1 Wednesday, 11 January 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, everyone. Good morning, Doctor.
7 THE WITNESS: Good morning.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
9 THE ACCUSED: Thank you, Excellency. Good morning, Excellencies.
10 [Interpretation] Good morning, everyone.
11 WITNESS: JOHN CLARK [Resumed]
12 Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic: [Continued]
13 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Dr. Clark. I don't know how much
14 time we have left, but I'm going to do my best to finish in the time
15 allotted to me. I would like to ask you --
16 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. Are we receiving the English
17 translation? Oh, yes. Then please carry on.
18 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. I wanted to ask you about what we were talking about during our
20 interview. You did not recall if there was any Serbian presence during
21 the exhumations, during the work of the pathologists doing the autopsies.
22 Is that correct?
23 A. Yes, that's correct. There was no Serbian presence at all in the
25 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
1 JUDGE KWON: The Judges do not get the English translations
2 except for Judge Baird.
3 Doctor --
4 THE WITNESS: I'm getting it, yes.
5 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
6 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Technicians will take a look. In the
7 meantime, let's continue.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Do you know -- well, you used, to an extent, also the interviews
10 and statements of witnesses when you were putting the whole picture
11 together; is that right?
12 A. I'm not getting the translation through the headphones, but I'm
13 reading it on the screen which will take a little time.
14 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will take a break for five or
15 ten minutes.
16 --- Break taken at 9.05 a.m.
17 --- On resuming at 9.20 a.m.
18 JUDGE KWON: Very well. I hope everything has been sorted out.
19 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
20 THE ACCUSED: Now I do not have anything in my ear.
21 JUDGE KWON: Let us try.
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. The question was: You -- when you were putting the whole picture
24 together, you were also using interviews by the investigators with other
25 persons, witnesses of sorts. Is that correct?
1 A. No, it's not correct. With one exception, these reports were
2 compiled entirely from the post mortem reports together with a little bit
3 of background information for the site which we had been given at the
4 start of the procedure. The only exception was the four bodies from
5 Vlasenica in which I was given detailed witness statements to consider,
6 but other than that, absolutely nothing other than vague -- just general
7 background information.
8 Q. Thank you. This is as far as what actually reached you, but
9 others had different information. Do you know if any interviews were
10 conducted with witnesses by, for example, investigators and those who
11 were conducting the exhumations and so on?
12 A. Well, undoubtedly the investigators would have carried out
13 interviews; that was their role. That information did not reach us.
14 Q. Thank you, Dr. Clark. In your opinion, in view of the fact that
15 this is a conflict between two sides, between two ethnic and religious
16 communities, would it be fair for there to have been Serbian experts
17 present there, at least for them to be able to have access if not to
18 participate, especially when we're talking about exhumations and other
19 investigative actions?
20 A. I would have had no problem myself in having Serb pathologists
21 present in the mortuary. That was not my decision. I'm aware, however,
22 that Serb authorities have had a chance to look at all the post mortem
23 reports and to comment on them and have done so. And I've seen -- I have
24 seen some of their comments. But that was not my decision to take,
25 whether to have Serb pathologists present. As I say, I would have had no
1 problem at all in them attending, standing beside me.
2 Q. Thank you. Well, of course I didn't think that any of those
3 conducting the autopsies would have made this decision, but it was a fact
4 that in Visoko all the bodies, both of the Muslim and Serb victims, were
5 put away but the Muslim bodies were not accessible to the Serbian experts
6 without permission of the Muslim side. You knew that, of course; right?
7 A. Not specifically, no, I didn't.
8 Q. Thank you. In a number of cases you found traces of gun-shot
9 wounds from a shot-gun even though it could not be concluded that the
10 cause of death was that weapon. However, the presence of gun-shot was
11 established in a number of bodies. Is that correct?
12 A. Yes, that's correct. This was a small number of people in which
13 we found typical shot-gun pellets, clearly indicating that a shot-gun had
14 been used as opposed to a handgun or a high-velocity weapon. They were
15 concentrated in I think -- I think Nova Kasaba and probably one of the
16 other sites. I may have that wrong. But there was a fairly small
17 number. At least some of these people also had high-velocity weapon
18 injuries, but as I recall, in two cases the only injury we found was
19 shot-gun injury and we attributed that as the cause of death. It wasn't
20 a common finding, but it's -- certainly was present in occasional cases,
21 shot-gun pellets.
22 Q. Thank you. Did you receive information about the degree to which
23 civilians were armed before the war broke out and as it was breaking out?
24 Did you receive any information as to the extent to which the civilian
25 population had various types of weapons?
1 A. No, I was not given any information specifically on that.
2 Q. Thank you. And would you agree with my assertion that civilians
3 easily could have had both an automatic rifle and a shot-gun while
4 soldiers and policemen only had automatic rifles. They did not have
5 shot-guns, at least it was not recorded anywhere as being part of the
6 weaponry available to the armed formations.
7 A. I'm sure it's possible that civilians had access to shot-guns. I
8 can't say any more than that.
