Does it relate to the incident at Safeta Zajke Street?

2 A. Yes.

3 MR. SACHDEVA: I tender this document under seal, Mr. President.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's admitted.

5 THE REGISTRAR: As P560, under seal, Your Honours.

6 MR. SACHDEVA: And, lastly, can I ask for 65 ter 73 to be shown on

7 the screen; and for the benefit of counsel, that is pages 22 and 23 of

8 the -- of 65 ter 73.

9 There should be a translation for this, if you -- it's got a

10 separate 65 ter number, 73H, which has the translation along with it.

11 Thank you.

12 Q. Witness, do you see this document on the screen?

13 A. I do.

14 Q. And what is this document?

15 A. This document is a report of the section for countersabotage

16 protection, KDZ, and they accompany us scene of scene of crime officers on

17 on-site investigations, to see whether there are any remaining explosive

18 devices that could kill all the personnel that approaches the scene. They

19 dug up the remnants of that projectile and provided their expertise for

20 the fragments.

21 Q. And the countersabotage protection, the KDZ, did that unit include

22 ballistics experts to your knowledge?

23 A. Ballistic forensic experts within the bomb squad, this section for

24 countersabotage protection, know all about explosive devices; and based on

25 parts of projectiles, they are able to recognise the type of shell.

Page 4633

1 However, ballistic experts formed a separate section within the group of

2 forensic experts.

3 Q. This investigation report, does it relate to the incident at

4 Safeta Zajke Street, number 43.

5 A. Yes, yes. This report deals with that incident, yes.

6 MR. SACHDEVA: I tender this document into evidence,

7 Mr. President.


9 THE REGISTRAR: As P561, Your Honours.


11 Q. Now, with respect to this incident, did you also take photographs?

12 A. Yes, I did for the photofile.

13 Q. And were you given an opportunity look through these photographs

14 before you testified?

15 A. I did.

16 MR. SACHDEVA: May I ask that 65 ter 00865 be brought up, please;

17 again, not to be broadcast.

18 Q. Is that your signature, if you can read it, at the bottom?

19 A. No, this is not my signature.

20 Q. Can you see your name there?

21 A. No, I don't see it. The printed part is not really legible.

22 Q. Can you see it now?

23 A. No, no.

24 MR. SACHDEVA: Perhaps we can move to the next page, please.

25 Q. Did you take these photographs?

Page 4634

1 A. Yes, I made them.

2 Q. If the signature -- if you don't recognise the signature on the

3 front page, whose signature was that? Do you know?

4 A. I don't recognise precisely whose signature it was, but I can

5 explain one thing. The thing is that the people killed in this incident

6 were transported to a mortuary on the other end of town, and that's why

7 photographs were made of the bodies. And another part of my team of scene

8 of the crime officers took the photographs of bodies. I probably provided

9 my part of the report and they provided theirs.

10 Q. So in this series of photographs, the ones of the scene were taken

11 by you; is that right?

12 A. Yes. I took photographs of the scene.

13 Q. And in this series of photographs, the photographs of the bodies,

14 who were they taken by?

15 A. I couldn't tell you that.

16 Q. Was it someone in your department?

17 A. Yes. Yes, certainly.

18 Q. Why didn't you take photographs of the bodies?

19 A. I did not photograph the bodies because the hospital, together

20 with the mortuary, were on the other end of town. On that day, the

21 shelling was intense; and, at that time, I was at the police station in

22 that part of up to be able to more efficiently cover that part of Novi

23 Grad municipality where the shell landed. Moving around was very

24 dangerous during intense shelling.

25 Q. So despite the fact that you don't have your signature on the

Page 4635

1 front page and you weren't able to discern your name, can you confirm to

2 the Court that the photographs of the scene were taken by you on that day?

3 A. Yes. I am certain that I made these photographs.

4 Q. And the photographs taken of the bodies in the mortuary by a

5 colleague from your department, can you confirm that they were also

6 official photographs?

7 A. Yes. Yes, they are official photographs.

8 MR. SACHDEVA: I tender these photographs into evidence,

9 Mr. President, under seal.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: They are admitted.

11 THE REGISTRAR: As P562, under seal, Your Honours.


13 Q. Witness, on that day, on the 24th of May, 1995, did you also --

14 did you investigate another incident?

15 A. Yes. On that day, as I said before, there was intense shelling on

16 Sarajevo, especially the Novi Grad municipality where I was at the police

17 station, and that's why I didn't go to other locations.

18 Q. And the incident that you investigated, where did that incident

19 occur?

20 A. That incident occurred at a location overlooking the transformer

21 station in Novi Grad municipality, also providing for Novo Sarajevo.

22 Q. Do you remember the location or the name of the street or the

23 location where the transformer station was?

24 A. I remember -- normally, I remember, but the name of the street

25 eludes me at the moment.

Page 4636

1 Q. Did you produce a sketch when you went to the investigation for

2 this incident?

3 A. Yes. I took photographs of the scene and a sketch as well.

4 MR. SACHDEVA: Could I ask that page -- page 9 of 65 ter 00076 be

5 brought up, please; again, not to be broadcast.

6 Mr. President, might I inquire how much time I have left?

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: I have to say none. You are now at the

8 discretion of the Chamber.

9 MR. SACHDEVA: May I therefore ask leave to continue for a further

10 five to eight minutes?



13 Q. Witness, is this a sketch -- is this the first page of the sketch

14 that you produced?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And do you see where it says, "Mjesto"?

17 A. Mjesto and Majdanska Street. The location is Majdanska Street, no

18 number, transformer station Novi Grad.

19 MR. SACHDEVA: Could we just go to the next three pages.

20 Q. Witness, just have a look and confirm that this is indeed your

21 sketch and your legend.

22 A. Yes. There is the key and the description of events.

23 MR. SACHDEVA: The next page, please.

24 Q. Is that the sketch?

25 A. Yes. This is a sketch, the sketch of the scene where the

Page 4637

1 projectile landed.

2 MR. SACHDEVA: I would ask that pages 9, 10, 11, and 12 be

3 admitted into evidence, under seal, Mr. President.


5 THE REGISTRAR: As P563, under seal, Your Honours.


7 Q. Did you also produce an on-site report, Witness?

8 A. I did. I did an on-site report.

9 MR. SACHDEVA: Could we move to page 5 of this 65 ter number,

10 please.

11 Q. Is this your on-site investigation report, Witness?

12 A. Yes. This is my report.

13 Q. And do you see at the end of the paragraph, does it give a

14 direction from which the projectile came?

15 A. Yes. It says the projectile came from the area of Paljevac,

16 south-east.

17 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we move back to the map, please, which is

18 Exhibit --

19 [Prosecution counsel confer]

20 MR. SACHDEVA: -- 558. Actually, there should be another.

21 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Prosecutor, while we're waiting for the right

22 map to show up, could you please ask the witness if he is able to indicate

23 or to identify the kind of projectile that landed on the 24th of May?

24 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes, Your Honour.

25 Q. Witness, with respect to the incident at the transformer station,

Page 4638

1 do you know what type of projectile exploded?

2 A. I don't know what type of projectile exploded, but I know for a

3 fact that it had huge destructive power, made an enormous hole in the

4 ground and vast damage to surrounding buildings. It was probably a

5 modified air bomb, because not a single projectile of smaller calibre

6 could have produced such huge devastation.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, if I may. Unfortunately, we don't

8 have the markings that were made the second time around on the map. We're

9 unable to locate them at this time. Perhaps the counsel would like to

10 have the witness to make the markings again, and we can resave the

11 exhibit.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: That is unfortunate. Well, let that be down.


14 Q. Witness, unfortunately, due a technical hitch, the initial

15 markings that you made were not recorded. Can you again start by

16 indicating north, south, east, and west.

17 A. [Marks]

18 [Trial Chamber confers]

19 Q. And from the location where -- and this refers to the incident at

20 Safeta Zajka Street, can you draw an arrow or a line in the direction from

21 which the projectile came; that is, south-east, as contained in your

22 report?

23 A. Very well. If you want me to, I can indicate the place where the

24 projectile landed.

25 Q. Well, first, I want you to indicate the direction from which the

Page 4639

1 projectile came with respect to the Safeta Zajke incident, the first

2 incident, because those markings have unfortunately been -- have not been

3 recorded.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the arrow which --

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I just did.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, that is not what you indicated first.

7 Well, I would say not generally.

8 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, perhaps can I explain because the

9 witness did say, "Very well. If you want me to, I can indicate the place

10 where the projectile landed." In other words, I submit he is referring to

11 this present case, this present incident.



