Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 7103

 1                           Wednesday, 29 September 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 2.19 p.m.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Good afternoon, everybody.

 6             I was advised that Mr. Karadzic has something to raise before we

 7     hear the evidence today.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.  I would like to do that in a

 9     private session.  I will only need a couple of minutes, please.

10             JUDGE KWON:  We'll go into private session.

11                           [Private session]

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 7104











11  Pages 7104-7108 redacted. Private session.















Page 7109

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22                           [Open session]

23             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor or Mr. Tieger, can I get a confirmation

24     from the Prosecution that, in relation to these 16 sniping incidents, no

25     expert is coming as a Prosecution witness?

Page 7110

 1             MR. GAYNOR:  That's correct.  There will be fact witnesses about

 2     other sniping incidents, but this the only expert specifically about

 3     sniping.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 5                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Shall we go into private session briefly.

 7                           [Private session]

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15                           [Open session]

16             JUDGE KWON:  The Chamber wasn't aware of the fact that this

17     witness is the only witness who will testify as to the origin of these 16

18     sniping incidents as an expert.  On that basis, we allow you,

19     Mr. Karadzic, to go until the end of today, given that you said you would

20     need two or three sessions more, upon the condition that the Chamber will

21     exercise a robust control over the efficient and relevant conduct of your

22     cross-examination.

23             We'll bring in the witness.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We're extremely grateful to you.

25             MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:  Your Honour, allow me to excuse myself,

Page 7111

 1     because I was actually coming in because of the next witness.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  Depending on the situation, we may need you,

 3     Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, but you may be excused now.

 4                           [The witness takes the stand]

 5                           WITNESS:  PATRICK VAN DER WEIJDEN [Resumed]

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. van der Weijden, I apologise for the

 7     inconvenience.  There were some matters to deal with in your absence, so

 8     it has transpired that you need to stay with us a bit longer than

 9     expected; probably until the end of today.

10             Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

11             MR. GAYNOR:  Sorry.  Before we --

12             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

13             MR. GAYNOR:  Sorry.

14             Before we go on, Mr. President, we do have, I estimate, 45

15     minutes of redirect, and some additional time, depending on today's

16     evidence.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

18             Bear that in mind, Mr. Karadzic.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I believe that we can comply with

20     that.

21                           Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic: [Continued]

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. van der Weijden.

24        A.   Good afternoon.

25        Q.   Before we move on to incident number 4, from Schedule F, I would

Page 7112

 1     like to thank you once again for the calculation of the angles that you

 2     did in your spare time.  I would also like to tell you that we are still

 3     looking for information relating to the detour of the tram.  The Defence

 4     will act in a fair manner and will take all of the options into

 5     consideration.  That is to say, we need to establish at which point in

 6     time this S-curve on the tracks was moved further down towards Holiday

 7     Inn.

 8             Can you tell us, in short and based on your notes, what does

 9     Incident 4 from the Schedule F refer to?

10        A.   Case F4 is the incident when a 35-year-old woman and her

11     8-year-old daughter were shot by a single bullet while walking together

12     on Ivana Krndelja Street in central Sarajevo.  The bullet wounded the

13     mother in her left thigh and the daughter in her right hand and her

14     abdomen, her stomach.  The alleged shooting position was Ozrenska Street,

15     and the GPS coordinate is as the one above in the paper document.

16        Q.   Do you agree that the then Ivana Krndelja Street is now called

17     Aziza Sacirbegovic Street?  Are you aware of that, although I believe

18     that you will trust my word for that, but in order to avoid any confusion

19     in the future, can you confirm that?

20        A.   I would not know.  I only visit that location according to the

21     GPS coordinate and as shown to me by the investigator.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

23             Could the Court please produce 1D02159, page 2.  First, let's

24     look at page 1 to identify the document, and then page 2.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 7113

 1        Q.   We were informed that that was a zone of sniping activity.  Was

 2     that zone there before the incident and after the incident?

 3             Have you received the interpretation of my question, sir?

 4        A.   I have not -- nothing on my left screen.  Sorry.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Can you not bring in the English?  It's not

 6     appearing on my computer either.

 7                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Before that, I would kindly ask you to tell us this:  Were you

10     informed that that place was a customary place of sniper activity?  Was

11     there sniper activity before the incident and was there any after the

12     incident?  Could you please answer that.

13        A.   I would have to read that back in the witness statements, but I

14     cannot recall it out of my head.  I'm sorry.

15        Q.   Could you please look at paragraph 6.  I can see only the Serbian

16     version, but I believe that you will find it in English as well.  The

17     Serbian text starts with the following words:

18             "I never saw or heard ..."

19             Could you please consult the paragraph in question?

20             JUDGE KWON:  I was told that there's no English translation at

21     this moment.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With your leave, I'm going to read

23     for the witness and for the other participants in the trial.  I'm reading

24     from paragraph 6:

25             "I never heard or saw that anybody was hit in that street.  We

Page 7114

 1     were the first and the last who were hit from a sniper weapon in that

 2     weapon [as interpreted].  I know that because my husband is a military

 3     commander and he is abreast of all the details.  Later on, I learned,

 4     when we were already in hospital, that within that one hour a total of

 5     five people were hit from a sniper in that area, but not in that same

 6     street, and those people have been taken to the same hospital ..."

 7             And so on and so forth.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Does this jog your memory?  Or, rather, did you have this witness

10     statement at your disposal when you drew your conclusions about this

11     particular incident?

12        A.   I'm sorry, I no longer have access to this -- to this -- the

13     witness statements of this incident, since I had them for the previous

14     report, but I no longer have access.  I do, however, recall the

15     mentioning -- at the incident site, the mentioning of a screen for

16     protection of civilians which would be in place only if there was a need

17     for it.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19             I would like to tender Nafa Taric's statement, if it hasn't been

20     admitted yet, as a Prosecution exhibit.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, you are well aware of the practice by

22     this Tribunal.  The witness did not confirm anything about this document,

23     and there's no foundation on our part to admit this.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] However --

25             JUDGE KWON:  Let us move on.

Page 7115

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] However, the witness did have that

 2     witness statement available to him.  That is the only witness statement,

 3     and the witness had it when he drafted the expert report.  He had the

 4     statement available to him.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  I missed that point because we didn't have the

 6     English translation of this document.

 7             Mr. Gaynor, do you agree that this is the statement this witness

 8     had seen at the time?

 9             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.  In fact, he -- according to page 79 of

10     Mr. van der Weijden's report, at the foot of the page, we see that he had

11     the witness statement of this person, dated 12th November 1995 and 25th

12     September of 2001, two separate statements, so they did form part of the

13     material provided to Mr. van der Weijden.  I leave it to Your Honours'

14     discretion as to what to do with that.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Why do we not have that English translation?

16     Because they couldn't locate --

17             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, I've just been provided by Mr. Reid the 65 ter

18     number for that.  It's 09940 [Realtime transcript read in error "05490"].

19     And the 65 ter number for the statement of the 25th of September, 2001,

20     is 10061.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, but --

22             JUDGE KWON:  The 65 ter number of the document which we see now

23     is -- could you give it again?  5490?

24             MR. GAYNOR:  The numbers I read out for the 1995 and 2001

25     statement, it's the same 65 ter number applies to the English and to the

Page 7116

 1     B/C/S, Mr. Reid tells me.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  I consult my colleagues.

 3                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 4             JUDGE KWON:  We'll admit it.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D664, Your Honours.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With all due respect, this is an

 7     expert witness, and --

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor.

 9             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, sorry.

10             Just to correct the record, it's been pointed out to me that the

11     number on the transcript is -- has been taken down wrong.  The first

12     65 ter number is 09940.  The other 65 ter number is correct.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With all due respect, I would like

15     to say that this is an expert witness and not an eye-witness.  Even if he

16     hadn't seen the incident, he should have seen it.  An expert -- or,

17     rather, things should be admitted if the expert should have seen them,

18     and he did see them.  He did see this thing during the drafting of the

19     expert report.

20             1D02160 is the next document that I would like to call up.  It's

21     a photo that was signed by Mrs. Nafa Taric.  Thank you.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Mr. van der Weijden, are you familiar with this photo?

24        A.   Yes, I've seen this photo before.

25        Q.   Could you tell us what the photo depicts?

Page 7117

 1        A.   The photo depicts a view from the incident site to the south, and

 2     the black squares depict the three containers that were placed there to

 3     hide the civilians from view.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Do you know where the mother and the daughter were

 5     hit, in which parts of the body?

 6        A.   They were hit as described in the situation -- the mother was hit

 7     in her left thigh and the daughter was wounded in her right hand and in

 8     her stomach.

 9        Q.   Were those gun-shot wounds -- entry/exit wounds, rather, and were

10     they both shot with a single bullet?

11        A.   According to the information provided to me, they were.

12        Q.   They were standing up, or, rather, they were walking when they

13     were hit; isn't that correct?

14        A.   That is correct.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Is the position of a victim important when it comes

16     to determining the bullet trajectory, or, rather, is it important whether

17     the victims were moving and where the site of the bullet entry is?

18        A.   In this case, it would be.

19        Q.   Could you mark the positions of the two persons at the moment

20     when they were shot, in this photo?

21        A.   I'll mark with red [marks].  They were about in this location,

22     according to my information.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Were there any containers or any other obstacles

24     there?

25        A.   Not at the time of my visit.

Page 7118

 1        Q.   And at the time of the incident?

 2        A.   According to the witness statement and the information provided

 3     to me, there were.  There were three containers.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  In which direction were the two persons moving at the

 5     moment when the incident happened, when they were shot at?

 6        A.   They were moving from east to west, in the direction of this

 7     arrow [marks].

 8        Q.   We still didn't hear from you whether they were shot at by a

 9     single bullet -- or, rather, you did say that it was a single bullet, did

10     you not?

11        A.   Yes, I did, according to my information.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Did they both suffer entry/exit wounds, or, in other

13     words, did the bullet exit from both the victims' bodies?

14        A.   Well, if it was a single bullet and the wounds were as described

15     in the situation, they would both have entry/exit wounds -- entry/exit

16     wounds, but the daughter might have an extra entry wound in her stomach

17     as well, but I wouldn't know because it doesn't state here that.  The

18     mother, at least, because she was, according to my information, walking

19     along, I think, the left side, but I would have to read the witness

20     statement again for that.  But they would both have entry and exit

21     wounds.

22        Q.   In a nutshell, the bullet was never found and it was never shown

23     to you; right?

24        A.   Well, I don't know if the bullet was never found, but it was

25     never shown to me.

Page 7119

 1        Q.   Is that why you had to conclude in your report about the calibre

 2     based on the wound and the distance, because you were not given any

 3     information about the calibre; right?

 4        A.   That is correct.

 5        Q.   Did the Sarajevo police or the Muslim police conclude the

 6     calibre -- what was the calibre in question?  At the moment of the

 7     investigation, they could do that; right?

 8        A.   I would have to read the witness statements for that.  But if

 9     they -- if there was a bullet, they should be able to conclude what

10     calibre it was.

11        Q.   Do you agree with me that they could have done that based on the

12     entry wound?  They could have concluded, based on the entry wound, what

13     the calibre was?

14        A.   No, because they would need the bullet, itself.

15        Q.   Very well.  Did they tell you about the levels of the entry and

16     exit wounds?  Were the two points at the same level?

17        A.   I was not -- I cannot remember being given that information.

18        Q.   But that information would be crucial for you to determine the

19     direction and the point from which the shot was fired; right?

20        A.   It would help, but it would not be crucial.

21        Q.   However, if the entry and exit wounds were at the same distance

22     from the ground, then we could conclude that the bullet was shot from the

23     same level and from this very street; right?

24        A.   Not necessarily so.  The entry doesn't have to be exactly in the

25     same line as the exit wound.  It depends on what tissue is in the way of

Page 7120

 1     the bullet and if any bone structure is hit or otherwise.

 2        Q.   Did the bullet in question hit a single bone in any of the two

 3     victims?

 4        A.   I do not know.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Do you agree that the horizon of this hilltop -- or,

 6     rather, the top of the hill is some 50 metres from the foot of the hill?

 7        A.   It would be, more or less, yes.

 8        Q.   For example, if the bullet had been fired from the foot, then the

 9     wounds would be parallel with the ground.  If, however, the bullet was

10     fired from the top, it would have hit the bodies at a certain angle.

11     Right?

12        A.   There would always be an angle, since a bullet is not a laser.

13     It follows a parabolic, even at ground level.

14        Q.   However, the parabola would be wider if the bullet had been fired

15     from the hilltop?

16        A.   The angle would be greater, yes.

17        Q.   On page 74 of your report, you excluded 7.62-calibre with

18     39-millimetre charge because the distance would have been extreme, at the

19     very far end of the range.  And you have also excluded calibres bigger

20     than 7.92 because the tissue damage would have been far greater.  Right?

21        A.   That is correct.  I'm sorry, I have to correct.  I did not

22     exclude it, but it would be very unlikely.

23        Q.   You didn't exclude 7.62 and 39 millimetres; right?

24        A.   I've written it would be at the extreme range and would be very

25     inaccurate, and therefore, in my opinion, there would be three calibres

Page 7121

 1     that would be more likely used than this one.  So I did not exclude it.

 2        Q.   Its velocity at the end, while passing through the two human

 3     bodies, would be much lower if the former one was in question; right?

 4        A.   If the 7.62 times 39 had been used, the exit speed after passing

 5     through two bodies would be lower than with the other bullets, depending,

 6     of course, on the range fired, because if the other bullets had been

 7     fired from a greater range, the speed might be the same as the 7.62 times

 8     39 millimetres that would be fired from a shorter range.