9 Q. Would you agree that it would be unusual for the army or the
10 police to have shot-guns --
11 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, is that a question for this expert
12 witness? Please move on to your next questions.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I apologise.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. In a number of cases in Zeleni Jadar, even in 7 per cent of the
16 cases you found that -- you found blast injuries and the presence of
17 shrapnel; is that correct?
18 A. Yeah, we certainly found shrapnel. I'm just checking the
19 percentage. I think it was actually seven cases. We found blast damage
20 in seven men out of 101 bodies, yes, you're right, 7 per cent, it is the
21 same. They had blast damage and pieces of shrapnel which were I have to
22 say very similar to the shrapnel we found in Glogova, one of the graves
23 in Glogova, which is the only other grave in which we did find shrapnel.
24 So Glogova and Zeleni Jadar both had evidence of shrapnel injuries. No
25 other graves had that.
1 Q. Thank you. Did you receive information at all that in the cases
2 when trenches were captured by one or the other side, these same trenches
3 were also used as places of burial, as graves, and the opponent's
4 casualties would be buried in an existing grave. Did anybody inform you
5 about that? Do you know if this was something that happened or if it was
6 possible at all?
7 A. I knew nothing about that at all.
8 Q. I think that this is an opening question relating to the presence
9 of bullet casings. I think in a number of cases, perhaps in Kasaba and
10 Konjevic Polje - but this was not in your report, it was in the report of
11 those who actually conducted the exhumations - but in your findings it
12 states that in a number of graves there were significant shell casings
13 found. I just wanted to tell you that when a trench is captured, then
14 that trench is used as a ready-made grave for enemy soldiers. So is it
15 possible that the shells that were found in the trench or around the
16 trench or around the grave could have originated from fire that was
17 originating from that place, i.e., that in the fighting there was
18 actually shooting from those places?
19 A. That certainly could be one explanation for shell cases beside
20 the bodies. It has to be said that we found shell casing in only a very
21 few bodies. There was -- I think in Ravnice we found some, but it wasn't
22 a common finding at all.
23 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, these lines of questions do not help
24 the Chamber, all speculative. I think it's now time for you to wrap up
25 your questions.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Is it true that in some cases you saw traces of animal-caused
4 damage, which would indicate that before burial the body was accessible
5 to wild animals?
6 A. I think the only site we saw that was in Ravnice in which I
7 understand the bodies were already -- well, found out in the open anyway
8 on a slope. I'm not aware that we found animal damage in any of the
9 other bodies. Bear in mind we were only looking at skeletons. Earlier
10 animal damage would, of course, affect the skin, which wasn't present
11 here. But apart from Ravnice we saw no evidence of animal damage.
12 Q. Thank you. Could we agree perhaps that DNA findings may be used
13 only for identification, but certainly not to determine the cause of
14 death, the time of death, et cetera?
15 A. Yes, entirely, yes. It is only for identification purposes.
16 Q. Thank you, Dr. Clark, for your testimony.
17 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
18 Mr. Mitchell, do you have any re-examination?
19 MR. MITCHELL: No, I don't, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
21 Thank you, Dr. Clark. That concludes your evidence.
22 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.
23 JUDGE KWON: On behalf of this Chamber and the Tribunal as a
24 whole, I would like to thank you for your coming to The Hague yet again
25 to give it.
1 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
2 JUDGE KWON: Now you're free to go.
3 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.
4 [The witness withdrew]
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Mitchell, please call your next witness.
6 MR. MITCHELL: Mr. President, the next witness is Mr. Peccerelli.
7 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President, while we're waiting to
8 bring in the next witness, I just wanted to ask the Chamber that we
9 received a filing yesterday from the Registry in connection with
10 Witness KDZ523 and part of that filing was ex parte. And it's our
11 request that that ex parte portion of the filing be made available to the
12 parties. I'd like you to consider that when dealing with that request.
13 Thank you.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I address the Court regarding
15 the sequence of witnesses. Due to some mistake, I expected Mr. Kingori
16 for today. Is it a problem to change the order of witnesses because I
17 haven't brought the background material for Mr. Peccerelli. I would have
18 to print it off the computer.
19 JUDGE KWON: How long would you need for that preparation?
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll see what I can print off from
21 here, but I've left all the background material for this witness back
22 there. I was ready for Mr. Kingori. I'll see in a few minutes what I
23 can access.
24 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Mitchell, would you have a problem if we begin
25 with Mr. Kingori?
1 MR. MITCHELL: Mr. President, Mr. Peccerelli is flying out --
2 JUDGE KWON: Oh, right.
3 MR. MITCHELL: -- at 9.00 tomorrow morning, so he really needs to
4 finish today if at all possible. And I believe Mr. Kingori is not here
5 yet. He's not -- he's physically in The Hague, but he's not coming in
6 until -- for at least another couple of hours.
7 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
8 [The witness entered court]
9 JUDGE KWON: My apologies, Mr. Peccerelli. Due to some
10 administrative matters, probably the Chamber needs to break about at
11 least half an hour and I hope with the assistance of the Registry I think
12 that problem could be sorted out.