14 Q. Witness, you see where you have written SZ there?

15 A. Yes. Yes, I can see it.

16 Q. And that stands for Safeta Zajke Street, right?

17 A. Yes, that's Safeta Zajke Street.

18 Q. And do you recall in your report that you produced the direction

19 of fire for that incident was recorded as south-east; do you remember

20 that?

21 A. Yes, I do.

22 Q. And a moment ago you indicated with an arrow that direction. Do

23 you remember doing that beforehand?

24 A. Yes, I do.

25 Q. Unfortunately, that was not recorded. Can you do that again now,

Page 4640

1 please.

2 A. Very well.

3 Q. And just to be clear for this exhibit, the arrow that you have --

4 the horizontal arrow above the one that you have just drawn, is that a

5 correct or incorrect depiction of the direction?

6 A. It doesn't exactly reflect the direction from which the projectile

7 came.

8 Q. The arrow that you have just drawn, can you put a P underneath

9 that, please.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Why don't have you him delete the arrow which

11 doesn't depict the direction.

12 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I had thought about that, but my

13 understanding was that that -- that is evidence which Defence might want

14 to --

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: I see. They might want to refer to that. Okay.

16 Right.


18 Q. Witness, now can you mark -- with respect to Majdanska, the

19 transformer station, can you mark the location where the projectile

20 landed?

21 A. It's been deleted. I marked it twice, but after a few seconds the

22 colour just vanishes.

23 It's been deleted, but now I have marked it with colour blue.

24 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm sorry, but have I

25 an objection regarding the colour, because I intend to ask the witness to

Page 4641

1 mark this map with blue. Maybe there's a third colour available for

2 Defence, but it would nice if Prosecution could stick to red.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, yes. Well, you have a patent on blue, so

4 select another colour.

5 MR. SACHDEVA: I didn't -- I actually didn't ask for it to be

6 blue, so I'd like to continue in red.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It has been deleted again.

8 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Well, maybe use another colour, but

9 not blue.

10 MR. SACHDEVA: I think now it seems to be working.

11 THE REGISTRAR: If I may, it probably problem appears to be that

12 when the witness is marking on the SMART Board, he is holding down the pen

13 and moving it. If he could be directed to mark it and then remove the pen

14 immediately.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

16 MR. SACHDEVA: Fabulous. Thank you.

17 Q. Witness, Can you just put the letter M by that spot and be sure

18 to remove the pen as soon as you have finished.

19 A. [Marks]

20 Q. And the arrow that you have drawn, the one without the P towards

21 the bottom of the page, is that the direction of fire for this incident in

22 Majdanska?

23 A. Yes, yes. If you want me, I can put a letter M next to this

24 arrow.

25 Q. Yes, that would be fine. Thank you.

Page 4642

1 A. [Marks]

2 MR. SACHDEVA: I ask that this be tendered into evidence,

3 Mr. President.


5 THE REGISTRAR: As P564, Your Honours.

6 MR. SACHDEVA: Might I just inquire that it has been recorded?

7 Thank you.

8 If we can move to page 7 of 65 ter 76, I think it is.

9 Q. Witness, is this an expert report for that incident at Majdanska?

10 A. Yes, it is. The expert analysis was conducted by the KDZ

11 department relating to the incident of the 25th of May, 1995, which took

12 place on Majdanska Street, no number.

13 Q. Does it say 25th or 24th of May?

14 A. Yes, yes, 24th. But the report was compiled on the 25th.

15 Q. Right.

16 MR. SACHDEVA: I tender that into evidence, Mr. President. That's

17 pages 7 and 8.


19 THE REGISTRAR: As P565, Your Honours.

20 MR. SACHDEVA: And, lastly, pages 1 -- sorry, pages 2, 3, and 4

21 I'm interested in of this same ter number.

22 Q. Witness, do you see this document and do you see your name in the

23 middle there?

24 A. Yes, I do.

25 Q. What is this document?

Page 4643

1 A. This is an official report of the Ministry of the Interior on the

2 incident that took place on the 24th of May, 1995 on Safeta Zajke Street

3 outside number 43 and on Majdanska Street, no number, on which occasion

4 four people were killed and 11 other people were injured.

5 Q. And do you recognise this document to be an official report from

6 the CSB? Can you confirm that it is.

7 A. Yes, that's the report.

8 MR. SACHDEVA: I tender this under seal, Mr. President.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic.

10 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

11 Just to be useful, I believe that this document has already been

12 admitted as a P560, and it was also admitted at P313. So maybe it would

13 be better to check right now, to make sure that we don't have any mix-ups.

14 Thank you.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, thank you for that. There is a very

16 fortunate document to be admitted, what, twice and now its admission is

17 being sought a third time.

18 Mr. Court Deputy.

19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, it's not entirely clear what

20 portions of this document have been admitted, and the notes in e-court, on

21 March 2nd, portions of this document were admitted. It says that the

22 admission should top with ERN number 75126 and not include the rest of the

23 medical report. However, it's unclear exactly what that means.

24 [Trial Chamber confers]

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll admit it and note the possible duplication.

Page 4644

1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes P566.


3 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it was admitted

4 earlier as P560 just a few minutes ago. It was admitted as P560. I will

5 use it, which is why I'm taking role of this.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is that so, Mr. Court Deputy?

7 MR. SACHDEVA: As I understand it, I asked for particular pages of

8 the ter number to be admitted, and this particular document is pages 2 and

9 3.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: I see. What was admitted then was a different

11 set of pages.

12 MR. SACHDEVA: That's correct, Mr. President.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Let us proceed.


15 Q. Witness, did you produce photographs on this incident? Witness,

16 did you hear my question? I asked you if you produced photographs with

17 respect to Majdanska Street.

18 A. Yes. I did make photographs, but I was hoping to see them on the

19 screen.

20 Q. I'm going to show you now.

21 MR. SACHDEVA: Could I have 65 ter 0076 brought up on the screen

22 now, please.

23 Can I withdraw that, please. Excuse me. I withdraw that question

24 and in fact the photographs for this incident have been tendered already.

25 I'm now going to move to the final incident.

Page 4645

1 Q. Witness, do you remember investigating an incident on the 16th of

2 June, 1995?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Was this incident at Trg Medjunarodnog Prijateljstva?

5 A. Yes, that is where it happened.

6 Q. And, similarly, did you produce an on-site report, a sketch, and

7 did you take photographs?

8 A. Yes. I produced an on-site report, took photographs, and drew a

9 sketch of the scene.

10 MR. SACHDEVA: Can I ask that 65 ter number 132 be brought up,

11 And I'm interested in the first seven pages. Move to the next page.

12 Q. Witness, do you see a document on the screen; and if you do, can

13 you tell us -- tell the Court what it is.

14 A. This is an Official Note produced by the Novi Grad public security

15 station of the Ministry of the Interior. It relates to an incident which

16 took place on the 16th of June, 1995 at 1520 hours on the street Trg

17 Medjunarodnog Prijateljstva, number 10, where a modified air bomb exploded

18 and slightly injured seven persons but inflicted substantial material

19 damage on the surrounding buildings.

20 Q. Thank you. And in the next paragraph, do you see your name?

21 A. Yes, I do.

22 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I tender this document, under seal.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's admitted.

24 THE REGISTRAR: As P567, under seal, Your Honours.

25 MR. SACHDEVA: That will be page 2 of the 65 ter of 132.

Page 4646

1 Can we now move to the next page, please.

2 Q. Witness, is this your on-site investigation report?

3 A. Yes, that's my report.

4 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we move to the next page, please.

5 Q. Is that your name and signature there at the bottom?

6 A. Yes. This is my name and my signature.

7 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I tender enter pages 3 and 4 of 132,

8 under seal.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We admit it.

10 THE REGISTRAR: As P568, under seal, Your Honours.


12 Q. And, Witness, I'm now going to show you a sketch, the sketch, and

13 this is pages 5, 6 and 7. And if you can just confirm that this is indeed

14 the sketch that you took, that you drew on that incident.

15 A. Yes. This is the sketch that I made in relation to this incident.

16 MR. SACHDEVA: Can we see pages 5 and 6, please.

17 Q. Is that the legend?

18 A. Yes. Yes, this is the legend.

19 MR. SACHDEVA: I tender pages 5, 6, and 7, under seal,

20 Mr. President.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: We admit them.

22 THE REGISTRAR: As P569, under seal, Your Honours.


24 Q. Lastly, Witness - and this is my final question - did you take

25 photographs of this incident?