 9        Q.   According to your conclusions, where was the bullet fired from,

10     eventually?

11        A.   The bullet, according to my conclusions, was fired from -- we

12     have to switch to page 75 of the paper version.

13             Could I have --

14        Q.   We can call it up, but perhaps you can mark the assumed place

15     from which the bullet was fired in the photo.  Then I would like to

16     tender the photo into evidence and we can move on.

17        A.   It will be an indication, but I could -- I can do that [marks].

18        Q.   That would have been the range; right?

19        A.   [Marks].  Somewhere from this -- within this area, the shot would

20     have originated, to my opinion.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Two hundred metre --

22             THE WITNESS:  Two hundred metres would be the end of the street

23     at the T-junction.

24             JUDGE KWON:  So that's the distance from the place of the

25     incident?

Page 7122

 1             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  Would you put the date and signature on

 3     this picture.

 4             THE WITNESS:  [Marks]

 5             JUDGE KWON:  That will be Exhibit -- just a second.  What's the

 6     number for this?

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit D665.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Before we remove the photo, did I understand you properly?  Was

11     that supposed to be between 200 and 1.104 metres?  That's the area from

12     which the shot came; right?

13        A.   It must have been.  Only the houses higher up the hill have

14     better views than the houses on street level, because the houses on

15     street level would have absolutely no insight -- would only view the

16     victims at a very late time after clearing the containers.  So more

17     likely they would be higher up the hill.

18        Q.   But then it also proves that the distance was a bit bigger?

19        A.   Could you -- could you clarify that question, please?

20        Q.   If, from the foot of the hill, from the 200 metres, towards the

21     top, the visibility is what it is, and the higher you climb, the distance

22     ranges from 200 metres to 1.104; right?

23        A.   That is correct.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25             Could the Court please produce the same photo from page 75,

Page 7123

 1     14045.  This is from the gentleman's report, page 75 of his report.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Does the name "Ozrenska Street" ring any bells,

 4     Mr. van der Weijden?

 5        A.   Yes, that was named as the shooting position.

 6        Q.   In your photo, is Ozrenska marked in red?

 7        A.   On the top photo of page 75, Ozrenska is the red line within the

 8     field of fire just before 1104 metres, that is correct.

 9        Q.   Could I please ask you to take a blue pen and draw another blue

10     line parallel with Ozrenska Street, just to avoid any ambiguity in

11     locating Ozrenska Street.

12        A.   [Marks].  This is just to the north of the red line.

13        Q.   Kindly put today's date and initial the photo.  I would like to

14     tender it and move on.

15        A.   [Marks]

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We would like to tender just this

17     page, because the document has probably already been admitted as a whole.

18     We need the picture to stay on the screen.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Mr. van der Weijden, were you ever informed that the separation

21     line went along Ozrenska Street throughout the entire duration of the

22     war; that the Serbs were on one side and that the Muslims were on the

23     other side of Ozrenska Street?

24        A.   I was only made aware of that Serb forces were on Ozrenska

25     Street, but I wasn't informed that it was the exact location --

Page 7124

 1     separation line where the Bosnian forces also were.

 2                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Were you informed about any other separation lines?

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Excuse me.

 6             I was told that we have technical difficulties today and it's not

 7     possible for us to keep any marked pictures for this moment.  Another

 8     option we can think of is to use a video shot later on.

 9             But as far as this picture is concerned, if you look at the

10     e-court version, Ozrenska Street is already marked, so we don't have to

11     keep this, necessarily.

12             So we can move on at this moment.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   At this distance from Ozrenska Street to the place of the

16     incident, were there any troops there?  And if there were, which troops

17     were those?

18             And my previous question was this:  Have you been informed about

19     any other separation lines, save for this one along the Ozrenska Street?

20        A.   Not that I can recall.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we again see the witness's

22     statement, please.  The ERN is 0105-6125 - 1D - P664.  We had it on the

23     screen a minute ago, and it was admitted a minute ago.

24             JUDGE KWON:  D664.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let's go to page 2, please.

Page 7125

 1             We have already read the sixth paragraph, and we heard that there

 2     were no sniper incidents either before or after.  And the witness only

 3     suggests that the shot might have come from Ozrenska Street.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Do you agree that from a distance of 1.000 metres or, rather,

 6     1.104 metres, this victim that provided a statement as a witness

 7     indicated Ozrenska Street only because she knew that that was the closest

 8     Serbian position?  Did she have any other elements at her disposal to

 9     draw her conclusion from?

10        A.   I would not know if the witness had any other information.

11        Q.   He believes that the confrontation line on Ozrenska Street was

12     700 metres away, and from your measurements we can see that it was over

13     1.000 metres away.  Can you draw a conclusion, an unambiguous conclusion,

14     that the bullet, indeed, originated from Ozrenska Street, or do you

15     adhere to what you said, that it came from an area ranging from 200

16     metres to 1.104 metres, that that's the area from which the bullet could

17     have originated?

18        A.   I did not measure Ozrenska Street to be 1.100 metres.  It's -- as

19     you can see where the arrow points on page 75, the 1104 metres is south

20     of Ozrenska Street, so it's not the exact same distance.  But I do -- I

21     did conclude that the bullet could come from within that field of fire.

22     So it could be from a shorter distance or it could be from a longer

23     distance.  So approximately from 200 metres to 1100 metres, that's where

24     the shot must have originated from.  But I also said that the shot would

25     be more likely to have come from a longer range because they would have a

Page 7126

 1     more dominating position of the street, the shooter there.

 2        Q.   If we agree that we should deduct perhaps 100 metres from 1104

 3     metres, Ozrenska Street would still be about a thousand metres from the

 4     place of the incident; right?

 5        A.   More or less.

 6        Q.   Were you in Ozrenska Street, and would you agree that its

 7     northern slope commands a view of the place of the incident and its

 8     southern side is turned towards Lukavica and the center of the city?

 9     Would you agree with that?

10        A.   I would agree that the houses on the north side of the street

11     would have a better view of the place of incidents.  But could you

12     clarify what you mean with "southern side"?  Just the southern side of

13     the street?

14        Q.   I meant south of the street is a south-facing slope, and the word

15     I mentioned was not interpreted to you.  Ozrenska Street is a ridge, a

16     watershed ridge, and do you remember that its northern side is directed

17     towards the place of the incident and its southern side towards the city,

18     and that Ozrenska Street is on top of the place where the incident

19     happened?

20        A.   I remember that the houses on both sides of the street were

21     approximately at the same level.  So on the south side of the street, you

22     would also -- there would be gaps between the houses on the north side

23     which would offer some houses on the southern side insight at the

24     incident site as well.

25        Q.   Thank you.  We will have an opportunity to see that in a

Page 7127

 1     topographic map.

 2             Could the Court please produce 65 ter 14045, page 77.

 3             Let's look at the photos contained in your report.  Could you

 4     please look at the photo and tell us what it depicts?  Is the place of

 5     the incident somewhere towards the top part of the photo?  And if it is,

 6     could you please mark it for us.

 7        A.   The place of the incident would be -- sorry -- would be somewhere

 8     around here [marks].

 9        Q.   Where was this photo taken from?

10        A.   As I have described above in the text, the photo was taken from

11     Ozrenska Street, at street level, so standing on the sidewalk between

12     houses, so with clear view.  From the houses, I would have a better view,

13     but I did not have access to the houses.

14        Q.   What size zoom was used to take this photo?

15        A.   On the camera that I used, there's an 18- to 200-millimetre zoom,

16     but it's a digital camera, so it would be 25 millimetres to 300

17     millimetres zoom, but I do not remember -- I do not remember exactly

18     which zoom was used and how much times I magnified it on the computer.

19     So it doesn't necessarily -- it's four times magnification or six times,

20     I could not say that.

21        Q.   Mr. van der Weijden, from this place to the foot of the hill or

22     where the hill starts ascending, doesn't it seem to you that the place of

23     the incident should be towards the very top of the photo?  Look closely.

24     Isn't that the straight part of the street?  From that place to the

25     slope, is the distance really how you assumed it was, 200 metres?

Page 7128

 1     Wouldn't you say that the crossroads where the incident happened is

 2     towards the very north and the top of the photo?

 3        A.   I'm checking it now.  Just a moment.  Just a moment, please.

 4             No, the location that I've just marked would be the location of

 5     the incident site.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  Could you please be provided with the map, and could

 7     you please tell us whether Ozrenska Street is on the watershed ridge

 8     between the southern and northern slope, at the trig points 676 and 650?

 9     We have all the markings.  Could you please look at the map, and could

10     you confirm what I just said?  If necessary, we will also record all

11     that.

12             Could the usher please provide the witness with the map.  Thank

13     you.

14             JUDGE KWON:  I will propose to take a break now, and in the

15     meantime the witness can take a brief look at the map, and we can proceed

16     after the break.

17             We'll break for 25 minutes, which means we will resume at five to

18     4.00.

19                           --- Recess taken at 3.31 p.m.

20                           --- On resuming at 3.59 p.m.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  Let's proceed, Mr. Karadzic.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Before we move to Ozrenska Street, can I just ask you,

25     Mr. van der Weijden, where was this photo taken from?  You said it was

Page 7129

 1     taken from Ozrenska Street; correct?

 2        A.   That is correct.

 3        Q.   Before which house number in Ozrenska Street, if you remember?

 4        A.   I do not remember.

 5        Q.   If you have that anywhere in your notes, it would be of

 6     assistance for us, because our team will visit the very same spot.

 7             Do you have any GPS coordinates from -- of the position from

 8     which you took the photo?

 9        A.   Just a moment.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Do we not have it above the photo in your report?

11             THE WITNESS:  Yes, that would be the coordinate.  Sorry.

12             JUDGE KWON:  You can see it from the monitor, yes.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14        Q.   Can you please note the date and your signature, and then we can

15     admit this page into evidence, please.

16        A.   [Marks]

17             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  That part will be admitted as Exhibit D666.

18             Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

19             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.

20             Just for the record, I'd like it to be known that if this is

21     based on the US [Realtime transcript read in error "GPS"] map that

22     Mr. Karadzic was looking at yesterday, I just want to note for the record

23     that we have identified inaccuracies in that map, and we don't

24     necessarily accept it as being an accurate representation of the -- of

25     the purported territory that it depicts.

Page 7130

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

 2             MR. GAYNOR:  The record should read "US" not "GPS map."  The map

 3     is produced by the United States Department of Defence, I believe.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 5        Q.   Could I now direct your attention, Mr. van der Weijden, as well

 6     as the attention of the OTP and the Trial Chamber, to this section of the

 7     map in which one can see Ozrenska Street.  And would you agree that the

 8     contour lines and the isobars depict that Ozrenska Street is a stretch

 9     along the ridge between the north and the south slopes?

10        A.   No, I don't agree.  It's located on a slope.  The "600" that you

11     see to the left, the letters are pointed downwards.  That indicates in

12     maps that there's a slope upwards.

13        Q.   And do you agree that these peaks, the elevation 670 and 655, are

14     very close to Ozrenska Street, and that in the continuation, the slope

15     moves to both sides, and that the street is spread along the very ridge

16     of the hill?  Isn't that correct?

17        A.   It's not spread on the ridge.  It's spread along the slope,

18     especially the section that I've marked with two black dots on the map.

19        Q.   Thank you.  And would you agree that -- or could you establish

20     now what is the distance between Ozrenska Street and the place of the

21     incident?

22        A.   I calculated it, and it was 825 metres from the same location

23     that I've marked with a black dot on the -- just below Ozrenska Street,

24     the triangle.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.

Page 7131

 1             Do we see the dot you marked?  Could you put your marked version

 2     on the ELMO?

 3             THE WITNESS:  Oh, I had them marked on this one, this is the

 4     first, these tiny dots, yes, but I will put them on here [marks].

 5             JUDGE KWON:  While looking -- I would like you to mark on the

 6     photocopied version while looking at the originals.

 7             THE WITNESS:  I had a sketch drawn of the original, Your Honour.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  You don't have a photocopied version.  You can

 9     explain --

10             THE WITNESS:  Sorry.

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, no.  Could the witness please

12     receive what we all have received.

13             JUDGE KWON:  He has it.

14             So number 1 depicts the place of incident?

15             THE WITNESS:  Correct.

16             JUDGE KWON:  And number 2 depicts what?

17             THE WITNESS:  It depicts the distance of 825 metres, according to

18     the map.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   And this is Ozrenska Street.  It stretches from Moravska [phoen]

21     Street towards these trigonometric points 655 and 670; is that correct?

22     Can you see where it says "Ozrenska"?

23        A.   Yes, I see that.

24        Q.   Are you aware that there is no Serbian position closer to

25     Ozrenska -- closer to the place of the incident than the one situated in

Page 7132

 1     Ozrenska Street, that that's the closest position that there was?

 2        A.   I would not know.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Could you then draw a conclusion, without -- beyond

 4     any reasonable doubt, that the shooting came from the Serbian side?

 5        A.   No, I couldn't.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  Can you please put your initials on this map, and can

 7     we then have it admitted into evidence, please?  And as a memento, we can

 8     give you a clean copy.

 9        A.   [Marks]

10             JUDGE KWON:  This photocopy, marked, will be admitted as

11     Exhibit D667.  Correct, Mr. Registrar?

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit D667, Your Honours.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14        Q.   Could I now please draw your attention to Incident 6 from the F

15     list.  If I can remind you, it's an incident which occurred on the 6th of

16     January, 1994.  Is that correct?

17        A.   Yes.  I have it before me.

18        Q.   According to the description of this incident, Sanija Dzevlan was

19     shot and wounded in her buttocks while riding her bicycle across a bridge

20     between Dobrinja 2 to Dobrinja 3 on the 6th of January, 1994, at 1630

21     hours, by a burst of fire.  She was shot with one bullet in the lowest

22     part of her back.  Isn't that so?