13 We'll take a break for half an hour.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you for your understanding.
15 --- Recess taken at 9.40 a.m.
16 --- On resuming at 10.33 a.m.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I address the Chamber?
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I should like to apologise, but I
20 must inform you that my living and working conditions have deteriorated
21 because the Registry, probably for saving purposes, put me in a wing
22 where we are 17 or 18 instead of seven to eight and I can use only a
23 public telephone. If I want to use the telephone in the office on the
24 ground floor, I have to write a special request. And if there is nobody
25 at the administration, then I can make the phone call only the day after.
1 I have no way of contacting my team.
2 Without any need whatsoever, so many of us are crammed into one
3 wing, which makes the overall living conditions much worse. And certain
4 restrictions are now imposed not related to the personnel but without any
5 justification and that creates a lot of problems for me because I have no
6 way of using a secure line because all my associates are only accessible
7 on mobile phones. And the Registry allows secure communication only on
8 land-lines. None of my associates are available on land-lines. That is
9 why I am experiencing these difficulties and I want you to know that.
10 During the recess I was placed into a different wing where we are very
12 JUDGE KWON: We'll note that, but I believe there are ways to
13 address the matter. Very well.
14 Would the witness kindly take the solemn declaration.
15 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
16 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
17 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Please make yourself comfortable.
18 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
19 JUDGE KWON: I apologise on behalf of the Chamber for your
21 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Mitchell.
23 MR. MITCHELL: Thank you, Mr. President.
24 WITNESS: FREDY PECCERELLI
25 Examination by Mr. Mitchell:
1 Q. Good morning, Mr. Witness.
2 A. Good morning.
3 Q. Would you please state and spell your full name for the record.
4 A. My name is Fredy Peccerelli, F-r-e-d-y P-e-c-c-e-r-e-l-l-i.
5 Q. Before we start can you describe what that material is that's in
6 front of you at the moment?
7 A. Yeah, I have a copy of the Lazete 1 report, the Lazete 2 report,
8 as well as copies of the registry logs for both excavation and exhumation
10 Q. Mr. Peccerelli, what is your profession?
11 A. I am a forensic and biological anthropologist.
12 MR. MITCHELL: Can I please have 65 ter number 3454 in e-court.
13 Q. Mr. Peccerelli, this is a copy of your CV. We can see on the
14 first page that you're the executive director of the Guatemalan Forensic
15 Anthropology Foundation. Is that correct?
16 A. Yes, that is correct.
17 Q. Can you briefly describe your work there, what it is that you do.
18 A. I have been working for the Guatemalan Forensic Anthropology
19 Foundation since 1995, 17 years now. I direct the full operations of the
20 institution. These are mainly operational duties as well as public
21 speaking and fund gathering for the organisation. I have grown -- or
22 helped the organisation to grow from five individuals to currently
23 136 individuals. The organisation has four technical areas. These are
24 forensic archaeology, forensic anthropology, forensic genetics, as well
25 as the investigation of missing peoples -- missing persons unit. We have
1 a multi-disciplinary approach to the search of missing persons, recovery
2 of evidence, and we investigate the crimes of the Guatemalan internal
3 armed conflict.
4 Q. You worked for the ICTY's Office of the Prosecutor in 1997, 1998,
5 and 2000; is that right?
6 A. Yes, that is correct.
7 Q. What was your position in 1997 and 1998?
8 A. If I'm not mistaken, 1997 I was hired as a forensic archaeologist
9 and in 1998 as a forensic anthropologist. My duties were documentation,
10 recovery and exhumation of human remains from mass graves. In 1997
11 specifically from Brcko and in 1998 with sites associated with the
12 Srebrenica killings.
13 Q. In 2000 you worked as the deputy senior forensic archaeologist
14 for the ICTY; is that right?
15 A. Yes, that is correct.
16 Q. Can you describe what that role was, who you reported to and what
17 your responsibilities were.
18 A. Well, I was called upon by Dr. -- Professor Richard Wright. He
19 told me that he was going to be leaving to Australia because of some
20 personal or academic reasons and he wanted me to take over while he was
21 gone. So I was instructed to lead a team of international archaeologists
22 and anthropologists in the recovery, exhumation, and documentation of
23 mass graves. Specifically, I was instructed to exhume the grave of
24 Lazete 1 initially and then later Lazete 2.
25 Q. And did you write reports on those two exhumations at Lazete 1
1 and Lazete 2?
2 A. Yes, I did. I rendered two reports. They're entitled "Lazete 1"
3 and "Lazete 2."
4 MR. MITCHELL: Mr. President, I would like to move to tender
5 Mr. Peccerelli's CV. It was 65 ter 3454. The Lazete 1 report which is
6 65 ter 2482. And the Lazete 2 report which is 65 ter 11151.