Page 4647

1 A. Yes, I did. I made a few photographs.

2 MR. SACHDEVA: Could I ask that 65 ter 00076 be brought up.

3 [Prosecution counsel confer]

4 MR. SACHDEVA: My apologies. I think it's ter number 133.

5 Q. Are these the photographs that you took, Witness?

6 A. Yes. These are the photographs, and in them one can clearly see

7 the corner of a multi-story building. It has more than ten floors and the

8 projectile of such an a devastating and destructive power, if it had hit

9 the building, it would have demolished it completely.

10 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Witness.

11 Mr. President, I tender these documents into evidence.


13 THE REGISTRAR: As P570, Your Honours.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic.

15 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

16 Cross-examination by Ms. Isailovic:

17 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Witness. I'm Branislava Isailovic,

18 a lawyer with the Paris Bar, and I defend General Dragomir Milosevic

19 accused in these proceedings, and I'm go to ask you a few questions.

20 I would like to start with the statements that you discussed

21 yesterday with the Prosecutor. Do you remember having done this?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. You made four statements to the Office of the Prosecutor. First

24 one on November 14, 1995, a document that was admitted as P548. In this

25 statement, you mention about your work methods. Do you remember that?

Page 4648

1 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] This is a protected witness with a

2 pseudonym, so I would like the document to be called up on screen but not

3 be broadcast. Can we move to page 2 of this document.

4 Q. Witness, you're talking about your training. I noted that you

5 were trained for your police work during a six-month session. Is that it?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. You started your job in August 1993. Is that it?

8 A. Yes. But initially I attended the scene with a senior technician

9 in order to become more knowledgeable about the practicality aspects of

10 the job.

11 Q. So if I understand you correctly, at first you were a junior

12 technician and you were always working with a senior technician.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Could you tell us when you started doing your on-site

15 investigations alone.

16 A. Well, I started doing my own investigations in late 1993 and early

17 1994. I attended the scenes of minor offences, such as burglaries and

18 things like that; in other words, minor criminal offences.

19 Q. When you started -- when did you start going to on -- when did you

20 start working on on-site investigations alone on more serious offences?

21 A. Well, during 1993, or rather, during 1994, that is to say, late

22 1994 and 1995. But I have to say that whenever some serious incident took

23 place, I always went with a senior technician; and with us there was

24 always, even in minor incidents, we had criminal investigation inspectors

25 and also there was judge go a major incident was involved.

Page 4649

1 And if there were fatalities, there were Court-appointed experts.

2 There were also ballistics experts -- court appointed ballistics experts,

3 as well as members of the staff of the KDZ primarily to provide security

4 for us as a team and to check whether there were any unexploded devices.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. I think you have answered.

6 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

7 Q. Witness, all these people you mentioned, were their names included

8 in the reports?

9 A. Yes. Yes, as a rule.

10 Q. So whenever the investigating magistrate was there, his name would

11 be written among the people in charge of the investigation.

12 A. Yes. However, I didn't include the names. I was focussed only on

13 the technical aspects of the report.

14 Q. Did you know the investigating magistrate personally?

15 A. Not personally. I knew them by sight only. I wasn't close to

16 them or on friendly terms with them.

17 Q. How often do you remember having seen an investigating magistrate

18 that you would know at least by sight.

19 A. You mean outside my work?

20 Q. No, I'm sorry. I'm thinking about seeing this investigating

21 magistrate on-site, where you were actually carrying out an investigation.

22 A. Yes, yes. Whenever there was a serious incident, such as shelling

23 involving a large number of casualties or serious casualties, the whole

24 team would be there, including a judge and UN observers, frequently. UN

25 observers wanted to see with their own eyes what was going on.

Page 4650

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: We have to take the break now.

2 We'll break for 20 minutes.

3 --- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.

4 --- On resuming at 10.55 a.m.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Ms. Isailovic, please continue.

6 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

7 Q. Witness, we will continue on the same topic.

8 So I would like to talk about your work methods as criminal

9 technician on site. Could you please take a look at the page that is on

10 the screen in front of you, and you can use it, of course, to refreshing

11 your memory, if need be.

12 So you were saying that you would always go on site together with

13 the team members, and you would take pictures on site. Is that it?

14 A. Yes, that's correct. The team could number a smaller or larger

15 number of people, but there was always a team.

16 Q. Among the team members, which one was telling you what pictures to

17 take?

18 A. I alone chose which photographs to take, while members of my team

19 would point certain things out to me, things that I may have overlooked,

20 or things I needed to pay special attention to, so that we viewed the

21 crime scene all together. And we all together tried to find clues,

22 evidence, put them on the sketch, and photograph them.

23 Q. Today, we have been able to see a number of photographs that were

24 taken by you. So on the basis of these photographs which we saw and which

25 we might see again today, could you tell me what kind of selection

Page 4651

1 criteria you used when you took these pictures and when you photographed

2 everything that was there?

3 A. The classic procedure, the traditional procedure in conducting an

4 on-site investigation is to inspect the scene broadly and to talk with

5 uniformed policemen securing it, those who were on the scene first,

6 because they have the first basic information about the incident, such as

7 what happened, what the casualties are, et cetera.

8 So there is an interview with them, inspection of the broader area

9 of the scene, photographing of the broader area, photographing of the

10 scene itself without moving any objects, without tampering with the scene

11 in any way.

12 After that, numbers are given to various pieces of evidence. Each

13 piece of evidence is photographed separately, and a measuring tape is

14 placed against evidence to show the exact size and dimensions. After

15 that, when a sketch is made, my first task was to find a basic point of

16 reference, such as the corner of a building, a solid object that is not

17 likely to change in the years to come, and then the distance from that

18 point of reference to various pieces of evidence is taken. On the basis

19 of photographs and the sketch, then a report is made.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just one moment. The question was: "What kind

21 of selection criteria did you use?" You seem to be explaining how you

22 took the photographs. Could you concentrate on the question which was the

23 kind of selection. How did you select the photographs to be taken.

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't understand the question.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, let me ask, Ms. Isailovic. What did you

Page 4652

1 mean by "the selection criteria"?

2 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, what I meant by

3 "selection criteria" was the fact that one chooses one object rather than

4 another. So you photograph a house, for instance, and you don't

5 photograph the house that's next door. You don't photograph the damage

6 caused to a particular building and not to another, because we have seen

7 the pictures that were taken by the witness. So it's a matter of

8 understanding who determined which criteria to apply. So this was my

9 question.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. So was he answering your question?

11 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Not exactly.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, that's what I --

13 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] You quite rightly noticed it.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: When the witness is not answering your question,

15 you should stop him when he is not answering the question.

16 So do you understand what she is asking? Why would you decide to

17 photograph a particular house as against the house that is next door, that

18 is it next to it?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I photographed the place where the

20 shell landed and the houses around it that were damaged by the explosion.

21 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] .

22 Q. Witness, how did you know what kind of damage was caused by the

23 explosion which you were investigating?

24 A. I did not know what kind of damage was involved, but it was

25 obvious that a house was destroyed, half of the roof was missing, all the

Page 4653

1 windows shattered, lots of shrapnel in the walls. When you are in a

2 situation like that, it is evident that you are in a place where something

3 evil was done.

4 Q. I would like to illustrate this with an example.

5 A while ago, we've seen the pictures that were taken of Hrasnica

6 on the 7th of April, 1995. Do you remember this?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. At the time you reached the site, were you aware of other

9 explosions that had taken place in Hrasnica before the 7th of April, 1995?

10 A. Well, I was aware, because all of Sarajevo had been shelled for

11 four years by that time.

12 Q. Precisely, Witness. How did you establish a distinction between

13 the damage caused, let's call it the explosion we are talking -- we are

14 currently talking about, the one which you came to investigate, and the

15 damage caused by the previous explosions?

16 A. The spot where this projectile landed was one where two houses

17 were completely destroyed, and it blew up the roofs of 11 other houses.

18 It was an inhabited area.

19 Q. I shall follow the instructions of the President of the Chamber.

20 This was not my question. How could you establish a distinction

21 in Hrasnica between the damage caused by the explosion we are talking

22 about, the one that took place on the 7th of April, 1995, and the other

23 explosions that occurred before that time?

24 A. Well, at the end of the day, I could not distinguish, but it was

25 my duty as a scene-of-crime officer to photograph the location, to enable

Page 4654

1 later reconstruction, because whatever crime is committed photographs of

2 all the surrounding buildings have to be made in order to enable a

3 reconstruction.

4 Q. Witness, you have conducted other investigations on-site,

5 according to your statements and according to what have you told us today.

6 So you were able to determine where the shot came from or where it was

7 fired from. So how did you establish a distinction between the damage

8 caused and the explosions that occurred? So what did you do to determine

9 the origin of fire?

10 A. That's a difficult question. However, this projectile had

11 enormous destructive power, and it created a scale of devastation that I

12 had not seen before that.