23        A.   That is correct.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Could you give the page number of your report,

25     Mr. van der Weijden?

Page 7133

 1             THE WITNESS:  It would be 47 of the paper copy, Your Honour.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   On what part of the bridge in Dobrinja was Sanija Dzevlan

 5     wounded, according to the information you received?

 6        A.   She was wounded, according to the information that I received, on

 7     the northern side of the bridge, on the north-east side.

 8        Q.   So what was the direction she was moving in?

 9        A.   She was moving from, more or less, south to north.  She had just

10     crossed the bridge.

11        Q.   Thank you.  So the fire was opened from which side?

12        A.   According to my information, from the general direction of

13     east-east-south -- east-south-east, to her right.

14        Q.   What is the distance between the place from which it was shot to

15     the place of the incident?

16        A.   There are two locations that would be possible.  One is at 355

17     metres and the other is at 820 metres.

18        Q.   And why not a position that would be between 0 and 355 or between

19     355 and 820 metres?  Why just these two possible distances?

20        A.   Because those are open fields.  So if the shooter would be there,

21     he would be exposed to any fire from any side.

22        Q.   So both the victim and the shooter had to be out in the open;

23     correct?

24        A.   No.  The victim was crossing the bridge, and the bridge had some

25     screens in place, and I believe the shooter was in a building, because to

Page 7134

 1     be out in the open, as a shooter, he would expose himself and risk his

 2     own life by that.

 3        Q.   If we recall the previous incident in Ivana Krndelja Street, your

 4     conclusion is that the shooter had to be out in the open.  Why couldn't

 5     he have been out in the open here?

 6        A.   Because he would be exposed to all sides and would severely risk

 7     his life by that.  He could be fired upon by all sides.

 8        Q.   How far from these screens on the bridge did Sanija Dzevlan move

 9     at the moment when she was hit?  How far was she from the screens?  She

10     was screened while she was on the bridge, because the bridge is screened,

11     so she moved away from the screen.  And how long did she cycle before she

12     was hit?

13        A.   Only for a short distance.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15             Could we now please see 65 ter 14045, page 49.  It's

16     Mr. van der Weijden's document, and on page 49 are the photographs which

17     we deem to be important.  The incident begins on page 47, but the

18     photograph that we are interested in is on page 48.  But in the document,

19     itself, it's page 49, so in e-court it's page 49.  The ERN page is

20     0629-5274.

21             JUDGE KWON:  We have it.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I apologise.  I was looking at the

23     ELMO.

24             Could we please see the upper photograph, and zoom in a little

25     bit.

Page 7135

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Mr. van der Weijden, do you know who was where along this

 3     possible line between 0 to 820 metres?  Which forces were positioned

 4     where?

 5        A.   I was told that the street that runs from, roughly, north to

 6     south -- south to north, which I will mark with a blue line [marks],

 7     that -- that this was the separation line with the Muslim forces to the

 8     west of the line and the Serbian forces on the right of the line.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Can you please place number 1 next to the line that

10     you were told was the separation line.

11        A.   [Marks]

12        Q.   And it is at about 400 metres from the place of the incident;

13     correct?

14        A.   More or less, yes.

15        Q.   But would you agree that from the buildings which are 400 metres

16     away, you cannot see the bridge because the view is obstructed by the

17     buildings which are at a distance of about 355 metres and located on the

18     Muslim-controlled territory?

19        A.   That is correct.  That's the same conclusion I draw.

20        Q.   Thank you.  So if the shot came from the Serbian position, then

21     it had to be the distance of 820 metres, and that's roughly the distance

22     from the church; is that correct?

23        A.   That is correct.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Can I please ask you to mark the place where the

25     church is located, though we can see the mark of 820 metres.  So you

Page 7136

 1     don't have to mark that, but can you just write the date and your

 2     initials, please.

 3        A.   [Marks]

 4             JUDGE KWON:  That will be Exhibit D668.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6        Q.   Was that a burst of fire or were these single shots, one of which

 7     hit Sanija Dzevlan?

 8        A.   In the witness statement, it was written that the bullets started

 9     to fly, so I assumed that they were -- there was a burst of fire from a

10     machine-gun.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Does that explain why she was hit immediately after

12     she appeared from behind the screen?

13        A.   Not necessarily so.

14        Q.   But would you agree that in case these were single shots, the

15     shooter would need a little bit of time in order to see her through the

16     sight, whereas in case of a burst of fire, that would not have been the

17     case?

18        A.   That, I agree.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In the Galic case, this witness

20     stated that the barricade was made from two to three centimetres thick

21     and two and a half high -- two and a half metres high metal sheets.  So

22     we can also tender this statement.

23             Could we please see 65 ter 22520, page 2.

24             We have the statement in English, and I will read it out in

25     Serbian:

Page 7137

 1             "The barricade which was in the area of the bridge only covered

 2     the bridge from end to end.  There was open space at each end.  The

 3     barricade was made of metal boards, about two or three centimetres thick

 4     and about two and a half metres high."

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   So she could have been hit only immediately after she left the

 7     space which is sheltered by the barricade.

 8             Can we please have this statement admitted?

 9             And would you agree with that, and have you had a chance to see

10     this statement?  Did you have access to it?

11        A.   Yes, I recognise it.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

13             Could we please have it admitted?

14             JUDGE KWON:  D669.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   In your opinion, what was the speed at which a bicycle moved;

17     that is to say, this victim?

18        A.   I would estimate it at 10 to 15 kilometres per hour, maybe faster

19     because she was passing a dangerous stretch, stretch of road.

20        Q.   Thank you.  You have already said that, but just to establish

21     everything.  So immediately after appearing from behind the shelter,

22     which wouldn't have allowed a bullet to pass through, she entered the

23     line of fire, and she was shot immediately after the shelter.  So would

24     you conclude that no one was aiming at her, but, rather, that she just

25     entered into the line of fire?

Page 7138

 1        A.   No, I would not conclude that from this.  As was written in the

 2     witness statement, the barricade was on the bridge and there were no

 3     barricades just before and after the bridge.  So she was -- she had been

 4     visible just before getting on the bridge, which would give the shooter

 5     time to -- already to aim at the location from which she would appear, or

 6     even fire so she would, indeed, ride into the line of fire.

 7        Q.   Well, it's a possibility, but it's not something that you

 8     established; correct?

 9        A.   I did not specifically establish that.

10        Q.   And is what I said also one possibility, that there was fire and

11     that she rode into the line of the bullet, considering, of course, that

12     if that was Serbian fire, that the distance was 820 metres; correct?

13        A.   That would be a possibility, yes.

14        Q.   Thank you.  Do we agree that this person was turned in the

15     direction of north-south, moving along this axis, and that the fire came

16     into her flank, the side of her body?

17        A.   That is correct.

18        Q.   Thank you.  How do you estimate the precision of automatic

19     weapons at a distance of 820 metres?

20        A.   I've seen machine-gunners hit targets at 600 metres with a single

21     shot, so 820 metres would not be an extreme difficult distance for a

22     machine-gun.

23        Q.   Was she hit from a machine-gun?  What was the calibre of the

24     bullet that hit her?

25        A.   From the wound sustained, I would estimate it to be a 7.62 or a

Page 7139

 1     7.92 millimetres.

 2        Q.   So in this incident, we also do not have the bullet or the

 3     calibre.  That means that we have to speculate; isn't it so?

 4        A.   That is correct.

 5        Q.   Would you agree that 7.9 millimetres -- that the Serbian Army did

 6     not have automatic weapons with this calibre?

 7        A.   As I've stated in the previous days, I personally saw Serbian

 8     troops with machine-guns in that calibre during my time with UNPROFOR.

 9        Q.   But we have no evidence that this was machine-gun fire, because a

10     machine-gun creates much greater noise; right?

11        A.   It creates the same noise as a regular gun with the same bullet,

12     only more rounds after each other.

13        Q.   Are you aware of the climate conditions in Sarajevo at 1630 hours

14     on a day in January?  When does the night fall in Sarajevo on the 6th of

15     January?

16        A.   I would have -- I would have to research that.

17        Q.   And if I tell you that it's rather dark at the time and that

18     darkness falls immediately after 16 hours [as interpreted], is that

19     something that you understand, that you will accept?

20        A.   Well, darkness never falls immediately; there's always twilight.

21     But not after -- 16 hours would be very early.  But somewhere around that

22     time, within a few hours, it would be dark, I agree.

23        Q.   And if I tell you that at 1630 in the Sarajevo Valley, the

24     twilight is already quite thick, is that something that you would accept?

25     We can check that.  We can wait until the 6th of January and then see

Page 7140

 1     what it looks like.

 2        A.   I would agree that the surroundings have an impact on the level

 3     of twilight.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  According to the statement, the first sentence says:

 5             [In English] "On 6th of January, 1994, at around 1630 hours, I

 6     was returning home by my bicycle.  At that moment, I was on the bridge in

 7     Nikola Demonja Street when bullets started to fly that were fired from

 8     Dobrinja 4, which is under the control of aggressor."

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Do we have that statement before us, Mr. Karadzic?

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm afraid not.  It's 65 ter 22518.

11     The previous one has been admitted.  If not, could it please be admitted?

12     Thank you.

13             JUDGE KWON:  The previous one has been admitted.  And what are

14     you reading from now?

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm reading from a hard copy.

16     Could the Court please produce 65 ter 22518.  The previous statement

17     described the barricade on the bridge, and this one actually depicts the

18     events, what happened and when.

19             It says here that bullets started flying and that they were fired

20     from Dobrinja 4.  She also says that Dobrinja 4 is under the control of

21     the aggressor.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Is there any dispute that the incident happened around 1630

24     hours?

25             JUDGE KWON:  What is the question, Mr. Karadzic?

Page 7141

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Does Mr. van der Weijden agree that the incident happened at the

 3     time indicated by the witness, herself?

 4        A.   Yes, I would agree to that if she states that.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  By some sort of miracle, in the Galic judgement the

 6     time has moved between 1500 and 1600 hours in order to avoid the

 7     twilight.  I'm afraid that this might appear as an adjudicated fact;

 8     therefore, I would like to correct that and establish facts correctly.

 9             When you drafted your report, you took into account the time

10     indicated by this witness, by the victim?

11             JUDGE KWON:  Your statement is a totally inappropriate statement.

12             Can you answer the question, Mr. van der Weijden?

13             THE WITNESS:  I took into account the time that it was daylight

14     when the victim was shot.

15             JUDGE KWON:  The transcript should have read your previous

16     statement is an inappropriate statement.  Yes, thank you.

17             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   Did you have any elements that would point to a different time, a

19     time different from the time indicated by the witness?

20        A.   No, I don't.

21        Q.   Can we then conclude that you took into account what the witness

22     wrote down, herself, in her own hand?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Based on your experience, would it be important, for

25     a sharpshooter or a sniper, what time of day it is when they open fire?

Page 7142

 1        A.   For a sharpshooter or a sniper, the time of day is always

 2     important.  It also depends on what equipment was available.  But I did

 3     not conclude anywhere it was a sharpshooter or a sniper.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 5             I would like to tender this statement into evidence, please.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, it will be admitted.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit D670.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Can I now remind you of Incident 9 from Schedule F,

10     Mr. van der Weijden.  Could you please consult your notes, and let's deal

11     with that particular incident.  If I'm not mistaken, you will find it on

12     page 67 in your report.  Right?

13        A.   Yes.  I have it before me.

14        Q.   Will you agree with me that the incident happened in a military

15     field on the 26th of June, 1994, in the former Djure Jaksica Street and

16     currently at the Adija Mulabegovica Street?

17        A.   I do not know the exact name of the street, it was only given to

18     me in the situation.  The coordinate I had of the location was only

19     pointed out to me by the investigator, and I took the GPS reading.  And

20     as for a military area, I only know that there were uniformed soldiers

21     nearby, but I do not know that it was on a military field.

22        Q.   The name of the locality or the neighbourhood is Vojnicko Polje,

23     or the military field.  The investigator of the OTP pointed out the place

24     of the incidents to you, and his brief to you was to find the location

25     from which the shot was fired; right?

Page 7143

 1        A.   That is correct.

 2        Q.   As a result of the incident, a 16-year-old girl was shot and

 3     wounded in her right shoulder.  According to the testimony of her

 4     girlfriend, after the wounding, BiH Army soldiers helped the girl, and

 5     allegedly they were not armed.  The soldiers had been on the second or

 6     the third floor.  The two girls accused the Serbs for the incident, and

 7     they said that the shots had been fired from the Institute for Blind

 8     Children.  Right?

 9        A.   I do not recall all the details, but the alleged shooting

10     position was the School of the Blind.

11        Q.   Who was it who first mentioned the School for the Blind as the

12     place where the sniper nest was and as the place where the shots came

13     from?

14        A.   I read it in the initial documents provided to me by the OTP.

15        Q.   Do you remember the document where that could be found?  And,

16     secondly, where did the OTP find the School for the Blind to put it in

17     that document, if it was, indeed, the OTP that had come up with that?

18        A.   It was first mentioned by -- yeah, by the OTP, and that was the

19     location of -- that was the place where they -- what the alleged shooting

20     position was.  I cannot remember at the moment where that document is.

21     And where the OTP found the School of the Blind, I would not know, but it

22     must have been stated, since this was used in a different trial as well,

23     also from the UNMO and other witnesses, that it was a sniping nest.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Am I then right when I say that you were expected to

25     confirm what the OTP thought was correct?