7 JUDGE KWON: Any objections?
8 MR. ROBINSON: No, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
10 They will all be admitted.
11 THE REGISTRAR: They will be Exhibits P4134 through to 4136
13 MR. MITCHELL:
14 Q. Mr. Peccerelli, do you recall testifying about these two reports
15 in the Tolimir case on the 6th of December, 2000 -- sorry, 2010?
16 A. Yes, 2010, yes.
17 Q. Have you had an opportunity to review that testimony recently?
18 A. Yes, I have. I've read the full testimony.
19 Q. Now, I understand there is one correction to make. At transcript
20 page 8464, line 10 of that testimony, you state that there was a wire
21 ligature around the leg of a body in the Lazete 1 grave. It's correct
22 that that was actually a strip of pink material around the leg of that
23 body; is that correct?
24 A. Yes, that is correct. It was, if I recall correctly, body 474,
25 LZ B474, and it actually has a strip of pink scalloped material that's
1 tied around the thighs of both legs and then also the lower leg of -- one
2 of the lower legs.
3 Q. With that one correction can you confirm that that transcript
4 accurately reflects your testimony in that case?
5 A. Yes, it does. It accurately represents my testimony.
6 Q. And if you were asked the same questions on the same topics
7 today, would your answers be the same?
8 A. I believe so.
9 MR. MITCHELL: Mr. President, I would like to tender
10 Mr. Peccerelli's Tolimir testimony. That's 65 ter 23511. And there was
11 one associated exhibit that we have requested leave to add to our
12 65 ter list and tender. That's number 23513.
13 JUDGE KWON: Probably you also need a leave to add this photo to
14 your 65 ter list?
15 MR. MITCHELL: That's right, Mr. President. We were -- request
16 that leave in our notification.
17 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
18 Any objections, Mr. Robinson?
19 MR. ROBINSON: No, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE KWON: That leave is granted and we'll admit the transcript
21 in the Tolimir case as Exhibit P4137 in this case. And we'll give the
22 number for that associated exhibit, Exhibit P4138.
23 MR. MITCHELL: Thank you.
24 I'd now like to read a summary of Mr. Peccerelli's testimony from
25 the Tolimir case.
1 In 2000, Mr. Peccerelli oversaw the excavation and exhumation of
2 two mass graves known as Lazete 1 and Lazete 2C. The Lazete 1 grave was
3 a partially robbed primary grave that was exhumed between the
4 13th of July and the 8th of August, 2000. It measured 15.8 metres long,
5 5.8 metres wide and 1.4 metres deep. It contained 127 bodies in
6 three distinct concentrations as well as two additional bodies that were
7 found in an adjacent ditch. Ligatures were associated with the wrists of
8 two bodies, while probable blindfolds were associated with 89 bodies. A
9 further 37 pieces of material were located in the grave fill. These
10 37 items appear to be the same material from which the probable
11 blindfolds were made. 456 shell casings were found grouped together on
12 the southern edge of the Lazete 1 grave area, mostly on the side of a
13 track leading into the field where the grave was located. Mr. Peccerelli
14 testified that the grouping of the shell casings suggested that firing
15 had occurred in that location.
16 The Lazete 2C grave was a large primary grave that was excavated
17 and exhumed by Mr. Peccerelli's team in August 2000. It was much larger
18 than the Lazete 1 site, measuring 37.7 metres in length and 4 metres in
19 width. The grave had been partially robbed in September 1995 and
20 two sections of the grave designated as Lazete 2A and Lazete 2B had
21 previously been excavated in 1996 by a team from Physicians from Human
22 Rights, or PHR, led by Mr. Bill Haglund. From this grave
23 Mr. Peccerelli's team recovered 16 bodies and 26 body parts that had not
24 previously been removed either during the robbing event in September 1995
25 or PHR's partial exhumation in 1996. Probable blindfolds were associated
1 with eight of these 16 bodies. 671 shell casings were found grouped
2 together near the Lazete 2C grave. Mr. Peccerelli concluded that the
3 shell casings were most likely fired at this location. In addition,
4 20 live rounds, 46 bullets, and 34 strips of material were found at the
5 Lazete 2C site. The strips of material found at the Lazete 2C site were
6 consistent with the strips of material found at the Lazete 1 mass grave
8 Q. Mr. Peccerelli, I have a few additional questions on three
10 MR. MITCHELL: If I can have 65 ter 2482 in e-court. It's
11 Exhibit P4135.
12 Q. This is your report on Lazete 1.
13 MR. MITCHELL: If I can have page 12 in e-court.
14 Q. Mr. Peccerelli, I think that's page 11 in the hard copy of your
16 Now, we can see here some photos of the site that you exhumed.
17 Were you able to tell whether the bodies in the Lazete 1 grave were
18 deposited in one event or were they deposited there at different times,
19 possibly over a period of several years?
20 A. During the excavation we were able to establish that a single
21 event was the cause of this grave. The grave showed uniform profiles and
22 as well as a uniform bottom. The bodies were displaced in a uniform
23 manner and clumped together throughout the grave. And the only thing
24 where we can see that there was a secondary excavation on the grave was
25 when a robbing event occurred posterior to the primary grave being dug,
1 and this was seen by a difference in the soil fill in those two robbing
2 areas as well as the presence of truncated body parts -- truncated bodies
3 as well as the creation of body parts specifically on the edges of the
4 robbing areas as well as in the fill.