13 Q. I noticed that on the photographs you took, which have now been

14 tendered into evidence, you drew some arrows; is that right?

15 A. Yes, correct.

16 Q. Witness, what do these arrows stand for?

17 A. These arrows show the most probable direction from which the

18 projectile came.

19 Q. And who drew these arrows?

20 A. I did.

21 Q. You draw these areas --

22 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could you kindly repeat

23 your question, please.

24 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] I have been asked to repeat my

25 question.

Page 4655

1 Q. This refers to the time the arrows were drawn. Was it at the time

2 you were developing your photographs? Because I assume you were taking

3 the pictures with a camera, and I assume you weren't able to draw the

4 arrows on the same day. Is that right?

5 A. I used a still camera, and what is made on the spot is a rough

6 sketch. That's when I placed the arrows, because I heard from the

7 uniformed policemen on the spot that there were witnesses, eye-witnesses,

8 who had seen from which direction the projectile had come. That's

9 something that I wasn't able to determine.

10 Q. Thank you for your answer. I would also like to know at what

11 point in time you drew these arrows.

12 A. At the moment when I arrived at the scene to perform the on-site

13 investigation. After the on-site investigation, I must have gotten back

14 to my office, sat down, made that sketch, and made the lines with a ruler

15 to make it look better; whereas, the rough sketch was made on the spot.

16 Q. Witness, I shall repeat my question.

17 So, you took your pictures with a camera on site; is that right?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And when you look at these two photographs, you can see that there

20 are some arrows on them; is that right?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And in order to draw these arrows, you need to have a support

23 medium, i.e., a photograph, don't you?

24 A. Yes, yes.

25 Q. And what I'm interested in is the following: Between the time you

Page 4656

1 take the picture and the time you develop your photograph, how long does

2 it take?

3 A. One day.

4 Q. And now what I'm interested in is the following: The next day --

5 on the next day, you looked at other reports before drawing your arrows on

6 the photographs, didn't you?

7 A. No, no. I did not look at other reports. I was doing my job.

8 Q. I would now like to get back to what you said a while ago. You

9 said you cross-questioned the policemen who had questioned the

10 eye-witnesses in order to determine the direction of fire?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And what I'm interested in is this: Was this procedure written

13 down anywhere or mentioned in any of your reports?

14 A. No.

15 Q. I am now going to ask you a few questions about some of the

16 victims you were able to see on the site.

17 First of all, were you able to see them there or not?

18 A. No, I was not. The victims had already been removed from the site

19 and placed in a mortuary. The mortuary was close by.

20 Q. I'm talking as a matter of principle. I'm not talking about any

21 particular incident. So as a rule, were the victims on the site?

22 A. At the moment when I arrived with my team, there were no longer

23 any victims on the site.

24 Q. In your statement, you mention the fact that these victims have a

25 particular status. You have talked about them being civilians, haven't

Page 4657

1 you?

2 A. Da. [No interpretation]

3 Q. And on these occasions, how could you establish the status of

4 these people, either as civilians or members of the army? What did you do

5 to establish their status?

6 A. When you see a 50-year-old woman dressed in civilian clothing, I

7 think it would be obvious to anyone that she was not a soldier.

8 Q. And when you see a man wearing ordinary clothes, what do you think

9 of that?

10 A. The same thing.

11 Q. So what criterion or criteria did you establish a distinction

12 between the two?

13 A. It was not my job to determine who was a civilian and who was

14 military. My job was to determine on site all the facts on the spot.

15 Q. Precisely. So that wasn't part of your job, but, nonetheless, you

16 talk about it.

17 A. Well, in the report, you write the names of the casualties or

18 victims.

19 Q. So can one say that you didn't look into this question; in other

20 words, you didn't ask yourself when you saw a victim whether this person

21 was a civilian or a member of the army when you prepared your reports?

22 A. Yes, precisely.

23 Q. Therefore, in your various statements, when you mentioned

24 civilians or army members, you didn't apply any particular criteria to

25 establish this distinction. This was just something that you were

Page 4658

1 inferring.

2 A. Yes. My part of the job was technical.

3 Q. Now, Witness, I'd like to turn to page 3 of the statement. This

4 is your statement, and you mention this particular incident in Hrasnica

5 that took place on the 7th of April, 1995.

6 First of all, I'd like to know how you got to Hrasnica and on what

7 day.

8 A. Could I just see that page on the screen, please.

9 Q. It's going to come up any minute now. This document is already on

10 the screen. This is page 3 of document 3108, a 65 ter document.

11 A. On that day I was on duty, and the police administration in Ilidza

12 that was based there Hrasnica called up the Security Services Centre --

13 Q. Sorry. For the sake of efficiency, was it on the same day as the

14 explosion, as far as you recall?

15 A. Yes, yes. On that same day, we arrived.

16 Q. Do you remember at what time this was?

17 A. We arrived around 3.00.

18 Q. Do you remember having seen the UNMO representatives on the spot?

19 A. Yes. They were there with two APCs.

20 Q. Were these UNPROFOR APCs?

21 A. Yes, yes.

22 Q. Do you make a difference between UNPROFOR soldiers and UNMOs?

23 A. Let me tell you one thing: At the moment, I was not able to

24 distinguish between them.

25 Q. Did you actually see soldiers whom you believed were UNMOs

Page 4659

1 carrying out the same investigation as you on the scene?

2 A. Yes, I saw them.

3 Q. According to what you remember, did you get to the scene on the

4 next day; namely, the 8th of April, 1995? That's the day when you reach

5 Hrasnica. Is that right?

6 A. Yes. We came to inspect the scene once again and to try to find

7 some more evidence, if possible. We were just double-checking.

8 Q. But did you see UNMOs at that time?

9 A. I can't remember that.

10 Q. In your statement, the one you have before you, you state that on

11 the next day you found other pieces of evidence on the site. This is on

12 paragraph 2, and you say on the next day -- it's not very clear. On the

13 next day, you came along with two UNMOs. Is this right?

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva.

15 Let me here from Mr. Sachdeva first.

16 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, perhaps it is confusing. However in

17 the English translation, which is the version that the witness signed, it

18 says that on the day of the event we arrived together with two United

19 Nations Military Observers. My submission is that the event refers to the

20 incident and not the next day.


22 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. I've checked this, Your

23 Honour, and I tend to look at the B/C/S version. That's correct.

24 Q. So you said on the first day the UNMOs were on the site.

25 A. The same reads in the B/C/S version.

Page 4660

1 Q. In your statement in B/C/S, and this is what is confusing, you

2 mention the next day, which is the day you found pieces of evidence. Are

3 you with me? Do you see this?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. To that -- this could be confusing, because you say that the day

6 you saw the UNMOs conducting the investigation was on the 7th of April.

7 Isn't that right?

8 A. No. It's clearly written here on the day of the incident we

9 arrived together with two UNMOs. However, UNMOs were present there on a

10 daily basis, and they had full insight into the situation.

11 Q. Of course, Witness, you did not find the victims on the site on

12 the 7th of April, 1995, did you?

13 A. Yes, that's correct.

14 Q. In your statement, thereafter, you mention eye-witnesses to this

15 incident. It wasn't part of your job to take witness statements, was it?

16 A. No. My job was strictly technical. Criminal investigation police

17 inspectors were duty-bound to take witness statements.

18 Q. In the paragraph that starts with, "Bomba je dosla," is this

19 something that you were able to establish yourself or is this something

20 that you established on the basis of witness statements?

21 A. I couldn't have determined that on my own. It could only have

22 been done based on the statements given by the uniformed policemen

23 securing the scene.

24 Q. I would like you to read everything that comes after the sentence

25 starts with, "Bomba je dosla," until the portion which mentions the

Page 4661

1 incident of the 7th of April, 1995.

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva is on his feet.

3 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, just so I am clear, counsel has said

4 the paragraph starting, and she has used B/C/S. I'm not entirely sure if

5 that could be translated into English, so I know exactly which paragraph

6 she is referring to. I presume it is when it starts about the direction

7 of north-west, but I just want to be clear.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Would you just clarify that.

9 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. This is the paragraph which

10 starts in the middle of the page, "The bomb came," in English, and "Bomba

11 je dosla," in B/C/S, which is also in the middle of the page. So this

12 ends with: "I also drew," and in B/C/S, "Takodjersam na karti." So I

13 have asked the witness to look at this portion of his statement, and I

14 shall put questions to him.

15 Q. This part of your statement describes the launch of the bomb and

16 the direction it took. Can we saw today that this is solely based on

17 hearsay and is not based on your findings an investigation on the site?