Page 7144

 1        A.   No.  My task was to go to the incident site and see what

 2     possibilities were there to take -- that would have a clear sight of the

 3     incident and would offer possibilities for shooters to have a location.

 4     So I did take into account the School of the Blind because that was

 5     within that area, but I did not solely take into account the School of

 6     the Blind.

 7        Q.   That means that besides the School for Blind Children, you

 8     considered some other locations as well; right?

 9        A.   That is right.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

11             Could the Court please produce 65 ter 14045, which is

12     Mr. van der Weijden's document.  Page 70, please.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   While we're waiting for the document to be produced, let me ask

15     you:  Did you go to the place of this incident?

16        A.   Yes, I did, because that was the location from where photo 2 was

17     taken.

18        Q.   And where was this photo taken from?

19        A.   From the actual incident site, as pointed to me by the

20     investigator and taken from the GPS coordinate.

21        Q.   All right.  So the person taking the photo was standing at the

22     place of the incident.  What does the photo then depict?

23             JUDGE KWON:  Are we referring to photo 2?  It says photo 1 is

24     taken from --

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'd rather talk about photo 1.  I

Page 7145

 1     would love to be able to do away with photo 1.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   What does it depict?

 4        A.   Photo 1 is a photo taken from the site of the School of the

 5     Blind, because the site had allegedly been used during the war, the

 6     windows that had been there at the time allegedly had been near bricked

 7     up.  So I had to take a picture from the south-eastern side of the -- of

 8     that building.  And it offers a view of the incident site.

 9        Q.   Taken from the assumed place from which the shots were fired;

10     right?

11        A.   That is correct.

12        Q.   And, again, what is the zoom?

13        A.   It would be the same as before, taken with a digital camera with

14     an 18- to 200-millimetre lens, which would translate, for a digital

15     camera, to a 25, 26 to 300 millimetre.  But I could not establish the

16     magnification for this photo.  Excuse me, that's 25 to 300 millimetres.

17        Q.   Do you have a photo in a normal scale, 1:1, the way a naked eye

18     would see from the school to the place of the incident?

19        A.   I estimate it about to be the same, because the school is only

20     about 200 metres away.

21        Q.   Between the place of the incident and the school, and we're still

22     thinking of the school as one of the possible places, where was the

23     separation line?  Did they ever tell you where the separation line was?

24        A.   Not exactly.  I knew -- I was told that the School of the Blind

25     was occupied by Serb troops, and there were Bosnian soldiers helping the

Page 7146

 1     girl, so they would be in the buildings next to the site of the incident.

 2     But I'm not aware of the exact separation lines.

 3        Q.   However, you were told that the area had been taken by the Muslim

 4     Army and that the Muslim troops were also on the separation line in their

 5     own trenches; right?

 6        A.   I do not recall that.

 7        Q.   How did you determine where the girl was at the moment when she

 8     was wounded; based on what?  Was she on the ground or was she in a

 9     building, on the ground floor?  Where was she?

10        A.   She was situated on the corner of the building.  The terrace or

11     the covered terrace that you see on the building now apparently wasn't

12     there at the time of the incident, and she was standing at the corner of

13     the building, or she was appearing at the corner of the building to which

14     the blue arrow points.

15        Q.   Here, we have an obstacle on the opposite side, and we have again

16     180 degrees as a possibility of the range from which the bullet

17     originated.  Did you take into account any other possibility, any other

18     location from which the bullet might have originated?

19        A.   My method is to go to a location, view the surroundings, see what

20     technical and tactical possibilities there are, and eliminate the ones

21     that are impossible or are very unlikely.  So I did take into account all

22     possibilities.

23        Q.   Did you take a photo of any of the possible places that were

24     eventually eliminated by you?

25        A.   In photo 2, the building, the School of the Blind, is marked, but

Page 7147

 1     the whole area I took into account.  But if I would move to the right

 2     with that picture, there would be no view of the victim.  And the parking

 3     garage would be an impossible position for a shooter.

 4        Q.   Are you then sure?  Have you established beyond any reasonable

 5     doubt that the shot was fired from the second floor of the School for the

 6     Blind or, for that matter, anywhere in the School for the Blind?

 7        A.   In my opinion, the shot was indeed fired from the School of the

 8     Blind.

 9        Q.   Could the bullet have originated from anywhere else?  The range

10     was 180 degrees.  The whole side of the building could have been the

11     shooting position, so do you think that the bullet could have originated

12     from somewhere else, from another site?

13        A.   Well, the range would actually be 270 degrees because she was

14     standing on the corner, and that would eliminate about 90 degrees of the

15     circle.  The bullet -- the position that I started with was 270 degrees,

16     and then I eliminated possibilities, ending up with the School of the

17     Blind.

18        Q.   How many degrees would have allowed for the possibility for a

19     bullet to originate from there?  Or let me put it differently.  What was

20     the range from which the bullet could have originated?

21        A.   If I would look at the flat terrain, the bullet could have --

22     could have originated from up to a thousand metres, if there was -- if

23     there were only flat terrain and no separation line, no buildings,

24     nothing.

25        Q.   Well, that's if you assumed that the bullet must have originated

Page 7148

 1     from the Serbian side.  But let's assume you don't know.  What is the

 2     area, in degrees, that was open to bullet fire?  Let's not talk about any

 3     separation lines or who could have fired the shots.  How open to bullet

 4     fire was the victim's position?  What was the range between the victim

 5     and the possible place from which the bullet was fired, in degrees?

 6        A.   In degrees, it would be 270 degrees, as I've stated before.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Do you have any elements describing the position of

 8     the bullet canal in the body?  Where did the bullet enter, where did it

 9     exit?  Do you have any information about the position of the girl's body

10     when the bullet entered the body, and how did the bullet travel, and

11     where did it exit?

12        A.   No, I didn't.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14             Could the Court please produce 1D02412.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Could I ask you to pay attention to the photo.  Look at the

17     arrow.  Does it show in the direction of the School for the Blind?

18     Further on, is there another arrow pointing to Dobrinja, on the one side,

19     and Bulevar Mese Selimovica?  And, finally, where it says the place of

20     the incident, is this, indeed, the place where the incident happened, and

21     is there an open line of vision towards the school and towards the street

22     in front of it?

23        A.   I could not conclude anything from this picture.  I recognise the

24     high-rise building as being similar to the high-rise building in my

25     pictures, but for the rest, I don't recognize any features.

Page 7149

 1        Q.   Do you agree with me that there are no major obstacles here, not

 2     only in front of the School for the Blind, but also in front of any other

 3     facilities?  Do you agree that there are no obstacles and that shots

 4     could be fired from a closer or a more distant range?  There are no

 5     obstacles anywhere, unless your brief was to determine that the shots had

 6     come from the Serb territory.

 7        A.   Again, I could not conclude anything from this picture, since I

 8     don't recognize the exact location.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the Court please produce

10     page 68 in Mr. van der Weijden's document, 014 -- 14045.

11             We'll use your photo, and we will try to see how accurate we can

12     be.

13             Can the upper photo please be blown up.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   And, Mr. van der Weijden, can you tell us, what does the photo

16     depict?

17        A.   The photo depicts the incident site as well as the alleged

18     shooting position, which I believe is the position which was fired from,

19     with the angle of degrees from the shooting position towards the incident

20     site.

21        Q.   And now could you please pay attention to the entire 180 degrees

22     that I insist on.  Let us put the baseline or the tangent line on this

23     street where the incident happened.  Why do you think that shots could

24     not have originated from any of the other degrees?  Why did you eliminate

25     all the other possibilities?

Page 7150

 1        A.   Because this -- [marks].  In this area, the girl had already been

 2     visible for a long time because she had been coming from this direction

 3     [marks], so I don't think the shooter would have waited until she was

 4     getting to the corner and possibly disappearing into a trench.  So this

 5     is why I left out this area [marks].  Down this street [marks], it would

 6     be difficult to see her because she was just appearing at the corner,

 7     which would give the shooter a very short reaction time to hit her

 8     standing at the corner.  And within this region, this arc [marks], this

 9     is blocked by an almost blind bowl, and this is the parking area that

10     blocks the view and which would offer a very limited -- no tactical

11     position for a shooter.  So this is why I came up to the School of the

12     Blind, or the building known as the School of the Blind.

13        Q.   It's a building marked with "190 metres"; correct?

14        A.   That is correct.

15        Q.   And how high is the building across which the red line is drawn

16     between the firing position and the incident site?

17        A.   There is no building.  From the top floor, the dark spot -- dark

18     area, that's the shadow caused by the sun on the building to the south of

19     it.  That would be this dark area that's a shadow [marks].

20        Q.   Of what?

21        A.   The shadow of this building to the south of it [marks].

22        Q.   So if the shooter was at the School for the Blind, in the

23     northern-most section, he had to take aim right against the corner of

24     this building which casts the shadow in order to hit the target; correct?

25        A.   It would not be very far from the corner, that is correct.

Page 7151

 1        Q.   And please tell us, was it established beyond doubt that the girl

 2     was hit by sniper, or could it have been any sort of single-shot fire?

 3        A.   It could have been any sort of single shot.  I do not know if it

 4     was a sniper, nor do I know his training.

 5        Q.   We don't know what calibre it was; right?

 6        A.   No, I don't.

 7        Q.   And we don't know in which direction the girl was turned, which

 8     direction she was facing; right?

 9        A.   Not exactly; only that she was approaching -- she was on the

10     corner.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Can I just ask you to draw a line marking the

12     separation line on this photograph, because on the photograph below they

13     showed you that.  Can you please draw this line, the confrontation line,

14     along this photograph.  If it would help you, maybe we can lower what we

15     can see on the screen a little bit so that you see the photo below, but

16     it seems we cannot tamper with this photo until it is admitted.  So can

17     you please draw the separation lines or confrontation lines on this

18     particular photo.

19        A.   I could not.  I only am aware that the School of the Blind was

20     indicated as a Serb position and that there were soldiers nearby.  There

21     was a trench located between these buildings -- sorry, I'll mark this

22     with green [marks].  But to my information, that trench was for people to

23     cross the street, so I do not know if it's exactly at the separation

24     line.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Before we keep this, could you put number 1 for

Page 7152

 1     those areas you excluded from the shooting area because the shooter must

 2     have a full view of the victim beforehand.

 3             THE WITNESS:  Yes, sir [marks].

 4             JUDGE KWON:  And number 2 is along the road because the shooter

 5     could not have enough time to prepare.

 6             THE WITNESS:  Okay [marks].

 7             JUDGE KWON:  And number 3 for the parking area.

 8             THE WITNESS:  [Marks]

 9             JUDGE KWON:  And number 4 for the shade of the building.

10             THE WITNESS:  [Marks]

11             JUDGE KWON:  That's enough.  You marked the trench as green, so

12     you don't have to put a separate number.

13             Put the date and signature, please, Mr. van der Weijden.

14             THE WITNESS:  [Marks]

15             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

16             That will be exhibited as Exhibit D ...?

17             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D671, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20             Can we now see 1D02413 in e-court.

21             JUDGE KWON:  2413?

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 2413, yes.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Have you seen traces on the facades of neighbouring buildings on

25     both sides of the separation line, on the basis of which you might

Page 7153

 1     conclude that there was an exchange of fire taking place constantly in

 2     that area, and does this photograph show that to you?  Would you agree

 3     that this the School for the Blind?

 4        A.   This building appears to have a different roof structure than the

 5     building that I have taken a picture of.

 6        Q.   And could this be the old-age pensioners' home?  Have you taken

 7     note of this building which is right next to the separation line?

 8        A.   I do not know any old-age pensioners' home, and I do not know

 9     where the separation line exactly was.

10        Q.   All right.  If this is the old-age pensioners' home situated at

11     the front-line, does this photograph suggest that there was a constant

12     exchange of fire, probably during a long period of time, because the

13     facade of this building is full of various pockmarks that seem to testify

14     to that?

15             JUDGE KWON:  Let us move on.  This witness does not know whether

16     this is situated in the front-line, Mr. Karadzic.

17             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   This building is 40 metres from the incident site, and it was

19     located on the Serbian side, and old-age pensioners lived within it

20     throughout the war.  Have you noticed this building at all, and did

21     anyone take you along to show you this building?

22             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection.  The accused is now giving evidence.  He

23     should just put --

24             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  The witness answered that he does not

25     recognise this.

Page 7154

 1             Is it correct, Mr. van der Weijden?  Do you recognise this

 2     building?

 3             THE WITNESS:  I do not recognise this building.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6        Q.   In your opinion, considering that the army was constantly present

 7     on both sides of the front-line and that there was constant exchange of

 8     fire between the two warring parties in the presence of the army, can it

 9     be considered that the area between the incident site and the

10     neighbouring places can be considered a military zone?  We have a trench

11     here, we have the statement of the witness, who says that the soldiers

12     were on the second and third floors, so do you think that this was a

13     military zone very close to the separation line?

14             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection.  The witness has given his answer in this

15     respect.  If Mr. Karadzic wants to make submissions later to that effect,

16     he's free to do so.  The witness has answered the question, in essence.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Agreed.  The witness didn't come to testify whether

18     this is a civilian zone or a military zone, and he was not there.  He can

19     only guess, Mr. Karadzic.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But this witness is a soldier.  He

21     saw a trench in the immediate vicinity of the incident site, and

22     buildings damaged by bullets.  He knows that the separation line was

23     close by.  It wouldn't be difficult for him to say whether that was

24     military zone or not.  That would be all, whether, in his opinion, this

25     was a war zone or a peaceful part of the city.