5 It is important to note that throughout the grave you can see a
6 continuum of the edges of the grave as well as of the equipment that was
7 used to create this grave. And the bodies are laid on top of each other
8 only with small pieces of top-soil among them. This indicates that the
9 bodies were placed in there at one time and most likely had this top-soil
10 among the bodies, between the bodies, because of the way they were placed
11 in the grave, most likely pushed in the grave by machinery.
12 Q. What would you expect to see -- what archaeological evidence
13 would you expect to see if the bodies had been placed in there at
14 different times?
15 A. Well, first of all, we would expect to see the existence of
16 disarticulation of the bodies, which we did not see here. Even the body
17 parts were articulated among the bones that were there, that were left.
18 In other words, these were severed during an extraction process that was
19 posterior to the initial burial and these showed the same type of
20 decomposition as the rest of the bodies. We did not see any signs of
21 features within the grave that would lead us to believe that this was a
22 prior burial of any type. The hole, the original hole that later turned
23 into a grave when the bodies were deposited into it was dug into a virgin
24 clay yellowish soil and the fill was a combination of the strata that was
25 exhumed as well as the top-soil that was deposited into it over the
1 bodies and this was uniform throughout.
2 Q. At page 21 of this report you describe how the 20 -- 129 bodies
3 from this grave were found in various states of decomposition. So if
4 these bodies all went into the grave in a single event, can you explain
5 why the bodies show differential rates of decomposition?
6 A. Yes, well, I have worked in over 1400 investigations in
7 Guatemala, and when it comes to mass graves there is differential
8 decomposition due to many factors but decomposition in itself is a very
9 complex issue. It is impacted by specifically three types of
10 differences. For example, first we look at the biological aspects of
11 decomposition, then we look at the environmental and then the cultural.
12 As far as the biological, we have to remember that bodies might decompose
13 differently due to their weight, their size, and their sex even. As far
14 as environmental, we have to remember that the difference in humidity or
15 acidity of the soil will also impact the bodies differently and how close
16 these bodies are to that soil. Thirdly, as far as cultural aspects,
17 well, in this case we're talking about a mass grave. The bodies were
18 buried and also the cause of death or the trauma that was impacted on the
19 bodies will also affect the decomposition. Specifically in this case the
20 bodies that are closer to the edges or in contact, direct contact, with
21 the soil or are higher in the surface of the grave will decompose at
22 slightly faster rate. And the bodies that are in the nucleus of the
23 grouping of bodies will be protected from the environment more so and
24 will decompose slightly slower.
25 Now, you do have to remember that the decomposition stages here
1 are transient. In other words, there we're talking about advanced
2 decomposition to skeletonisation. So there is no one step jumping to the
3 other. This is a transient state and the bodies are all among those too.
4 They show adipocere which is a greyish-whitish tissue, sort of greasy
5 initially and then eventually it becomes brittle and eventually into
6 skeletonisation. This is exactly what we have throughout these bodies in
7 the entire grave.
8 So the difference is very slight and it is related to the
9 location of the bodies within the grave. Once again, the bodies that are
10 protected from the environment by other bodies decompose at a slightly
11 slower rate than the bodies that are in direct contact with the soil.
12 Q. After you had established that these bodies were placed in the
13 grave in a single event, were you able to determine when this single
14 event occurred?
15 A. Well, archaeologically we were not able to do so. What we did
16 have was images that we were given by the ICTY investigators. Dean
17 Manning I think was his name at the time. He gave me an image. I think
18 it's the image that's on the screen now --
19 MR. MITCHELL: Perhaps we can bring up a larger version of that
20 image. If we can have 65 ter 3199 and go to page 146 in e-court. It's
21 the same image but bigger and better quality.
22 Q. Perhaps if the usher can assist you, I might ask you to mark some
23 things on this photo as you're describing to us what you can see. If you
24 can go ahead with your explanation.
25 A. When we were -- the team was given these images, we studied them.
1 And what we could see, these are two images, aerial images, taken of the
2 same location. And you can see that we are talking about basically this
3 quadrant here which appears in this image as this quadrant there. And
4 then we're also talking about this section here, which appears more or
5 less there. You can see they are slightly different and this is probably
6 because of the angles of where the pictures were taken, but in the one on
7 my left, which is dated July 5th, you can see that on both fields there
8 are no features that are relevant. In other words, there's nothing we
9 can see. We can see homogenous ground, vegetation looks pretty much the
10 same, these are cleared fields with maybe a slight feature going to the
11 middle of the top one. But then on the one on the right that is dated
12 July 27th, we can see that there are specifically an oval-shaped feature
13 with tracks going around it and in the bottom one you can see also an
14 oval-shaped feature with some spillover on both of these.