18 A. Yes. Yes, based on hearsay and not on my own investigation.

19 Q. You will the opportunity to see a video that was filmed by a BBC

20 reporter, and you admitted that this had to do with the incident you

21 investigated in -- the incident that occurred in Hrasnica on the 7th of

22 April, 1995, the incident you investigated together with an entire team.

23 Do you remember that?

24 A. Yes, I do.

25 Q. I would like to know what details made it possible for you to be

Page 4662

1 so sure that this is actually dealing with this incident that occurred on

2 that day.

3 A. Because it shows total destruction of the house where the

4 projectile landed.

5 Q. Was it the only house entirely destroyed that you saw during your

6 work?

7 A. I hadn't seen a case like this before. This must have been a very

8 heavy bomb.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: You should attend more carefully to the question,

10 which was: "Was it the only house entirely destroyed that you saw during

11 your work?"

12 What's the answer to that?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I saw many houses on fire, many

14 houses damaged by tank shells, but this kind of destruction I had never

15 seen before.

16 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. Now, normally, when you arrive on site when an incident has

18 occurred, I would like to know whether you ever possibly envisaged that

19 the bomb might have been planted there and would have exploded right

20 there?

21 A. No, no.

22 Q. This hypothesis was never envisaged by the investigators.

23 A. No. Because the aggressor tried to promote this hypothesis in

24 Sarajevo very often, but it is very naive to believe that people would be

25 shelling themselves for four years. I think that would be an

Page 4663

1 exaggeration.

2 Q. The word used by the witness was not "exaggeration" but "naive."

3 It would be "naive."

4 A. Both "exaggerate" and "naive."

5 Q. So it was -- it would have been naive. So this hypothesis was

6 ruled out from the very start. When you started working in 1994 and

7 further, you always ruled that hypothesis out?

8 A. Yes, over two million shells landed in Sarajevo.

9 Q. Witness, you have another statement dated February 26th, 1996, 65

10 ter document number 3109. We'll go through this quickly. It's a question

11 that the Prosecutor did not address with you, but the statement has been

12 admitted into evidence.

13 First, do you recognise your statement dated February 26th, 1996?

14 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] And if we could please move to

15 page 2 of this document.

16 Q. I'm interested in paragraph 2. You are mentioning an incident

17 that occurred on November 8, 1994, a sniping incident. Is that it?

18 A. Yes, that's correct.

19 Q. In the English version of the statement, there is a third page.

20 Unfortunately, it has not been translated, but this is a report.

21 Personally, I would not have called this a forensic report, as is said in

22 the translation. I believe that this is a report on the search that

23 occurred on site.

24 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] If we could move to the next page,

25 please.

Page 4664

1 Q. First, do you see your signature on this document?

2 A. Yes, I do.

3 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please go back to the

4 previous page, because here I have a slight problem with the birth date of

5 this victim.

6 Q. Could you please look at this, and could you please read out that

7 sentence?

8 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] For English speakers, I'm

9 mentioning the first paragraph and I'm asking the witness to read out

10 the first paragraph starting with: "Dana."

11 A. "At around 1530, on 8th November 1994, in the flat owned by

12 Sabahita Omerovic on 9/5, Djura Danatica [phoen] Street, the fifth floor,

13 Nermina Omerovic was killed. She was born on the 31st of October, 1994."

14 Now, this is me speaking. I made a mistake here. She was born on

15 the 31st of October, 1984. So we're talking about a girl, who was at the

16 time 10 years old.

17 Q. When did you note that you had made a mistake -- there was a

18 mistake?

19 A. I noted it just now. If you look at the photograph of the body,

20 you can determine the age of the girl.

21 Q. Witness, you can confirm that your reports were used to establish

22 the criminal liability of the alleged offenders.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And when reading this report, which you would like to correct

25 today in this court, don't you find that there is an inconsistency in this

Page 4665

1 report, because here it would be a baby rather than a 10-year-old that is

2 mentioned?

3 A. Yes. It is possible, and it was my mistake.

4 Q. Do you remember where this happened?

5 A. Yes. I remember where this happened. This building is very close

6 to River Miljacka, which was a separation line between the Bosnian side

7 and the aggressor. The windows were covered with thin plywood. The girl

8 opened the door for a minute and shut it when the bullet passed through

9 the window and killed her.

10 Q. And how do you know that?

11 A. I know that on the basis of a conversation with her family when I

12 came there for the reconstruction of the incident.

13 Q. Did you take pictures of the victim of this incident?

14 A. Yes, I think I did.

15 Q. Witness, could we please look at your statement on the second

16 page.

17 First, could we say that you were just starting your job as a

18 technician working on your own, in November 1994?

19 A. Yes. Yes.

20 Q. Here you are telling how you proceed to establish the direction

21 the shot came from, right?

22 A. May I answer your question?

23 Q. Of course.

24 A. I came to attend the reconstruction of the incident. It was not

25 me who determined the direction from which the shot had come. It was,

Page 4666

1 rather, done by the ballistic experts, Mr. Mirza Sabljica, a mechanical

2 engineer, and Borislav Stankov, an electrical engineer and court-pointed

3 expert witness, who was my supervisor. Both of them were ballistics

4 experts, and it was them who determined that.

5 Q. Witness, but you were an eye-witness to these investigations

6 carried out by your more senior colleagues, and you were talking about two

7 panels, two plywood panels, that were placed on the windows?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. What was the distance between these two panels?

10 A. A few centimetres.

11 Q. You're saying a few centimetres, because of what? How was this

12 construction applied to the windows?

13 A. It's a rather old building from the era of Austria-Hungary. The

14 buildings were old and had two wings. During the war, the windows were

15 broken. The residents remitted the plywood panels in order to enable them

16 to live in these rooms.

17 Q. I have a very technical question, so please think about it in

18 technical terms and as a technician. You're saying that out of the two

19 holes in the two panels, your colleagues were able to establish the

20 direction the bullet came from. That's it, right?

21 A. No. There was also a bullet trace on the floor. They stretched a

22 string between the place where the bullet landed on the floor and the hole

23 in the plywood panel. So they established the direction from which the

24 bullet had come.

25 After that, and I was looking what they were -- watching what they

Page 4667

1 were doing although this was not part of my job, they viewed through a

2 tube and one can precisely determine the point of origin of the gunshot.

3 My task under those circumstances was to open the window, risk my

4 life in so doing, and photograph the building where the gunshot came from,

5 and this is what I did.

6 Q. Does this document exist somewhere?

7 A. Yes. I photographed the adjacent building.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic, you must conclude by the end of

9 this session.

10 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just like my

11 colleague, I will ask by your leave ask to you give me some extra time. I

12 mean, the Prosecution required twice the time that was allocated. So if

13 I'm allowed the same thing, I would need three hours. I don't need three

14 hours, of course, but I do have a great number of questions to ask because

15 that this is a very important witness.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: The Prosecution used an hour and 44 minutes, and

17 you would have used the same time by the end of the session. If you wish,

18 you can have another -- how many minutes more would you wish?

19 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] I can do what my colleague did and

20 ask for five and go on for 40. I can give you an estimate, of course. I

21 don't exactly when the session is supposed to end, in 25 minute, I think.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, please continue, and we can deal with it

23 when we come to the break.

24 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. Witness, let's take a look at the Sarajevo map, document 65 ter

Page 4668

1 104.

2 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, 2872.

3 Q. Now the map is on display.

4 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the court officer please

5 zoom into the Marindvor area, where the Holiday Inn is located on the

6 right, where Grbavica is located, and really zoom into that area.

7 Q. Witness, could you please look at the map and tell us where the

8 building where this victim was hit is located?

9 A. In this area here.

10 Q. Can you see the area where the -- where you photographed the

11 building which was allegedly the source -- the origin of fire?

12 A. That building is not drawn on this map, but it's directly

13 opposite.

14 Q. You determined this building to be Metalka, right?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. According to you, the building located in front is Metalka.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Could you please mark an I, November 8, 1994. So next to the mark

19 that you have just placed, Witness, could you please use the electronic

20 pen and mark a letter I, as "incident," next to the mark that you have

21 already put on the map.

22 A. [Marks]

23 Q. And below that I, could you please write 8/11/94, for the date of

24 the incident.

25 A. [Marks]

Page 4669

1 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] I'd like to tender this as a

2 Defence exhibit, please.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.

4 THE REGISTRAR: As D166, Your Honours.

5 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation].

6 Q. Witness, could you give us a rough estimate of the distance

7 between this building and Metalka?

8 A. Three hundred metres at the outside.

9 Q. At the time, did you know that units of the ABiH army were located

10 in this area next to this building?

11 A. No.

12 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Now I'd like to have the same map

13 as annotated by the witness. It's P564. Could we have this on the

14 screen, please.