Page 7155

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, I told you to move on.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 3             Could we please focus our attention on Incident 3 from the F

 4     Schedule, Mr. van der Weijden.

 5        Q.   It's the 11th of July, 1993; correct?

 6        A.   That is correct.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Do you have the page number on your report,

 8     Mr. van der Weijden?

 9             THE WITNESS:  It would be page 41 on that paper copy.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   Is it correct that in this incident, Munira Zametica, a

13     48-year-old woman, lost her life while she was collecting water below the

14     bridge across the Dobrinja River?

15        A.   That is correct, according to my information.

16        Q.   And who did you receive this information from?

17        A.   From the OTP.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Is that then also Nikola Demonja Street in which the

19     bridge was located and where she was shot with two bullets?

20        A.   I wouldn't know the name of the street, since I only visited the

21     site which was pointed to me by the investigator and checked with the GPS

22     coordinate.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Are you aware that the Muslim police said that the

24     church in Lukavica was the firing position, a church which is located at

25     a distance of more than 1.000 metres?  Your report says "1.104 metres";

Page 7156

 1     correct?

 2        A.   That is correct.

 3        Q.   What about the calibre in this incident, Mr. van der Weijden?

 4     Was the bullet retrieved?  Do we have any data about the calibre?

 5        A.   No, we haven't.

 6        Q.   Would you agree that in your report, just as in other examples,

 7     you had to exclude and eliminate other possibilities and, therefore, draw

 8     an indirect conclusion about a possible calibre?

 9        A.   That is correct.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please see this document,

11     14045, page 43.  It's Mr. van der Weijden's report.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Have you drawn this, Mr. van der Weijden?

14        A.   Yes, I have.

15        Q.   You have marked the incident site with a blue circle and an

16     arrow; correct?

17        A.   That is correct.

18        Q.   Can you please explain to us these degrees, the angles, and the

19     distances which you marked on this photograph?

20        A.   From the exact incident site under the bridge, I took into

21     account the -- what possibilities there were for the direction of fire.

22     The 107 degrees on the north side is the outer limit to the north, and

23     the 120 degrees is the outer limit to the south.  The 636 metres is the

24     distance to the apartment block which was occupied by Bosnian troops.

25     And the longer arrow of the longer line, it points to the Orthodox Church

Page 7157

 1     which was supposedly occupied by Serbian troops.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  So you exclude the possibility that the bullet

 3     originated from the other side of the bridge.  Does that mean that you

 4     know on which bank of the river Munira Zametica was and which direction

 5     she was facing at the moment of the incident?  Was this presented to you?

 6        A.   The exact location was presented to me.  It was on the north --

 7     north bank, and the exact position she was facing was not pointed out to

 8     me.

 9        Q.   And was the late Munira at that very moment in the river or was

10     she a little bit above the river?  Where was she, in terms of the

11     river-bed?  Where was her position?

12        A.   I was told the victim was exactly on the river-bed, on the line

13     of the water and the ground.

14        Q.   Would you agree that if she was facing the river and she was hit

15     in her left flank, that she was then hit from the direction which you

16     marked?  But if she was not facing the river and if she was hit in her

17     left side, that then she was hit from the other side of the river, that

18     is to say, downstream?

19        A.   As I've indicated, I do not exactly know which side she was

20     facing at the moment she was hit.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Can you please mark the church with the letter S, in

22     order to mark the Serbian position, and also write the date and your

23     initials so that we could remove this image from the screen.

24             JUDGE KWON:  I don't think it's necessary.  It's marked already

25     here, location of shooter.  It's marked.

Page 7158

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But that is the church.  I wish to

 2     have that marked because, during the proceedings, we will try to

 3     establish whether anyone shot from the church at all.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  It's written in his report.  We move on,

 5     Mr. Karadzic.

 6             I note the time.  It's time to have a break.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Unless you need to ask a relevant question to this

 9     one, we'll take a break now for 25 minutes.  We'll resume at quarter to

10     6.00.

11                           --- Recess taken at 5.21 p.m.

12                           --- On resuming at 5.48 p.m.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15             Has this page been admitted or should I tender it?  This is a

16     part of the report and has been admitted as a P evidence; right?

17             JUDGE KWON:  1620.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19             Can the Court please produce 65 ter 09535.  09535.

20             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Do you recognise this place, Mr. van der Weijden?  Is this the

22     Dobrinja River?

23        A.   It looks to be so, yes.

24        Q.   And far away, at 1.000 metres, is there a church?

25        A.   I recognise a church, but I do not know if it's at 1.000 metres,

Page 7159

 1     from this photo.

 2        Q.   However, it arises from your previous document that this church

 3     is at 1.000 metres, even higher up, right?  1104 metres, and that arises

 4     from the previous photo we saw.  Is that the church or is there any other

 5     church?  I don't think so.  Right?

 6        A.   No, this is the church, but I don't know the exact distance

 7     because I don't know at which location this picture was taken.

 8        Q.   And is this the bridge where the incident happened?

 9        A.   If I were to judge it, it would be the bridge where another

10     incident happened, where the woman riding a bicycle was shot, because

11     that was closer.  There was a bridge in between this incident and the

12     church, and that was the incident where the woman -- of the woman riding

13     the bicycle was shot.

14        Q.   Then it is more probable that the incident that we are currently

15     talking about happened at the place where the person was standing when he

16     was taking this photo; right?  Is that possible?

17        A.   According to my information, the victim was on the other side of

18     the canal.  And even though I see a shadow on the right down corner, I

19     don't know exactly if it's under the bridge or just before or just after

20     the bridge, but I would say it's in the approximate vicinity of the

21     incident site.

22        Q.   Thank you.  How many shots did the woman -- or, rather, the

23     victim sustain?

24        A.   I do not know because I did not have the medical records.

25        Q.   According to the police report, there were two shots.  Did they

Page 7160

 1     tell you how much time elapsed between the first and the second shots?

 2        A.   No, I was not told.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 4             Could the Court please produce 65 ter 09590.

 5             We don't have to tender this photo into evidence because we are

 6     not sure of its significance.

 7             Could the Court please produce 65 ter 09590.  Thank you.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Are you familiar with the weapon type sniper carbine part of our

10     armament?

11        A.   The sniper carbine is not the -- doesn't give a type number, but

12     I would assume it's M-76.

13        Q.   A sniper carbine is a type of weapon which fires single shots and

14     then it has to be reloaded.

15        A.   Then it would be a bolt-action rifle.

16        Q.   Yes, a bolt-action rifle, that's a carbine.  Can I draw your

17     attention to what this investigator said?  He said that the sniper fired

18     at a lady with two shots, and the lady was down at the river-bed,

19     fetching water.  How likely is it for a carbine to hit one person with

20     two shots before the carbine is reloaded after the first shot?  Wouldn't

21     the body have to fall down and thus change its position?

22        A.   I will answer the first question first, how likely it is for a

23     carbine.  If the carbine is a bolt-action rifle, it's actually more

24     precise than an M-76 or a 91, so it would be more likely that it would

25     have -- it would have a higher success rate.  And if the body falls down

Page 7161

 1     and is still in view, it would be easy, because it will remain static, so

 2     it will be easier to hit if the shooter has already hit it the first

 3     time.

 4        Q.   That would assume that no other sources of fire were present,

 5     that that was the only source of fire, and that the late Munira was an

 6     intended target.

 7        A.   If there was a second shot from a bolt-action rifle, she would,

 8     indeed, have been an intended target at least for the second shot.

 9        Q.   Well, do you see that this policeman determines the distance to

10     be at anything between 1.000 and 1500 metres?  On the assumption that the

11     Serbs had fired the shots from the church, or the direction of the

12     church, the distance would have been between 1.000 and 1500 metres;

13     right?

14        A.   That is right.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this official note please be

16     admitted?

17             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  No objection, Mr. President.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honour, that will be Exhibit D672.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Was this referred to by this witness in his report,

21     or this is one of the materials provided to him?  But, in any event, it

22     refers -- it deals with the same incident.  And given that there's no

23     objection from the Prosecution -- it has been already admitted by the

24     Court Deputy.

25             Let's move on.

Page 7162

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, I would like to

 2     apologise for calling upon another document which hasn't been announced.

 3             Can the witness please be shown a statement by a different

 4     witness, Sadija Sahinovic, 00378952 or 953?  I hope that all the

 5     participants in the trial have been provided with the copies.  And if I

 6     may, I would like to put our hard copy on the ELMO.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Before that, Mr. Gaynor, I'd like to confirm that

 8     the witness referred to is not a protected one.

 9             MR. GAYNOR:  I haven't -- I'm not in a position to confirm that

10     right now.  I would have to check the list of protected witnesses.

11             JUDGE KWON:  In the list provided by the Defence as documents to

12     be used, it refers to her as a -- by the pseudonym name, so I'm not sure.

13     I'll leave it in your hands.

14             MR. GAYNOR:  Out of an abundance of caution, if we could redact

15     the name from the transcript.

16             JUDGE KWON:  It was confirmed that she's not protected.

17             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   Could you please read from the ELMO?  Rather, could you please

19     follow.  I will be reading for you, and I will read the gist of the

20     statement, the second paragraph.  The first paragraph speaks about the

21     weather, and so on and so forth, and the second paragraph reads:

22             "I went with my neighbour, Munira, to the river to collect water,

23     and the river is nearby.  On our way to the river, we heard sniper fire

24     directed towards the river.  I knew that because there was constant

25     sniping there, and I learned from a neighbour that another woman had been

Page 7163

 1     wounded there.  They had a very good view of the river.  When we were

 2     approaching the river, we saw several people sheltering below a bridge by

 3     the river.  We joined them and waited for some time.  They said that they

 4     had seen bullets hit the water in the river.  We thought it would be

 5     possible for us to go for water one by one.  One woman went down to the

 6     river and filled two buckets full of water without any problem.  We

 7     waited for another five minutes, and then another man got some water.

 8     Then my neighbour, Munira, went down to the river.  She grabbed some

 9     water, but the bucket wasn't full.  She tried to use her hands to fill it

10     up.  At that moment, she was hit by a bullet."

11             And so on and so forth.

12             Does this indicate that there was, indeed, an exchange of fire

13     going on, and that those civilians went down to the water at a great

14     risk, and that they were not targets, but, rather, that they ended up --

15     that they found themselves in the line of fire?

16        A.   That would not be possible.  The bridge under the river -- first

17     of all, I read that there's no mention of exchange of fire.  There's only

18     sniper fire mentioned in the statement.  But when you go down to

19     water-level in the river, only the side -- the exchange of fire would

20     indicate that the Bosnian troops would have to be in the water, down a

21     canal, more to the north-west, which I would find very unlikely because

22     they would have no protection nor would they have a view of the supposed

23     Serb positions at the church, because the civilians hiding under the

24     bridge, they were under ground level.  So I don't think they were in the

25     midst of an exchange of fire and exposing themselves to any stray fire,

Page 7164

 1     stray rounds.

 2        Q.   They said that bullets had hit the water.  I would like to draw

 3     your attention to this sentence, and I would like to ask you:  What was

 4     that shooter's target if he couldn't see anybody but the water?  Who was

 5     he aiming for, who was he targeting, or what?

 6        A.   I believe he would be targeting the people hiding under the

 7     bridge and that the bullets hitting the water would just try to bracket

 8     the distance, because he could not -- he was trying to hit the target,

 9     but at 1100 metres it's difficult, so some bullets will fall short, or

10     some bullets will fall the bigger distance.

11        Q.   Why do you exclude the possibility of the exchange of fire?  Why

12     would anybody shoot at the water without being able to see the civilians

13     under the bridge?  And if they had seen the civilians under the bridge,

14     why hadn't they targeted the bridge and not the water?  And how come that

15     the first two people who went down to fetch the water came up unscathed?

16     How come they were not killed?

17        A.   I guess they were lucky.

18        Q.   Do you believe that this woman knows what sniper fire is?  How

19     could she determine that that was, indeed, sniper fire and not just stray

20     rounds falling into the water?

21             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection.  I think this is going well beyond the

22     witness's field of expertise, to try and guess what another person was

23     thinking at the time.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Agreed, it's not for the witness.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 7165

 1        Q.   In the same note, it says that the bullet came from the direction

 2     of the church.  Does this possibly suggest that somebody had determined

 3     the direction of the fire?  Was it the police who did that; and if they

 4     did, what method did they use to determine the direction of fire?

 5        A.   Well, I would assume that if you're hiding under a bridge and

 6     you're sheltering in a canal which only offers a left or a right

 7     direction, that it is very clearly to hear if a shot is fired from the

 8     left or from -- if multiple shots are fired from one side or the other.

 9        Q.   Could you perhaps determine from which metre, from 0 to 1.000,

10     the fire came?  Could you determine whether there is a difference in the

11     sound of a bullet fired from different distances; for example, 200

12     metres, 300, 500, or a thousand metres?

13        A.   Well, the sound at a thousand metres would, of course, be less.

14     The sound of the bullet passing by or hitting the -- around you would be

15     clearly -- would be good to hear.  It's a supersonic snap.  But for the

16     sound of the shell, itself, it would be a different sound level.  It

17     would be softer than, of course, at a shorter distance.

18        Q.   Thank you.  And let's finish with this incident.  Did you

19     determine, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the fire came from the Serb

20     territory, or, rather, from the church, or, rather, from a distance of

21     1104 metres?

22        A.   I did determine that it was the most likely position for the

23     shooter.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25             I note the time.  I'm sorry that we cannot go over the case of

Page 7166

 1     young Tarik Zunic, which was the case that the Prosecutor started with.