15 Once we saw these images, what we believe we're seeing here is
16 the result of turning the soil over, in other words, exposing soil that
17 was underneath and breaking the top-soil, taking the vegetation away, and
18 then covering it up again. So you would see this very differently from
19 the surrounding vegetation. And also the shapes of the two features led
20 us to believe that these could be graves. So we decided that we should
21 excavate -- well, initially it was only Lazete 1, which is the one on
22 top --
23 Q. I'm sorry, can I stop you there for a minute. Can you actually
24 mark on this image Lazete 1 -- LZ01.
25 A. Pen went over it. Can you see it?
1 Q. And then put in the -- for the lower site what its name is.
2 A. I don't know if you can see that.
3 Q. We can see that. Thank you. Please continue.
4 A. Because of the two dates -- I mean, we requested images in
5 between the dates, but we were told that they didn't have them. So we
6 placed the dates of the original excavation of the primary grave-site
7 between July 5th of 1995 and July 27th of 1995.
8 Q. Can you please put your initials in the bottom right-hand corner
9 and then today's date, 11 January 2012.
10 A. [Marks]
11 MR. MITCHELL: And can I tender that, Mr. President.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes, that will be admitted.
13 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P4139, Your Honours.
14 MR. MITCHELL:
15 Q. And just to summarise and round that off, it's your conclusion
16 that the bodies from that grave were placed there in a single interment
17 between the dates of 5 and 27 July 1995?
18 A. Yes, that is correct.
19 Q. And the last area I want to ask you a couple of questions about
20 are the probable blindfolds that were recovered from Lazete 1.
21 MR. MITCHELL: And if we can go back to 65 ter 2482; that's
23 JUDGE KWON: Page?
24 MR. MITCHELL: Page 23 in e-court.
25 Q. It's page 22 of the physical report.
1 JUDGE KWON: I think it's sufficient to upload the English
2 version only.
3 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
4 JUDGE KWON: Next page. Is it correct -- right?
5 MR. MITCHELL: No. It's the page --
6 JUDGE KWON: I think it's the next page. You said hard copy
7 page 22.
8 MR. MITCHELL: You're right. That's the correct page. Thank
10 Q. At the top of this page you describe how on 89 bodies there was
11 strips of material tied around the head and placed over the face or
12 directly associated to the head. And you concluded that these were
13 probably used as blindfolds. Now, can you explain why you concluded that
14 these 89 strips of pink material were probably blindfolds and not
15 something else. For example, some kind of ceremonial headband.
16 A. In -- what we were encountering here was a mass grave with no
17 clear funerary practices, disorganised bodies, no respect was shown as
18 far as the way the bodies were buried. It seemed to be that this is
19 concurrent with a site of deposition of or execution of bodies, and the
20 pieces of cloth which were very similar seemed to have uniformity. And
21 in most of the cases seemed to be covering the eyes. The term "probable"
22 was used because in some instances they were not covering the eyes and
23 they were covering the mouth or in a couple of instances they might have
24 moved up to the forehead. But in general they were covering the eyes.
25 And also because we found another 37 strips of material very particular,
1 again scalloped edges and pink. And we believe that these could also
2 have been used as blindfolds and might have fell off the bodies. I think
3 you can see some of those -- there's an image of those in the report as
4 well. The colour I think is also something very important. Pink is not
5 some -- is not a colour that you would use to wear as a headband in a
6 combat situation, I think.
7 Q. You found 34 strips of the same type of material in the Lazete 2C
8 grave over the other side of the railway tracks. Is that correct?
9 A. Let me check on the number, but I believe so. Yes, 34 strips of
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Peccerelli. I have no further questions.
12 A. You're welcome.
13 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
14 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Mitchell, I'm afraid the markings by this
15 witness of Lazete 1 and Lazete 2 on aerial image have been lost. Do you
16 think we need to do that exercise again or ...?
17 MR. MITCHELL: I could take him very briefly to the photo and
18 just have him quickly mark it.
19 JUDGE KWON: All right. Could we do that.
20 MR. MITCHELL: It was 65 ter 3199 and page 146 in e-court.
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
22 MR. MITCHELL:
23 Q. And when this comes up, Mr. Peccerelli, if you can just mark for
24 us the Lazete 1 and Lazete 2 sites.
25 A. Of course.
1 Q. And if you could circle the actual grave areas within --
2 A. [Marks]
3 Q. Thank you. And then initialise and date.
4 A. [Marks]
5 Q. Thank you.
6 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
7 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
9 Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
10 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Peccerelli. First of all, I'd
11 like to thank you for meeting up with the Defence. I hope that that will
12 help us conduct this examination as simply as possible. I see that
13 Mr. Mitchell even used that interview of ours to clarify a few matters,
14 so even he had some benefit from it and I thank him for it.