15 Q. I'd like to talk about other incidents, the two incidents that

16 occurred on the same day on May 24, 1995, in two different places. The SZ

17 that you marked corresponds to the place where, allegedly, you say that

18 the air bomb exploded on Safeta Zajke Street?

19 A. Yes, approximately, that's the place.

20 Q. On this map, you noted the -- you noted where the south, north,

21 east, and west is. And did you use these type of coordinates when you

22 were trying to establish where the fire came from?

23 A. Let me tell you: We were told where the fire came from, and I did

24 use the coordinates, but that's roughly it.

25 Q. You say, "We were told where the shot came from." Who is that

Page 4670

1 "we," please.

2 A. For instance, forensic experts, ballistic experts, and people from

3 the bomb squad. They would be the ones who determined more precisely

4 where the projectile had come from.

5 Q. Witness, I thought I understood that in your reports, in the

6 report that you drafted yourself, you always noted the direction of the

7 shot.

8 A. Yes, I did.

9 Q. So is it fair to say that you used information you got from the

10 other members of the team?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. So these were not your own findings using the traces found on

13 site.

14 A. Yes. But I have to say when a projectile fired from a mortar or a

15 cannon or some type of artillery piece falls, it leaves a pretty clear

16 trace, showing from which direction it had been fired. However, with

17 modified air bombs, that is much more difficult, and we determined the

18 direction based on the funnel-shaped crater.

19 But the most important factor were eye-witnesses who had seen it

20 flying, because the modified air bomb was very slow flying through the air

21 and it could be seen with a naked eye. Once, when such a bomb fell

22 outside the building of the municipality of Novi Grad, I saw it myself.

23 Q. What exactly did you see that day?

24 A. You mean in Safeta Zajke Street?

25 Q. No. I'm talking about the time where you personally saw the

Page 4671

1 flight of this projectile that you're calling an air bomb.

2 A. It looks like a small aircraft, moving very slowly and producing

3 very strange, wheezing sound, and can you see it with the naked eye.

4 Q. Is there a smoke trail, possibly?

5 A. I saw that projectile when it was already going down, and there

6 was no trace of smoke.

7 Q. So -- but there was no smoke trail that would still be lingering

8 on in the sky, as can you see, for example, when there is a plane that is

9 in the sky.

10 A. In the case I have seen, there was no trace of smoke. It was

11 already going down, and I was perhaps 200 metres from the place where it

12 fell.

13 Q. What was the flight path when this projectile was falling? Was it

14 falling straight? How did it fall?

15 A. It was falling in a slant. In physics, it's called a slanted hit.

16 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, could you please

17 allow the witness to sketch this on a piece of paper, and I would like to

18 tender the sketch, if you allow for it, please.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, he may do that. Just a minute, please.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please go ahead.

22 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Witness, please, could you draw what you were showing us with your

24 hands earlier, you know, what you saw when this projectile fell. The

25 actual path of this projectile when it fell.

Page 4672

1 A. [Indicates]

2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, counsel.

3 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. Now, to be specific, you were able to see this part of the

5 trajectory or the path of this projectile.

6 A. Yes. I saw only the end of the path.

7 Q. And therefore behind the projectile, there was no smoke, or smoke

8 trail?

9 A. Right. I didn't see any trace of smoke.

10 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Now could I please have an exhibit

11 number for this sketch, and if you could just write in B/C/S, "avio

12 bomba."

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If I could just add.

14 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Please do.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. It may be numbered.

16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, this is will be D167.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I could add one thing, if I may?

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, what's that?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This modified air bomb produced a

20 terrible noise during its flight. It sounded like some sort of

21 destruction, a very strange high-pitched sound, and everybody to hear it.

22 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Ms. Isailovic, I would just have a

23 question for clarification sake.

24 Witness, this particular sketch relates to what incident in

25 particular?

Page 4673

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This relates to the incident, an

2 on-site investigation, when an air bomb fell outside the building of the

3 municipality of Novi Grad, between the municipal building and the radio

4 television Bosnia-Herzegovina building.

5 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour and Judges of the

6 Bench, this was one of the incidents that was listed on the incident list;

7 but pursuant to your order, this incident has been taken off the list.

8 This is the one dated 29th of June.

9 Now, I am about to move on to --

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva.

11 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, if indeed it is that incident, does

12 that entitle the Prosecution to -- does it open up for the Prosecution to

13 ask questions on that, since the Defence has led evidence on this

14 incident?

15 [Trial Chamber confers]

16 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I respond to the

17 Prosecution's request?

18 I did not ask this particular question in relation to any

19 particular incident but in relation to this witness's testimony, because

20 he told us that he was an eye-witness to the fall of an air bomb.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Since the evidence relates to a dropped incident,

22 it will be ignored. No account will be taken of it.

23 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. Witness, let's have a look now at your third statement, the one

25 what is dated the 11th --

Page 4674

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva.

2 MR. SACHDEVA: I'm sorry, Mr. President. Does that mean that

3 pursuant to your order that the sketch is not going to be admitted into

4 evidence?

5 [Trial Chamber confers]

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, that should also be deleted.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, D167 will be removed.

8 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. Witness, I would now like to turn to your statement dated 11th of

10 March, 1997.

11 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] This is a 65 ter document number

12 3110. Let's go straight to page 3, please.

13 Q. You mentioned two incidents. First of all, one incident that took

14 place on the 16th of June, 1995, but you conducted the investigation on

15 this particular site ten days later; is that right?

16 A. Yes, that's correct.

17 Q. An official report was issued after these investigations. You

18 addressed this with the Prosecutor a while ago. We are now talking about

19 document 132, a 65 ter document, page 2.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. First of all, do you remember why nobody went on the site on the

23 day and that the people only went there ten days later?

24 A. Yes, I remember, because the shelling was intense those days, and

25 it was very dangerous to go out into clear space and we went out there

Page 4675

1 only when the situation calmed down a bit.

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic, we have come to the time for the

3 break. In ten minutes the court deputy informs me you will have used

4 exactly the same time as the Prosecutor. And how much more time would you

5 need, beyond that ten minutes and do not tell me that you can, like the

6 Prosecutor, ask for five and be given on half an hour, because I will

7 consider that out of order.

8 How much more time will you need?

9 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, given the importance

10 of this witness for us and for the Prosecution that has been granted extra

11 time by the Bench, I feel it would be fair that I have enough time to.

12 Begin with, we talked about an hour, hour and a half. I have now had the

13 same time as the Prosecution, and I believe that half an hour is, at best,

14 what I would need.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, all right. We'll give you half an hour.

16 We'll take the break now.

17 --- Recess taken at 12.22 p.m.

18 --- On resuming at 12.48 p.m.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please continue.

20 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

21 Q. Witness, please, we were working on a document that was admitted

22 as P567.

23 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] If we could have something else,

24 because right now we have got the English version on both sides.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva.

Page 4676

1 MR. SACHDEVA: Just to ensure that it's not going broadcast.

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please ensure it's not being broadcast, yes.

3 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. Witness, this is an Official Note after an event which occurred on

5 June 16, 1995. Is that it?

6 A. Yes, correct.

7 Q. Could you confirm that in the second paragraph of this document

8 the following is said: "The investigation was made on June 26th, 1995."

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Could you also confirm that this memo is dated ten days -- is

11 dated on the 16th of June, ten days offer the event?

12 A. Yes, but in the second paragraph below it says: "Due to intense

13 shelling of the entire neighbourhood, it was not possible to conduct an

14 on-site investigation. So on the 26th of June, 1995, at 9.00 a.m., the

15 complete team came out on site," et cetera.

16 Q. Witness, earlier, you confirmed that this memo came -- was an

17 official document from the Bosnian police, which is why I'm asking this

18 question. Why is it that we have a document drafted on June 16, 1995,

19 where there is mention of events that will occur ten days later?

20 A. The crime investigations inspector, Mujo Music, who made the

21 minutes, made an error; but from the text below, one can see how this

22 investigation on site progressed and what the situation was like.

23 Q. Witness, the dates were an important information for the Bosnian

24 police, weren't they?

25 A. Yes, extremely important.

Page 4677

1 Q. And yet earlier we noted that there had been a mistake regarding

2 the date of birth of one of the victims.

3 A. Yes. But that mistake becomes obvious when you read through the

4 document.

5 Q. So, according to you, it would be not fabricating documents and

6 then placing the dates for another reason than for investigation reasons.

7 Would that be something that could be envisaged?

8 A. No --

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Sachdeva.

10 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, actually, I withdraw that and

11 perhaps I would like to hear the answer of the witness. Excuse me.