 2     It would really be useful.  However, since Mr. van der Weijden lives in

 3     The Hague, maybe the Trial Chamber will want to call him again.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Do you remember that a few days ago, you encircled Wilson's

 6     Promenade across the road from Grbavica?

 7        A.   I don't think I circled it.  I think I drew a line along it, at

 8     your instructions, because I did not know what Williams Avenue was.

 9        Q.   But you do agree that it is across the River Miljacka and along

10     the river on the Muslim side?  We don't have the time to look at the map.

11     I'm trying to jog your memory without the map.

12        A.   I recall that it's the -- that the line that I drew was on the

13     north side, and that was the street that you said it was, Williams

14     Avenue.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this statement please be

16     admitted into evidence, the one that we see on the ELMO?

17             MR. GAYNOR:  Your Honours.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor.

19             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.

20             If Your Honours are going to admit this statement into evidence,

21     can I ask that Your Honours also admit the other statement of this

22     person, described at page 46 of Mr. van der Weijden's report?  It is a

23     one-page statement, and it's 65 ter 10065.  It clarifies the question as

24     to the side of the body on which the victim was hit.  It's a very short

25     statement.

Page 7167

 1             JUDGE KWON:  As a Prosecution exhibit?

 2             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, indeed, yes.

 3             And we might note for the record that the statement of this

 4     person, dated 25th of February, 1996, contains a date of birth which is

 5     obviously inaccurate.  It contains the year 1996, just -- I don't think

 6     anything arises from that.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Do you have any objection, Mr. Karadzic or

 8     Mr. Robinson?

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No problem, no objections.

10             JUDGE KWON:  The 65 ter 9652 -- is that the correct 65 ter number

11     of the document we are seeing on the ELMO?  No.  Do we have the 65 ter

12     number, Mr. Karadzic?

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have 1D2437.  That's what I have,

14     but it hasn't been up-loaded in e-court.  The ERN number of the first

15     page is 0090-6749.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  That will be admitted as the next

17     Defence exhibit.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D673, Your Honours.

19             JUDGE KWON:  And 65 ter 10065 will be admitted as a Prosecution

20     exhibit.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P1622, Your Honours.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the Court please produce

24     1D01958.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 7168

 1        Q.   And while we're waiting for the document, Mr. van der Weijden, I

 2     would like to remind you that you have taken into account tactical,

 3     psychological, moral, and other elements which helped you to draw your

 4     conclusions about the probability of any of the events.  You have taken

 5     into account logical and tactical reasons when drawing your conclusions.

 6     Right?

 7        A.   Among those, yes, that's right.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This will be our last document,

 9     1D01958.  This is a document issued by the Muslim Military Intelligence

10     Service.  I heard that there is a translation thereof.  The Prosecution

11     has prepared this document.  I believe it has a 65 ter number as well.

12             Very well.  It seems that we have translated just one part.

13             Could I please read from the document.  This is from the Republic

14     of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Staff of the Supreme Command of the

15     Armed Forces, the Security Administration, and it's a bulletin.  It says

16     "Military Secret" and so on and so forth.  This is a bulletin, therefore.

17             And now can we go to page 4 in the document, please.  I'm going

18     to read for you, and the interpreter can control.

19             At the top of the page, it says:

20             "On the 26th of July, 1993, a group of civilians was felling

21     trees at the Wilson's Promenade in front of the HVO positions.  It is

22     indicative that the aggressor did not open fire, although they had clear

23     targets in front of them.  HVO troops chased away the civilians upon the

24     intervention of the fighters of the 10th Mountain Brigade, and the

25     aggressor opened fire only when the civilians had left."

Page 7169

 1             I hope you know that when they use the word "aggressor," they

 2     meant us who live there across the river, on the other bank of the river.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Would you be pleased to have had the information that in the same

 5     zone where we were accused of opening fire on civilians constantly, the

 6     Serbian Army did not open fire even when the civilians were mixed with

 7     the troops, and that they opened fire only after they were sure that the

 8     witnesses had left the scene?

 9        A.   I do not know where that area is, but I do know what is HVO, that

10     is the Croats, of which I wasn't aware anywhere near the incident sites

11     that I visited.  So it's a different area in my -- according to my

12     information.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we then please see the map of

14     the city and the Marin Dvor neighbourhood.  We'll now find the

15     appropriate city plan where you underlined Wilsonovo Setaliste, that's

16     the Wilson Promenade.

17             Could we please see 14519 -- no, 13519, please.

18             Can we move it a little bit more to the right.  Yes, just like

19     that, thank you.  And a bit more, please.  And another five centimetres,

20     please.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Mr. van der Weijden, can you see where it says "Wilsonovo

23     Setaliste" just next to the river?

24             Can we please zoom in to -- yes.

25        A.   Yes, I can read it.

Page 7170

 1        Q.   Can you recognise other locations on the map, such as the

 2     Assembly building, the Holiday Inn, and the bifurcation where the

 3     number 8 is?

 4        A.   Yes, I can.

 5        Q.   Do you agree that here, around number 15, is the so-called Sniper

 6     Alley?

 7        A.   Based on the video that I was shown yesterday, that's at least

 8     the location of one of the -- around that area is the location -- is the

 9     location of one of the incidents, which is the area that -- somewhere in

10     that area is Sniper Alley, as far as I know.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Can you see now, where it says next to the river

12     Wilsonovo Setaliste?  It's named after the US President Woodrow Wilson.

13        A.   Yes, I can.

14        Q.   How would you explain, Mr. van der Weijden, that the Serbs were

15     killing people in front of the Holiday Inn, where there were so many

16     journalists, and it was right in front of them, and they wouldn't kill

17     anyone here in this place where no one could see that?

18        A.   I cannot explain.

19        Q.   Thank you.  But do you agree that it would be important for you

20     to have had this document as well in order to draw conclusions about the

21     logic, just as you used logic for your conclusions in other cases?

22        A.   Not necessarily so.

23        Q.   But would you agree that it is strange that the Muslims,

24     themselves, report about the Serbs not killing anyone until the moment

25     when the civilians had gone away?

Page 7171

 1             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection.  This is not part of the witness's

 2     expertise at all.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Agreed.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.  Could this document be

 5     admitted, or has it already been admitted?

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  It's Exhibit D167.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  We admitted a clean version of this.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm talking about the Bulletin of

 9     Bosnia and Herzegovina, this document which was on the screen before this

10     one.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor.

12             MR. GAYNOR:  I don't believe the witness said anything material

13     about that document.

14             JUDGE KWON:  We are not satisfied as to its foundation, so we'll

15     not admit it at this moment, Mr. Karadzic.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

17             As we have no time for another incident, Mr. van der Weijden, I

18     want to thank you for coming here, meeting the Defence, and testifying,

19     and to convince you that the Defence was not attacking your work, but

20     rather, criticised those who were supposed to inform you; primarily, the

21     local police and others.  Thank you.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor.

23             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. President.

24                           Re-examination by Mr. Gaynor:

25        Q.   Mr. van der Weijden, the first area I'm going to explore with you

Page 7172

 1     is the question of ammunition.  And for the benefit of the other

 2     participants in the courtroom:  On the 27th of September, that's

 3     Monday --

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor, I apologise.  Before you re-examine the

 5     witness, the Chamber has some questions for the witness.

 6             Judge Baird.

 7             JUDGE BAIRD:  I do apologise.  Just a few questions.  I shan't be

 8     very long.

 9             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you.  That's fine, sir.

10                           Questioned by the Court:

11             JUDGE BAIRD:  Captain van der Weijden, there are a few areas in

12     your evidence that we should like just a bit of clarification.

13             Now, what I shall do, I shall read the evidence you gave to sort

14     of refresh your memory before the question is asked.

15        A.   I understand, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE BAIRD:  Now, you stated on page 62 of the transcript of the

17     27th of September that the incident sighted almost ground level, where

18     the child was hit, to the area indicated to you as Baba Rock, was the

19     only possibility as to the origin of fire.  You recollect this, do you

20     not?

21        A.   Yes, I do.

22             JUDGE BAIRD:  And you went on to state that there was a

23     possibility that the shot might have come from 25 metres directly next to

24     the street because that was the only option, but you ruled that out

25     because of tactical reasons?

Page 7173

 1        A.   Yes, I did, Your Honour.

 2             JUDGE BAIRD:  All right.  And then you stated further, at page 63

 3     of the transcript, that there was the possibility that it could have come

 4     from the house in the foreground of the photo at page 15 of your report,

 5     but the only other possibility was from the upper rock.

 6        A.   That's correct.

 7             JUDGE BAIRD:  Now, Captain, can you tell us, the house in the

 8     foreground of the photo and the point you described as being 25 metres

 9     directly next to the street, are they one and the same?

10        A.   No, they're not, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE BAIRD:  They're not.  Well, if they're not, then what was

12     the reason you ruled out the second possible point of origin; that is,

13     the house?

14        A.   The house that lies in approximately the same direction as the

15     rock, it would be -- tactically, it would make no sense to have a

16     shooting position on that side because, as I was told by the OTP, the

17     rock was located high on the hill.  So to have people -- a shooting

18     position down the hill, tactically it makes no sense.

19             JUDGE BAIRD:  I see.  And what were the tactical reasons that

20     accorded you to rule out the point 25 metres next to the street?

21        A.   Because I don't think -- the child had been playing on the porch

22     for a while and the mother was half a metre away.  If she had seen people

23     on the street -- if I had a child playing on the porch and I would see

24     people with guns on the street, I would take her inside.  So that's the

25     logical reason that I used.

Page 7174

 1             JUDGE BAIRD:  A purely subjective situation.

 2        A.   Yes, a child --

 3             JUDGE BAIRD:  I see.  Now, in your report, at page 6 you stated

 4     revenge could very well have been the motivation for a sniper who shoots

 5     civilians.  You recollect this?

 6        A.   Yes, I do.

 7             JUDGE BAIRD:  And for the snipers, they, too, represent the enemy

 8     because of things experienced in the past?

 9        A.   That is correct, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE BAIRD:  Now, would this reason have found acceptability

11     anywhere at all?

12        A.   I do not know the people who were fired at, I could not tell, but

13     it happens that, for revenge, the people target civilians.

14             JUDGE KWON:  But is it acceptable?

15        A.   Could you clarify that question, please?

16             JUDGE BAIRD:  In the sense, now, you referred to the snipers

17     shooting at military, and that no doubt is because they regard them as

18     the enemy.  But in respect of civilians, would any country regard this as

19     acceptable?

20        A.   No, no, no, it would not be acceptable.  But the reason that I

21     wrote down -- that I've written about the revenge part is that in

22     conflict it has happened that people volunteer to become snipers because

23     then they are able to fight back at the enemy, but it doesn't necessarily

24     refer to people -- to military snipers shooting civilians.

25             JUDGE BAIRD:  Thank you.

Page 7175

 1        A.   From my point of view and in my experience, it would never be

 2     acceptable.

 3             JUDGE BAIRD:  I see.  Just one final question, Captain.

 4             You stated that you matched the coordinates from the incident

 5     site, and it was contrary to Grabovica, so you concluded that the

 6     location did not match the witness statement of the victim, and you told

 7     that that was a mistake with the coordinates that you had received.

 8     Dr. Karadzic then asked you whether it did not occur to you that there

 9     might have been an error in determining the fire position, and he added

10     that, in other words, you concluded that it must have come from

11     Grabovica, come what may.  Now, can you clarify the answer you gave to

12     us, please?  Do you -- shall I read it for you?

13        A.   I recall the incident.

14             JUDGE BAIRD:  You have it.  Can you clarify that, please?

15        A.   The tram was moving at the time of the incident, and if it had

16     been hit on the exact coordinate that I was given by the OTP, it would

17     be -- all the surrounding areas would be within -- if it had been fired

18     from the south, the faculty building would only be 25 metres away.  And

19     with the press present in the Holiday Inn, which was a well-known

20     location for the press to be in, it would be -- it would be completely

21     illogical for the shooter to have been there.  And, also, because I --

22     for a witness to exactly describe, on a moving tram in which a lot of

23     people are present, there is glass, exactly to realise where he is at

24     that moment, it's very difficult, so that's why I concluded that the tram

25     must have just passed the intersection, had been fired at, and maybe

Page 7176

 1     people realised it a little bit after the intersection.  But this is how

 2     I came to that conclusion.

 3             JUDGE BAIRD:  Thank you very much, indeed.

 4             Mr. Gaynor.

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 6             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Microphone, Mr. --

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Would I be allowed to ask just one

 9     question as a follow-up question to the questions of Your Honour?

10                           Further cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic:

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   You talked about the possibility of personal revenge of the

13     sniper.  Did you have in mind that this was the local population and that

14     they had personal reasons and personal motives as well?

15             JUDGE KWON:  It is not for the witness.

16             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] All right.

17        Q.   Another question would be:  Does the witness imply that such

18     revengeful acts would be reported to a commander or was this something

19     that would be done outside the control of a command?

20             JUDGE KWON:  Can you answer the question, Mr. van der Weijden?

21             THE WITNESS:  Yes, of course, Your Honour.

22             The -- if I had to shoot out of revenge, I would try to do it

23     outside of the lines of control because it would be -- I would be

24     court-martialed immediately.  But it would be difficult -- if there is a

25     static warfare, it would be very difficult to be outside the lines of

Page 7177

 1     control.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 3             Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

 4             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 5                           Re-examination by Mr. Gaynor:

 6        Q.   Now, Mr. van der Weijden, I'd like to turn to the question of

 7     ammunition.