15 I would like to start with the very last matter. On page 22, in
16 response to Mr. Mitchell's question about the possible bands, or rather,
17 you say these are possible blindfolds, he asked whether this was a
18 ceremonial thing. You brought that into question -- actually, the
19 argumentation you provided was that the burial was not dignified and was
20 not carried out in accordance with religious customs and rites. Was it
21 your understanding that these bands are used during religious burial
23 A. No, no, they are not.
24 Q. But that was your answer. In a way you expressed your doubt, you
25 doubted that these were ceremonial bands because there were no other
1 elements that would be involved in a dignified religious burial. Do you
2 know - and up until our interview you had not known about this, your
3 hosts in Bosnia had not informed you about this - do you know of the
4 custom of wearing these headbands during combat and they're worn on the
5 forehead. And then if tissue decays, then the headband may fall down or
6 slide down. Do you know that this was customary among the Islamic
8 A. No, I do not.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 JUDGE KWON: Can you bring up the page of his report which shows
11 the probable blindfold. E-court page is what?
12 MR. MITCHELL: E-court page is 23.
13 JUDGE KWON: 23. Thank you, Mr. Mitchell.
14 Mr. Karadzic, were you referring to these pictures when you asked
15 the witness about the ceremonial or customary thing? Or your question
16 was in general?
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If I understood things correctly,
18 Mr. Mitchell brought this into doubt -- or rather, offered the
19 possibility of doubting whether these were ceremonial headbands. On
20 page 22, Mr. Peccerelli said that he had not seen any other signs of a
21 ceremonial burial, and that therefore the conclusion could be drawn that
22 perhaps these were not headbands but rather blindfolds. This led me to
23 think that Mr. Peccerelli perhaps thought that bands were used during
24 burials, not during fighting.
25 JUDGE KWON: And what was your question, Mr. Karadzic?
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Is that the case and does
2 Mr. Peccerelli know that these bands were not used during burials? On
3 the contrary, they were used during fighting, combat. So the absence of
4 other elements of a religious burial does not say a thing about these
5 bands because these bands are not used during burial ceremonies, but
6 rather during a person's life and when that person goes into combat.
7 JUDGE KWON: I think we heard the answer from the witness. Let's
8 carry on.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. So nevertheless, out of an abundance of caution, you used the
12 word "probable." What led you to this relativisation, or rather, this
13 reservation? What led you to do that? For example, these very same
14 victims, did they have their hands tied or did they only have these
15 blindfolds or bands on their heads?
16 A. What led me and the team to put "probable" was because some of
17 them were not placed directly over the eyes and had been moved due to the
18 movement of the bodies being placed in the grave as well as
19 decomposition. Also the fact that we also found 37 more. They were not
20 directly on the bodies but because they were the same type of material,
21 mostly all of the same colour, and mostly all with scalloped edges, we
22 believed that this could also have been probable blindfolds and that's
23 what led us to use that term.
24 As far as -- let's see, two of them had their hands tied behind
25 their back and those are listed in the report. The rest we found no
1 evidence of them having restraints. Only, like I mentioned at the
2 beginning, there was a third body that had a strip of material that was
3 placed around both thighs and then went into the lower leg.
4 Q. Thank you. And do you know that under such circumstances when
5 people cannot be differentiated on the basis of race, language, faith,
6 combatants are marked by such ribbons or other markings in order to
7 prevent friendly fire?
8 A. No, I do not.
9 Q. Thank you. Is it correct that these two persons, these two
10 victims, with tied hands did not have any blindfolds on?
11 A. You would have to give me a second to check. These are body 549
12 and 560 according to the report. Yes, body 549 did not have a blindfold
13 and body 560 -- however, body 560 did according to the exhumation form.
14 Q. And where was that band in the case of that particular body?
15 A. Over the eyes.
16 Q. Thank you. Did you have any explanation or any way of
17 understanding why people who were being shot at and who did not have
18 their hands tied would suffer having some blindfold on their eyes when,
19 quite simply, they could tear them off by moving their hands?
20 A. My only explanation for that would be the overwhelming amount of
21 ballistic evidence at the site, and to think that they were probably --
22 probably shot rather quickly and did not have a chance or were probably
23 afraid to take them off if they were told not to take them off. If they
24 would, they would probably be shot. That's my only explanation.
25 Q. And how and in which way did you rule out the possibility that
1 these were not executions in the case of persons who did not have their
2 hands tied? How did you rule out that possibility? Actually, during our
3 interview you said that no one had informed you about 44 months of heavy
4 fighting in that area, 44 months of heavy fighting. No one told you that
5 you might come across such graves and such victims. Isn't that right?
6 A. Yes, that is correct, nobody informed me that there was 44 months
7 of fighting in the area.
8 Q. And was it beyond reasonable doubt and by applying which method
9 did you rule out the possibility that these victims were the victims of
10 combat? Basically you were seriously restricted by this lack of
11 information to the effect that there had been 44 months of heavy
12 fighting. Had you known about that, you probably would have done things
13 differently or at least some things. Could you rule out the possibility
14 of these people having died in combat?