13 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] I think that we heard the answer.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is not conceivable.

15 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Could you go on, please.

17 A. I was saying it's not conceivable the documents were forged or

18 tampered with because a large number of people were involved in those

19 teams for on-site investigation.

20 Q. So, according to you, this memo was drafted after June 26, 1995?

21 A. Yes, yes.

22 The inspector who made this note made a perfectly appropriate

23 note, apart from the fact that in the heading, he mistyped the date. But

24 from the text of this note, since it follows a chronological order, it is

25 clear how the events developed and what the sequence of events was.

Page 4678

1 Q. According to you, Witness, does this memo take into account the

2 results of the investigations that were carried out after the incident?

3 And I'm especially thinking about the direction of fire.

4 A. No. This Official Note shows only the state of affairs, the

5 factual aspect, when the shell landed, how many people were hurt, who the

6 members of the on-site investigation team were, and at 9.00 on the 26th of

7 June when that investigation took place. It also mentioned the size of

8 the resulting crater and the people injured during the explosion. So this

9 is purely a detailed description of the event.

10 Q. Witness, in paragraph 3, can you find the place where it is stated

11 that the shot probably came from Lukavica?

12 A. I didn't really understand the question.

13 Q. Can you read paragraph 3, please.

14 A. Yes, I've read it.

15 Q. In this memo, it is said that the -- that the possible origin of

16 fire was from the aggressor's position in Lukavica. Is that what's

17 written?

18 A. Yes, it's written there.

19 Q. Do you remember whether these were also your findings?

20 A. When the projectile landed, it made a huge funnel-shaped crater

21 and it came from the direction of Lukavica. I mean, the crater was

22 pointed to the direction of Lukavica. There were also ballistics experts

23 with me on the team and other experts as well who arrived at this

24 conclusion.

25 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] If we could please have page 3 of

Page 4679

1 this document, document 65 ter 132, which was given the exhibit number

2 P568. It's difficult to read, I agree.

3 Q. But if could you please try and read when it starts with,

4 "najvjero vatnije."

5 A. "The missile in question was most probably a modified aircraft bomb

6 with four in-built rocket engines and great destructive force. It came

7 from the direction of," I cannot see this clearly here, "from the

8 aggressor's positions."

9 Q. Witness --

10 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, first, could the court

11 officer please zoom into this part, because I can guess what is written

12 and the interpreter who translated the document --

13 A. I can't see the right hand part.

14 Q. In the English translation of this document, the direction is as

15 follows: "Aggressor's position from the west."

16 Maybe the interpreter had a more legible copy. I'm not sure. But

17 can you confirm that it is written exactly what I said?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. So these were your findings after the investigations which

20 Detective Music took into account?

21 A. Yes, yes. However, I say that this was most probably a modified

22 air bomb, so I didn't put it directly and specifically what kind of an

23 explosive device was involved.

24 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Could my case manager please

25 display 65 ter document 2872, the Sarajevo map, and we must find ...

Page 4680

1 Q. So we will find this area called "Medjunarodnog Prijateljstva."

2 And if we could please zoom into the area in the bottom of the map, we see

3 Novi Grad and Lukavica.

4 Could you please show us where this incident occurred at Trg

5 Medjunarodnog. Could you take the pen, Witness, please, and I would

6 kindly ask the usher to assist you.

7 A. Could you please zoom in a little bit? The central part of the

8 map.

9 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Just a little, because we would

10 like to locate Lukavica after that.

11 Q. Can you see it now?

12 A. Where Lukavica is?

13 Q. First of all, draw a circle around Lukavica and then Trg

14 Medjunarodnog Prijateljstva.

15 A. [Marks]

16 Q. In any case, we can say that Medjunarodnog Prijateljstva is at

17 Alipasino Polje; is that right?

18 A. Yes. It's part of Alipasino Polje.

19 Q. Now, in relation to this circle, first of all, could you place the

20 letter I, for "incident" next to it. TMP, please, on the small circle;

21 and I, for "incident."

22 Yes, that's fine. That's fine. That tells us where the street

23 is.

24 Now, the second circle, could you plays the letter L next to the

25 second circle.

Page 4681

1 A. [Marks]

2 Q. And could you draw a line from the small circle to the west.

3 A. [Marks]

4 Q. Could you place the letter W here; W stands for "west."

5 A. [Marks]

6 Q. Please, on this line --

7 A. I made a mistake. [In English] Yes. [Interpretation] This is

8 east.

9 Q. In that case, you can delete the W line and draw a line in --

10 towards the west and place the letter W there, please. Please correct

11 your mistake.

12 A. [Marks]

13 Q. W, please.

14 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to

15 tender this map into evidence, please.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We admit it.

17 THE REGISTRAR: As D167, Your Honours.

18 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Witness, do you remember that you discussed another incident with

20 the Prosecution which took place in the Safeta Zajke Street.

21 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. I didn't wait for the

22 exhibit number.

23 THE REGISTRAR: It will be D167, Your Honours.

24 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25 Q. Witness, you discussed the incident that took place on 24th of

Page 4682

1 May, 1995, Safeta Zajke with the Prosecution.

2 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to now see the 65 ter

3 document 865. This is a series of photographs, and I would request the

4 help of my learned colleague. I would like to be able to see photograph

5 12. Which page do I need to display in order to see this photograph?

6 My case manager has found it, so let's see.

7 Could we possibly enlarge photograph 12, please. I'm turning to

8 the court officer now: Can we enlarge this, please?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is photograph 11.

10 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] This is number 11, but I would

11 need the number 12.

12 Q. Witness, could you describe to me what one can see on this

13 photograph, please, and from which side in relation to the crater formed

14 by the explosion?

15 A. We are looking from the direction of the crater, i.e., from the

16 point where the explosive device landed. There's a concrete wall in the

17 background of the photograph, and there are visible -- there's visible

18 damage caused by shrapnel; and in the -- on the house behind, one can see

19 that the whole roof had been blown away.

20 Q. Can you see the tires that are on the forefront here?

21 A. Yes. You can see tires scattered around. In the right-hand

22 corner, one can see trees that were cut off by shrapnel and damaged to the

23 tree branches. Also, the earth had been turned over and blown towards the

24 wall.

25 Q. Could these tires mean that were there some military facilities

Page 4683

1 close by?

2 A. No. That used to be a workshop, a car repair workshop and tire

3 repair workshop. More precisely, Safeta Zajke is a street, a residential

4 area, where there are only family houses. They're lined next to each

5 other and all these houses were demolished.

6 Q. Can we agree then that opposite this location, where the tires

7 are, we found ourselves at the foot of Mount Zuc?

8 A. Yes. Yes, behind the houses.

9 Q. At the time, did you know that the ABiH units were positioned on

10 this mount?

11 A. Yes. Yes, I knew that.

12 Q. And on the 24th of June, 1995, did you and your team look into the

13 question of any military activity or fire that could have come from Mount

14 Zuc and that could have been the cause of this damage?

15 A. No. The reason being that the damage is so extensive. It's much

16 more extensive than the one caused by a mortar shell or a tank shell or a

17 shell fired from a gun.

18 Q. But, Witness, if someone was firing from a tank or firing several

19 shells, would the damage have been huge or not?

20 A. Not even closely to the one caused by a modified air bomb. It

21 caused devastation at the place where these bombs hit, but also within the

22 radius around it.

23 Q. And what do you base this on?

24 A. I base it on the fact that I have seen hundreds of mortar shells

25 landing; and when a mortar shell lands on a concrete surface, you can see

Page 4684

1 exactly the so-called rose. This is what we call it in criminal

2 investigation parlance, the place where a mortar shell lands. And one can

3 see also see the angle of firing. You can see the tail of the mortar

4 shell as well, and the largest shells were those of 120-millimetre.

5 Q. Can we agree that on this photograph we mainly see the soil. We

6 don't see tarmac. We see soil that has been overturned.

7 A. In my previous answer, I said that both of soil was overturned,

8 and one can also see fresh holes in the concrete wall. You can see these

9 tires scattered around, you can see the damage on the trees to the right

10 of the photograph, and you can see that there's a roof missing.

11 Q. Witness, I would like to continue talking about this incident. We

12 mentioned the report which is exhibit number 560. This is a 65 ter

13 document number 17 -- 56, page 2 to 4.

14 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] First of all, Your Honour, I would

15 have liked to make a comment as regards the translation of this document,

16 because the first -- I would like to talk about the fourth paragraph of

17 this first page, which does not reflect what has been said in B/C/S, and I

18 would like to spell this out.