 8             On the 27th of September, page 7000 of the transcript - there's

 9     no need for you, Mr. van der Weijden, to refer to anything - Mr. Karadzic

10     referred to three calibres mentioned in your report; the 7.62 by 51

11     millimetres, 7.62 by 54 millimetres, and the 7.62 by 57 millimetres.  Do

12     you remember that?

13        A.   I remember that the calibres have come up several times.

14        Q.   Mr. Karadzic went on - this was at page 7001 - to assert that

15     7.62 times 54 millimetres was the ammunition that we didn't have at all.

16     Do you recall that?

17        A.   Yes, I do recall that.

18        Q.   You then gave an answer concerning weapons you'd seen during your

19     duty in Bosnia.

20        A.   That is correct.

21        Q.   Yesterday, Mr. Karadzic said - this was at page 7071:

22             "Did you know, Mr. van der Weijden, that the Serb Army did not

23     have 7.62 times 54 or 57, but only 7.62 by 39 millimetres?"

24             Do you recall that?

25        A.   I recall that, yes.

Page 7178

 1        Q.   My question came up again today in respect of a different

 2     calibre, and Mr. Karadzic said - this was today at page 39:

 3             "Would you agree that 7.9 millimetres -- that the Serbian Army

 4     did not have automatic weapons of this calibre?"

 5             Do you recall that?

 6        A.   I recall that.

 7        Q.   Now, I'd like to seek your assistance in respect of a number of

 8     documents.

 9             I'd like to, first of all, call up 22970.

10             When this document arrives, I'd like you to identify, if you can,

11     what kind of 7.62-millimetre round is described, and second, to comment

12     on the 7.9-millimetre bullet described.  These are items 1, 2, and 3 in

13     the list in front of you.

14        A.   The number 1, the 7.62-millimetre bullet for AP, automatic rifle:

15     An automatic rifle, that would be of the M-77 series which fires -- which

16     can be chambered for the 7.62 times 39, the 51 -- for the 7.62 times 39.

17     It was also produced later on, but I don't know, at the time of the

18     conflict, in a calibre 7.62 times 61, but I don't know at exactly what

19     date that that production started.  For number 2, the 7.62-millimetre

20     bullet tracer, it would be of the same calibre, so 7.62 times 39, but

21     possibly it could also be for the 7.62 times 54R.  The number 3 is

22     7.9-millimetre.  That is -- there are several descriptions of the

23     7.9-millimetre times 57.  It's also sometimes referred to in civilian

24     shooting as an 8-millimetre bullet, but that is the 7.92 times 59 Mauzer

25     round that I described in the appendix on my weapons animation.

Page 7179

 1             MR. GAYNOR:  Could I request that document to be admitted?

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Do you have the time-frame of this document?

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, I can provide that information.

 4             It concerns the consumption of ammunition during November and

 5     December 1994.  The date of the document is the 11th of January, 1995.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 7             That will be admitted.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  The next document, Exhibit P1623, Your Honours.

 9             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

10             The next document is 20830.

11        Q.   When this document comes up, Mr. van der Weijden, I'd like you to

12     focus on items 1 and 2, specifically, in the first section.

13             While the document is coming, I'll describe what it is.  It's a

14     request for ammunition supplies, dated the 23rd of January, 1995, and it

15     is from the SRK Command to the alternative command post of the VRS

16     Main Staff.

17        A.   Number 1 would again be the 7.62-millimetre times 39 or the 7.62

18     times 51 millimetre.  Number 2 would be the 7.62 times 54, since it's

19     used in a machine-gun, and that would be for the M-84.  That's the

20     calibre for -- that's chambered for that round, only chambered for that

21     round.

22        Q.   Item 4?

23        A.   Item 4 is a 7.9-millimetre bullet.  It doesn't say whether it's

24     linked ammunition which could be used in the M-53 machine-gun or if it's

25     separate rounds which can be used in a number of bolt-action or

Page 7180

 1     semi-automatic rifles.  But it would be the 7.92-millimetre F times 57

 2     millimetre Mauzer ammunition.

 3        Q.   The description for the machine-gun is "PKT."  Do those letters

 4     mean anything to you?

 5        A.   I don't know exactly what they stand for, but the M-84 is a copy

 6     of the Russian PK machine-gun, so I assume it's an abbreviation of a

 7     name.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  I request that that be admitted, Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P1624, Your Honours.

11             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd now request document 65 ter 15453, please.  This

12     document is dated the 16th of June, 1995, and it's a document which is

13     sent from the VRS Main Staff Logistics Centre, Technical, to the SRK

14     Command, Pretis Company, Vogosca, and the 27th Anti-Armour Battalion

15     Command.

16        Q.   Again just very quickly, Mr. van der Weijden, have a look at

17     items 1, 2 and 3, and could you indicate what calibre you believe those

18     to be.

19        A.   Number 1 would again be the 7.62 times 39 millimetres, intended

20     for the M-70 series or, in this case, the semi -automatic rifle that is

21     described is the Zastava M-59/66, which is a carbine.  Number 2 would be

22     the 7.62-millimetre times 54R, since that's the only round that the M-84

23     is chambered for.  And number 3 would be the 7.62 times 54R as well, but

24     then because it's mentioned "sniper," it would be precision ammunition.

25        Q.   Could you just describe, in this context, what "precision

Page 7181

 1     ammunition" means.

 2        A.   There are four standard -- for instance, the ammunition that the

 3     Dutch Army uses for its rifles, the quality of the rounds, they should be

 4     able -- they have to fall within a ten-centimetre group at 100 metres.

 5     That's the utmost deviation.  For sniper ammunition, 10 centimetres is

 6     too big, so the quality of the bullets for sniper ammunition is usually

 7     of a higher grade than the regular ammunition.

 8             MR. GAYNOR:  Could I request that that be admitted?

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P1625, Your Honours.

11             MR. GAYNOR:  The next document is 22971, please.  This is a

12     document dated the 28th of June, 1995, from the 1st Ilidza

13     Infantry Brigade Command to a number of locations, including the VRS --

14     sorry, correction, the KM Main Staff and the command post of the SRK.

15        Q.   Just very quickly, Mr. van der Weijden, have a look at the first

16     four.

17        A.   Number 1 would again be the 6. -- 7.62 times 39 millimetres.

18             The second one could be the same, so times 39, but it could also

19     be the times 54R.

20             The third one would be the 7.62 times 57, but the amounts of

21     ammunition could very well be linked, so then it would be intended for

22     the M-53 machine-gun.

23             And number 4, the 7.9-millimetre, is the 7.92 times 57 Mauzer

24     ammunition.

25             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd request that that be admitted, Your Honour.

Page 7182

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P1626, Your Honours.

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  Can I have 22973, please.

 4        Q.   This is a document dated the 1st of July, 1995, and the 1st

 5     Ilidza Infantry Brigade Command, to be delivered to the SRK Command,

 6     General Milosevic, to the 3rd Infantry Brigade Forward Command Post, and

 7     to the VRS Main Staff for information.  It's a request for ammunition.

 8             Very briefly, Mr. van der Weijden, tell us what 1, 2, and 3 --

 9     what kind of rounds they are.

10        A.   Number 1 would again be the 7.62 times 39 millimetres.  Number 2

11     would be -- could be times 39 or times 54R.  And number 3 is a

12     7.92-millimetre times 57 Mauzer, and the numbers could be either for a

13     separate round for using rifles or linked as ammunition for machine-guns.

14             MR. GAYNOR:  The last document in this series is -- sorry, can I

15     ask that that be admitted, Your Honour, please?

16             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  As P1627, Your Honours.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  Can I have 22972, please.

19             This document is from the Main Staff of the VRS Logistics Sector,

20     Technical Department, dated the 20th of July, 1995, to be delivered to

21     the Command of the 27th Logistics Base, to Pretis and Vogosca, to the SRK

22     Command, and to the SRK Command Rear Command Post.

23        Q.   Mr. van der Weijden, again just tell us about the first two items

24     listed in this document.

25        A.   The first line would again be the 7.62 times 39-millimetre

Page 7183

 1     rounds, and the second one would be the 7.62 times 54R rounds for the

 2     M-84 machine-gun.

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  Could that document be admitted, please?

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P1628, Your Honours.

 6             MR. GAYNOR:  Could I have document 65 ter 07692.

 7             At this time --

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just a remark.

 9             The indications of the length of the charge are not indicated

10     here, and they do not exist in the original.

11             JUDGE KWON:  The witness gave his explanation.

12             Yes, let's move on.

13             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, that's precisely why I'm putting them to the

14     witness, because he can help us with that.

15             The next document is 07692.  This is a long document.  It's an

16     analysis of technical support for 1995, and I would like to take you to

17     both the English and the original versions of this document when it

18     arrives, Mr. van der Weijden.

19             In fact, we could go to the fourth page in the B/C/S version and

20     to the sixth page in the English translation.

21        Q.   This time, I'm going to ask your assistance with respect to kinds

22     of rifles.  So if you could look at, essentially, numbers 3 to 8

23     inclusive, and if you could tell us what kinds of rounds those weapons

24     use.

25        A.   Rifle number 3 is the M-48.  That rifle is a copy of the German

Page 7184

 1     standard infantry rifle from the Second World War.  It's chambered for

 2     the 7.92 times 57-millimetre Mauzer ammunition.

 3             Number 4, PAP, is the Zastava M-59/66, which is chambered for the

 4     7.62 times 39 millimetres.

 5             Number 5, PM 7.62-millimetre, the M-72.  The M-72 is a slightly

 6     -- a version of the M-70 with a heavier barrel and a bipod, intended to

 7     be used in a close support role for infantry squads, and the calibre is

 8     7.62 times 39 millimetres.

 9             Number 6, the M-53, is a copy of the MG-42 German machine-gun

10     from the Second World War.  It is chambered for the 7.92-millimetre times

11     57-millimetre Mauzer ammunition.

12             And number 7, that is the M-37.  It's not the identification of a

13     machine-gun I'm familiar with.

14             Number 8 is a machine-gun, the M-84.  That's the copy of the

15     Russian PK, and that is chambered for the 7.62-millimetre times 54R.

16        Q.   Could we move to the next page in the B/C/S and to page 8 in the

17     English.

18             Now, the English translation only shows the kinds of weapon

19     described in the left, so really, Mr. van der Weijden, you could probably

20     make due with the original.

21             And if we could just focus in on the original B/C/S.

22             If I could ask you to look, in particular -- this is monthly

23     consumption of various rounds, and if you could look at --

24             JUDGE KWON:  By the way, this is an analysis by what unit,

25     Mr. Gaynor?

Page 7185

 1             MR. GAYNOR:  Sorry.  This comes from a -- this comes from

 2     Lieutenant-Colonel Anton Sinkovic, and he is within the SRK.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 4             MR. GAYNOR:  This concerns consumption month by month during the

 5     year of 1995.

 6        Q.   So if you can -- before we get to the monthly consumption, if you

 7     could just tell us about items 3 to 7, what kinds of --

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Can we see the number?

 9             MR. GAYNOR:

10        Q.   -- ammunition they are?

11             JUDGE KWON:  Move a little bit to the left.  Yes, thank you.

12             THE WITNESS:  Number 3, "AP" stands for "Armour Piercing."  That

13     means that there is a steel core within the bullet, itself, as is very

14     common in 7.62 times 39-millimetre rounds.

15             Number 4 is the M-84, so the 7.62-millimetre times 54.  "TZ" also

16     means "tracer," which is -- but the M-84 uses linked ammunition.

17             Then number 5, the 7.62-millimetre Browning, Browning is the

18     designer of the M-2 heavy machine-gun, but the 7.62 times 51-millimetre

19     bullet that's still used by a lot of NATO armies, is basically the same

20     design, so the number 5 is the 7.62 times 51 millimetres.

21             And number 6 is the 7.92 times 57-millimetre Mauzer, and the

22     numbers would indicate that it's linked ammunition intended for the M-53

23     machine-gun.

24             Number 7 is the 7.92-millimetre times 57-millimetre Mauzer,

25     ammunition used -- possible for the M-76, the M-48 rifle, or possibly for

Page 7186

 1     the M-91.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  And if you could just look at the consumption figures

 3     for June.  If you look at the consumption figures just for the rounds

 4     that you've discussed, do you have any comments about that at all?

 5        A.   Well, from the numbers, you could see what the common weapons are

 6     and what machine-guns are, and what the sniper ammunition -- what sniper

 7     ammunition is, because they were left the lowest consumption.

 8        Q.   Would the consumption of 9.900 sniper rounds in a month, in a

 9     combat environment, would that strike you as particularly high, or low,

10     or anything?

11        A.   I'm not aware of the combat operations of those months.  I'm

12     sorry.

13             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd request -- I request that that be admitted,

14     Your Honour.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Robinson, I take it there's no objection.

16             Yes, it will be admitted.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P1629, Your Honours.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you.

19        Q.   Now, I'd like to take you to Incident F-15.  There's no need to

20     look at your report at this stage.  But at page 7034 of the transcript,

21     Mr. Karadzic asked:

22             "Do you agree that a thigh on a human body is below the hip?"

23             To which you responded:

24             "Yes, I agree.

25             "Q.  So if an entry wound is in the thigh and the exit wound is

Page 7187

 1     in the hip, the canal then stretches from down upwards; would you agree

 2     with that?

 3             "A.  The wound canal would stretch upwards, yes."

 4             I want to explore that a little bit.  I want you to consider for

 5     a moment a person who is lying flat on the ground.  In that situation, if

 6     a person is hit in the thigh, which direction might the wound canal turn

 7     out?

 8        A.   It could turn out in the same direction in the length of the

 9     body.

10        Q.   If the person were to be crouching down, taking cover from

11     oncoming fire, could you describe the position of the thigh in relation

12     to the hip in that situation?