19 This is the last paragraph on this page. In the text in English,

20 which you have, and which is the only one you can use, it says: "[In

21 English] stretches towards the south-east."

22 [Interpretation] Whereas, I will ask the witness to read this part

23 so that the interpreters can translate it.

24 Q. Could you start reading from --

25 A. The last paragraph?

Page 4685

1 Q. This is the last paragraph, the second sentence in the last

2 paragraph.

3 A. Very well. "The projectile landed on the asphalt carriage way of

4 Safeta Zajke Street in front of the house number 43. The crater made by

5 the projectile is turned length-wise towards south, more precisely to the

6 area of Lukavica, where the aggressor's firing positions are."

7 Q. Yes. Thank you, Witness.

8 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would have liked to

9 draw your attention to the fact that you are solely working with the

10 English text. I believe this is very important. In the original text, it

11 says "south."

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Well, we have heard that, and we see that

13 the mistake has been corrected.

14 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] I should like to continue with

15 this report.

16 Q. This report deals with two events, doesn't it -- incidents,

17 rather?

18 A. I only see the first one.

19 Q. Let's turn to the second page, please. I would like you to look

20 at the text where it says, this is the last paragraph, "lice mjesta." Do

21 you have it in front of you now? Does this have to do with a second

22 incident in Majdanska?

23 A. Yes, Majdanska Street. Yes. This last paragraph says that the

24 point of the impact of the second projectile is on Majdanska Street, no

25 number, next to the Novi Grad transformer station.

Page 4686

1 Q. Now, as far as the crater is concerned, it faces south, doesn't

2 it?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And the report says that the crater mentioned in the first

5 incident is also addressed in this report. This is the incident that took

6 place in Safeta Zajke Street.

7 A. Yes. But if I may add one thing, the previous incident on Safeta

8 Zajke Street, there are photographs --

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute, please.

10 Mr. Sachdeva is on his feet.

11 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, it's just for your benefit, but the

12 translation corresponding to the paragraph counsel is talking about is the

13 next page in the English version.

14 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. This is

15 in -- this is in paragraph 3.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I finish?

17 MR. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] This is on page 3 for the Bench.

18 This is the same as the original. The original text and the translation

19 tally.

20 Q. Witness, I think you wanted to add something, didn't you?

21 A. Very well. What I wanted to add was that at the place of impact

22 of the projectile on Safeta Zajke Street, there's a photograph that I made

23 which shows fragments of the modified air bomb rocket engines embedded in

24 the asphalt and also the angle at which they are embedded. It shows that

25 the direction is from the south; in other words, there's a photograph

Page 4687

1 showing this.

2 Q. So you are saying that one can see on the photograph that it's

3 towards the south, as is mentioned in this report.

4 A. Yes. South or south-east.

5 Q. Witness, you say it faces south, south-west [as interpreted].

6 There is quite a big difference between the two, particularly in the light

7 of distances?

8 A. Yes, yes. Right.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva.

10 MR. SACHDEVA: At least on the transcript, Mr. President the

11 witness answered: "Yes. South or south-east," and counsel is -- if she

12 is referring to the previous answer, she said "south, south-west," just

13 for that to be clarified.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Did you mean to say south or south-east?

15 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] No. I said south-east. No

16 matter. This was a mere rhetorical question; south-east, south-west,

17 whatever the direction might be.

18 Q. This can, of course, have great bearing on the findings you make,

19 can't it?

20 A. Well, I have to tell you one thing. My personal opinion, and I'm

21 not a ballistics expert, since the aggressor forces were deployed all

22 around Sarajevo. Sarajevo is in a depression. It's surrounded by hills.

23 They were able to fire where they wanted, when they wanted. They had

24 ample opportunity.

25 Q. Fine. Now let's stick to this report. According to you, was this

Page 4688

1 report drafted on the basis of reports that had been filed by each member

2 of the investigation team?

3 A. Yes.

4 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like my case manager to

5 bring up document 76, which is a 65 ter document.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva, are you going to re-examine this

7 witness?

8 MR. SACHDEVA: Yes, Mr. President.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: For how long? And bear in mind the reputation

10 that you have unfortunately developed for underestimating, which has been

11 referred to your learned colleague for the Defence.

12 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, five to eight manipulates.


14 MR. SACHDEVA: Five to eight minutes. I have three to four

15 questions, at the moment.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic, you have used the half an hour.

17 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I can see that, Your Honour.

18 I think it's important for the Bench.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Another five minutes.

20 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] It's very difficult with all these

21 technicalities. We have document 76, 65 ter document, up on the screen I

22 believe that my learned colleague did not ask for this document to be

23 tendered.

24 Q. Witness, can I ask you to turn to the last sentence of this

25 report, please.

Page 4689

1 A. Will I read it?

2 Q. Please.

3 A. "Projectile came from the area of Pavlovac, south-east".

4 Q. Can you confirm that these were the findings that you made on that

5 day?

6 A. Yes. It was in the report. Since there is a hill behind the

7 site, we got information from reconnaissance teams that the projectiles

8 came from that place.

9 Q. But you don't mention this in your report, Witness, neither you

10 nor Mr. Kucanin Mirsad, who was the person who drafted the previous

11 report?

12 A. Yes. But there's another fact that is relevant to this incident;

13 namely, the place where the projectile landed is cylindrical in shape and

14 very long, and you don't need expert knowledge to establish from which

15 direction the projectile came.

16 Q. Therefore, if it was that easy in two reports which have been

17 included in the investigation, you mentioned two opposite directions of

18 fire, didn't you?

19 A. South, south-east.

20 Q. Can we agree that a while ago the report signed by Kucanin Mirsad,

21 which we discussed together, we made changes to the translation and we

22 established that the origin of fire was the south. Is that right?

23 A. Yes. Yes, that's what he wrote.

24 Q. And, in this instance, we can see that is says south-east; isn't

25 that right?

Page 4690

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Can you confirm that each member of your investigation team drew

3 up these conclusions with a view to drafting a final report which would

4 recap everything concerning this incident. Is that why there were so many

5 forensic technicians on the site?

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva.

7 Yes, just a minute, please.

8 MR. SACHDEVA: Well, Mr. President, to be precise, in the

9 witness's report, in the English translation, and I understand also in the

10 B/C/S version, it actually is written the projectile was fired from the

11 Pavlovac area in the south-east; in other words, south-east refers to the

12 location ever Pavlovac.

13 Perhaps counsel can ask the witness where Pavlovac is on the map.

14 I think that should be noted, in my submission.


16 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I had something else

17 in mind, and I'm not interested to know where Pavlovac is located. What I

18 would like to establish with my cross-examination is this: There are

19 blatant discrepancy between two reports prepared by the same investigation

20 team, so this is the purpose of my questions. We know where Pavlovac is.

21 We can all use a map. That is not so difficult. So I have concluded my

22 cross-examination.

23 Q. Thank you, Witness.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Sachdeva.

25 Re-examination by Mr. Sachdeva:

Page 4691

1 Q. Witness, can you just tell the Court that in your official job

2 description were you responsible for determining the direction of fire?

3 A. No. I was not responsible for determining the direction of fire,

4 and I said as much at the beginning of my testimony.

5 Q. And with respect to the incident on the 16th of June, 1995, were

6 there persons from the bomb squad present when you did your investigation

7 on the 26th of June?

8 A. Yes. Their presence was almost compulsory. It was indispensable

9 in order to find any remaining mines or explosives that might be there.

10 MR. SACHDEVA: If we can just go to Exhibit P568, this is the

11 document prepared by Mujo Music. This should be the first page.

12 My apologies, excuse me. It's 567. I'm very sorry.

13 Q. Witness, in the second paragraph that you see that, it says that

14 members of the bomb squad were present, in that report?

15 A. Yes, yes.

16 Q. And in the next paragraph where it talks about the -- where it

17 talks about the origin of fire, do you see that there, where it talks

18 about the origin of fire from Lukavica?

19 A. Yes, it's written there.

20 Q. Does it say at all that it came from the west? Do you see that

21 there at all?

22 A. No.

23 MR. SACHDEVA: And if we could go back to Exhibit 568.

24 Q. Witness, this is your report. On the top right --

25 A. Yes.

Page 4692

1 Q. -- on the top left-hand corner, do you see a date; and if you do,

2 please tell the Court what date that is.

3 A. 26th of June, 1995.

4 Q. And was that the date that you conducted the investigation or that

5 the investigation was conduct the for this incident?

6 A. Yes.

7 MR. SACHDEVA: That's the re-examination, Mr. President.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Witness, that concludes your evidence. We thank

9 you for giving it and you may leave.

10 We are going to adjourn now and we will resume tomorrow at 9.00.

11 [The witness stands down]

12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m.,

13 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 19th day of

14 April, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.