13        A.   It could again be entry on the thigh level and exit on the hip

14     level.

15        Q.   And would that give -- what conclusions could you draw about the

16     angle of the incoming fire in that situation?

17        A.   If I wouldn't know the exact location of the -- of the victim,

18     there are several possibilities.  But the angle of fire would not be

19     conclusive in an investigation.

20             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd like to move now -- I'd like to -- I wonder if

21     we could play the video which was played yesterday, which is D55.  If we

22     could play that from 3 minutes 28 seconds to 3 minutes 41 seconds.  It's

23     only about 12 seconds.

24        Q.   While that's coming up, Mr. van der Weijden, I might ask you some

25     other questions on this subject.

Page 7188

 1             You concluded that the sniping incident which you saw in the

 2     video -- you said:

 3             "Since I did hear multiple shots, that would indicate a

 4     machine-gun."

 5             That was at page 7060.  Do you recall that?

 6        A.   Yes, I do.

 7        Q.   Now, in your report, you said that machine-guns are designed to

 8     fire in a cone.  That's page 10 of your report.

 9        A.   That is correct.

10        Q.   Now, the cone that you describe has an apex at the point of fire

11     and a base at the point of impact; is that right?  I just want to orient

12     the cone for everyone in the courtroom.  When you refer to a cone, which

13     way is the cone standing?

14        A.   It would be -- the point of impact for a burst of machine-gun

15     fire isn't -- it would be elliptical, but in a length-wise direction.  So

16     the rounds would fall further and closer by.  That would be the -- it

17     would fall on the ground like that.  It would be more deep than wide.  So

18     there's a -- there's a spread of fire on purpose built into the

19     machine-gun.

20        Q.   Now, will the -- will each individual bullet be arriving at that

21     location at the same height?

22        A.   No, it wouldn't.

23        Q.   Taking the figures provided to you by Mr. Karadzic, if you can

24     consider a situation where fire is coming from 321 metres away and coming

25     from a height of about 30 metres, could you make any general indication

Page 7189

 1     of the difference in height at which the individual bullets might arrive

 2     at the impact location?

 3        A.   At that location, it might be -- depending on the support of the

 4     machine-gun, it could be a difference in height of up to two metres.

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  Now, if we could play the video, please, from 3

 6     minutes and 28 seconds to 3 minutes and 41 seconds.

 7                           [Video-clip played]

 8             MR. GAYNOR:

 9        Q.   Now, in the video that you've just watched, you -- you provided

10     your conclusion that this was machine-gun fire.  Could you indicate how

11     those rounds -- how the bullets would be arriving at that location?

12        A.   Based on my experience, it would probably be up to a level of --

13     in this case, up to a level of about 1 metre height to ground level, and

14     the distance in the length for 300 metres, shot from an elevated

15     position, it would probably stretch the width of the -- of the path the

16     people are walking on.

17        Q.   When you say "the width of the path," could you also indicate the

18     relative height at which the bullets would be arriving at that location?

19        A.   Well, it could be up to -- up to 1 metres high.  From ground

20     level to 1 metre high.  They would hit the ground possibly just before.

21     It really is up to the -- to the way the gun position is built.  So if it

22     was used on a tripod, it would be a tighter cone of fire.  If it were

23     used on a bipod and have a longer burst, the cone of fire would be

24     bigger.

25             MR. GAYNOR:  I'd like to replay that short clip with audio this

Page 7190

 1     time for the witness, please.

 2                           [Video-clip played]

 3             MR. GAYNOR:

 4        Q.   Now, on the basis of your expertise, would the victims in that

 5     incident have been able to judge for themselves the direction of fire?

 6        A.   Yes, I believe so.

 7        Q.   And on the basis of the limited information which I accept is

 8     available to you, what direction of fire did the victims judge, and on

 9     the basis of their movements, where did they judge the rounds were coming

10     from?

11        A.   From down the street to their left.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Such questions were not allowed to

13     me.  I was not allowed to put questions which might call for the

14     witness's speculation.

15             MR. GAYNOR:  On the basis of this witness's expertise as a sniper

16     expert, on the basis of his experience in combat and in exercises, I

17     submit that he is in a position to --

18             JUDGE KWON:  And we had video.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Why is this not in his expert

20     report?  Why are we seeing it only now?

21             JUDGE KWON:  By the way, is this incident referred in --

22             MR. GAYNOR:  No, this is not a scheduled incident.

23             JUDGE KWON:  No, it is not a schedule incident.  In any event,

24     the witness answered, and what probative value it will have is the

25     subject of the Chamber's assessment later on.

Page 7191

 1             We'll move on.

 2             MR. GAYNOR:  Your Honours, I don't have very much more to go, but

 3     I do notice that it's 7.02 p.m.  I could conclude within 10 minutes,

 4     I think.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  I have to consult the Court Deputy whether we can go

 6     on for another 10 minutes.

 7                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Can I ask the interpreters whether we can go on for

 9     another 10 minutes?  I thank you very much.  I appreciate it very much.

10             Let's give it a try, Mr. Gaynor.

11             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Now --

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I apologise.

13             Can I ask the general that this is an incident that is mentioned

14     as having happened on the 8th of October, 1994?  I believe that this is

15     already included, but now we have a video-clip, and Mr. van der Weijden

16     was working with something else, was he not?

17             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, I heard that you noted that this is an incident

18     that happened 8th of October, but I didn't locate this incident in the

19     indictment.

20             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, that's right, it is not scheduled in the

21     indictment.  It's an unscheduled incident which Mr. Karadzic brought this

22     video in during his cross-examination.  It's an unscheduled incident.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, let's proceed.

24             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. President.

25             Now, the next area of questions concerns the location of the

Page 7192

 1     S-curve.

 2             If we could have D652 brought up.

 3        Q.   Mr. van der Weijden, you recall that the relevance of the S-curve

 4     is really related to the fact that a tram has to slow down - that was

 5     your evidence - at the S-curve.  Is that right?

 6        A.   That is correct.

 7        Q.   Now, you were asked to mark the S-curve on the picture which is

 8     coming up now, and you did so.  That is where you believe the S-curve to

 9     have been; is that right?

10        A.   That is correct.

11        Q.   Now, nobody has -- apart from Mr. Karadzic's comments yesterday,

12     nobody has given you any information to suggest that the S-curve has

13     changed, changed location?

14        A.   None.

15        Q.   Now, Mr. Karadzic, at page 7049, yesterday said - I'll just read

16     it into the record:

17             "Would you agree with me that this kind of reality set in after

18     2004 and there are no indications whatsoever on earlier maps that there

19     was a curve at the time of the events?"

20               I'd like to show you a map prepared prior to 1995, and I would

21     like 65 ter 07048A to be brought up, please.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] At the beginning, we announced that

23     we were still investigating this and that we were not sure.  We wanted to

24     be fair to the witness.  We already announced that.  That was the first

25     sentence uttered earlier today.

Page 7193

 1             MR. GAYNOR:  I think the transcript from yesterday is quite clear

 2     that Mr. Karadzic was claiming that he was brought up in Sarajevo, he

 3     knows Sarajevo very well, and he knows that this S-curve changed

 4     location.  I think that's clear from yesterday's transcript.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Let's proceed.

 6             MR. GAYNOR:  Could I ask the usher to zoom in as much as possible

 7     on the central part of Sarajevo.

 8        Q.   Now, Mr. van der Weijden, if you could guide -- if you could

 9     possibly identify where you believe the S-curve to have been.  If it

10     needs to be zoomed in further, please say so.

11        A.   Zoom out a little bit.  Please move to the center of the map.  Or

12     could I -- is it possible for me to mark the area where to magnify?

13             JUDGE KWON:  You can point out.  I think you can magnify,

14     yourself, yes.

15             THE WITNESS:  That's the location [marks].

16             MR. GAYNOR:

17        Q.   And I think the answer is obvious, but can you see an S-curve on

18     that map?

19        A.   Yes, I can.

20        Q.   Can you just mark that with "S-curve"?

21        A.   [Marks]

22             MR. GAYNOR:  I request that that be admitted, Your Honours.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we please be given the date?

24     Can we identify the date?  We have not identified the date of this map.

25             MR. GAYNOR:  This map is from -- it's on the Prosecution's

Page 7194

 1     exhibit list.  It is an ABiH map dated sometime in 1995.  Now, I've

 2     inspected the map myself.  It doesn't indicate on the map what precise

 3     date the map was prepared, but it is prior to 1995.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Can we bring up Exhibit D653.

 5                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, this will be --

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could you please send this to the

 8     American government?

 9             JUDGE KWON:  It will be admitted as P1630.

10             And can we bring up D653.  This is a map on which you marked

11     yesterday, Mr. van der Weijden.  This is part of the US map you saw

12     yesterday.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the Bosnian and the American

14     one differ.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Can we zoom in on number 1 and number 2.

16             You said that number 2 is an S-curve.  But if you look at the

17     number 1 part, we can see that there's an S-curve there as well.  In

18     number 1, which goes down to the right side.

19             THE WITNESS:  I don't think -- it's an S-curve that splits from

20     the northern track and goes to the south side, I agree.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

22             Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

23             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you.

24             Could I ask for 90193 to be brought up, please.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I believe that it is crucial to

Page 7195

 1     establish the date of the map that was shown to the general.  We know

 2     that this one was published in 1993, and we know by whom.  We know who

 3     the publisher was.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  We have another opportunity to deal with the

 5     foundation of these maps.  Let's move on.

 6             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 7        Q.   On the next map, I'd just like you to -- it's a bird's-eye view

 8     of Sarajevo, taken -- sorry.  I want to bring up a map without the

 9     markings on it for you to inspect.

10             While that's coming up, I'd like to just deal with one other

11     issue very briefly.

12             You were asked by Mr. Karadzic - that was at page 6961 of

13     Monday's transcript - you were asked if snipers had actually been trained

14     in accordance with an order by General Milosevic dealing with the

15     training of sniper instructors.

16             Now, on that subject, I'd like to bring up P01010, please.  The

17     document coming up is an order, which has been admitted, obviously, which

18     is dated th of November, 1992, from Dragan Marcetic to all units of the

19     SRK.  I would ask Mr. van der Weijden to look at the first -- the points

20     1 to 4 on this document.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor, if you are confident we can finish in

22     five minutes' time, we can go on.  But otherwise --

23             MR. GAYNOR:  Very well.

24             JUDGE KWON:  -- we'll continue tomorrow.

25             MR. GAYNOR:  In that case, yes, we can finish in five minutes,

Page 7196

 1     I'm confident.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

 3             MR. GAYNOR:

 4        Q.   Could you look at items number 1 to 4, Mr. van der Weijden.  Does

 5     this appear to you to indicate the use of trained snipers?

 6        A.   I would say so, yes.

 7        Q.   I'd like your assistance with one point.  That is, at the very

 8     bottom, it says:

 9             "The required number of pieces of passive equipment (for night

10     vision)."

11             Could you explain very briefly what passive equipment and active

12     equipment are when it comes to night vision?

13        A.   The first innovation of night vision was active night vision.  It

14     consisted of a scope that consumed the IR spectrum, but it made use of an

15     IR torch to light up the area to enable the scope to see something.  The

16     passive equipment makes use of the thousands times magnifications of

17     starlight which enables the shooter to see at night.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you.  If we could now return to the bird's-eye

19     view.  It's 07048K.

20        Q.   When this arrives, Mr. van der Weijden, I'd simply like you to

21     see if you can identify where the S-curve is on the document -- on the

22     picture.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Again, the date.  And can the 1630

24     be MFI'd, please?  The date of the map is crucial.  We're not disputing

25     the fact that the curve exists, but we cannot establish when it was

Page 7197

 1     created.  In the Bosnian and in the American maps, it's more towards the

 2     east.

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, we'll come back to the map at another date.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Of course, we'll come back to it.

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  I was actually looking for 90193, please, which is a

 6     Google Maps aerial view of the relevant location.

 7        Q.   And I'd like you just to circle the location of the S-curve when

 8     you see it.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Do we have the date of this picture, Mr. Gaynor?

10             MR. GAYNOR:  I don't have it on me.  We will concede that it is

11     within the last couple of years.

12             THE WITNESS:  I do see traces of an S-curve on this location

13     [marks].

14             MR. GAYNOR:  And if we could zoom that out a little bit.

15        Q.   Are you able to identify the Holiday Inn on that photograph?

16        A.   That would be the yellow building here [marks].

17        Q.   Very well.  If you could just mark, next to the Holiday Inn, "H,"

18     next to the S-curve, the letter S, and sign and date it.

19        A.   [Marks]

20             MR. GAYNOR:  And I would seek the admission of that document,

21     please.

22             JUDGE KWON:  That would be Exhibit P1631.

23             MR. GAYNOR:  And that's the end of the re-examination.  Thank you

24     to the interpreters and everyone else.  Thank you.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The Defence suggests that 1630 and

Page 7198

 1     1631 should be MFI'd.  Google Earth has existed for a few years only.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  Mr. Gaynor admitted that it has been taken in

 3     recent days, a couple of years -- within the last couple of years.  And

 4     then we'll come back to the date of P1630.

 5             Very well, thank you.  That concludes your evidence,

 6     Mr. van der Weijden.  I thank you very much, on behalf of the Tribunal

 7     and the Chamber.  Now you are free to go.

 8             And I join Mr. Gaynor thanking all the interpreters and staff for

 9     their patience.

10                           [The witness withdrew]

11             JUDGE KWON:  We'll sit tomorrow morning at 9.00.

12                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.18 p.m.,

13                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 30th day of

14                           September, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.