15 A. Well, here I must say that to answer this question you cannot
16 only do it with the excavation part of the investigation. This type of
17 an investigation has to be approached with a multi-disciplinary approach
18 and I would need the information, first of all, of the traumas that each
19 one of these bodies was sustained. There is specific information,
20 there's actual studies conducted by Dr. Snow and Jose Pablo Baraybar that
21 shows that during 60 years and 25 different conventional combat you only
22 expect to have fatal wounds in 0.199 of the wounds of the people wounded
23 which means that only two out of ten wounds are fatal in combat. And
24 this is shown in 25 different combats all over the world during 60 years.
25 If I had the information of the traumas that these people suffered, I
1 could probably put them into this frequency of fatal wound formula and
2 tell you that with a high degree of probability.
3 The other thing I would do is I know for a fact that ICMP has
4 been working on the DNA identification of these bodies. I would see if
5 these are, in fact, the victims of Srebrenica that have been identified
6 here and that would also help me to ascertain whether the testimony that
7 says that the people were taken to this site and executed here are the
8 same people that were, in fact, taken from Srebrenica.
9 So I would definitely answer your question more completely with
10 all of that information, but the excavation part of this investigation
11 tells us that we did find a -- once again, a primary grave with
12 127 bodies. Two other bodies were found in a drainage ditch. Two of
13 these bodies had hands tied behind their back and 89 bodies had these
14 cloths over their faces. The way the bodies were placed in the grave
15 were -- gives me at least -- leads me to believe that they were pushed in
16 with some type of machinery, and that also put some of the top-soil
17 within the bodies. And also the fact that I -- we did not find any
18 markings on these headbands, we did not find any weapons, I mean all of
19 those things would have to be taken into account for me to be able to
20 make that type of a conclusion. The evidence here tells me that there's
21 nothing that I can see that leads me to believe that this was combat
23 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, you are conducting your
24 cross-examination not only in the capacity of an accused but also as
25 counsel who represent yourself. So I'm asking you in that latter
1 capacity, is it your case that the people whose pictures we are seeing in
2 front of us died as a result of combat?
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, my case is that an
4 enormous number of victims died in combat. Yesterday we heard from a
5 witness that we -- that they left behind the victims of bombings and the
6 Serbs later buried them. That is what we were told by a witness, a
7 Muslim, who was part of that column that was leaving. I can prove that
8 the presence of leafs and a surface layer clearly indicates that bodies
9 were gathered from the surface and then interred in a newly dug grave.
10 Even Mr. Peccerelli himself says that there was some dust there, that is
11 to say, soil coming from the surface. That means that these bodies had
12 spent a certain amount of time on the surface.
13 JUDGE KWON: And that theory applies to both Lazete 1 and
14 Lazete 2? Is that your case?
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. I don't know whether
16 there were some executions, but blindfolds without having these persons'
17 hands tied are illogical. We saw video clips of Islamic fighters with
18 the headbands going into combat. Mr. Peccerelli himself says that
19 sometimes these bands were on the eyes or on the nose or further down, so
20 I am challenging executions in obvious cases. Let the Prosecution prove,
21 for instance, who executed 12 tied men. That is not debatable at all.
22 However, there were so many victims of 44 months of heavy fighting,
23 warfare, and all of that is being put under "executions" and that is what
24 I am challenging and that is what I can prove.
25 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Thank you. Please carry on.
1 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Mr. Peccerelli, is that the only explanation of the varying
3 degree of degradation of the bodies involved? How and in which way do
4 you rule out the possibility of burials taking place in several stages,
5 that is to say, after fighting existing graves were increased by adding
6 further bodies into them. Isn't that another viable possibility?
7 A. In Lazete 1 and Lazete 2, that is not a possibility. These
8 graves were homogenous in their shape, their depth. The bodies were
9 placed with no strata of foreign soil between them. All they had was
10 clumps of top-soil that were, again, a result of the bodies being pushed
11 in with machinery at one single time.
12 During my experience, once again, of excavating over 1400
13 different cases and close to 20.000 sets of human remains, we can tell as
14 anthropologists and archaeologists when graves are disturbed. And, as a
15 matter of fact, it is customary in Guatemala when a cemetery runs out of
16 room to bury several bodies in one grave. And even the people who work
17 at the cemeteries disturb the other bodies when they do this. So you
18 expect to see some degree of disturbance in the graves, definitely
19 different degree of preservation as far as the anatomical positioning of
20 the bones in relationship to each other, in other words, the articulation
21 of the bones and of the bodies. There's nothing in these two graves that
22 tell us that. There's no evidence of these graves coming at a later time
23 or on top of earlier graves.
24 Q. Are you speaking about the procedure of burial in Guatemala in
25 war time or peace time?
1 A. I would have to say both.
2 Q. I am a little bit baffled now by something. You said that you
3 believe or that you established - and if you did, would you please tell
4 us how - that before the 5th of July there were no burials in these
5 two locations. Is that correct? Were you able to rule that out?
6 A. What I said was that I believe that this -- these two graves were
7 dug between the date of July 5th and July 27th, and that was established
8 because of the aerial images we have. The fact that there were no
9 previous burials was established by the stratographic methodology used to
10 conduct the archeological excavation and exhumation of the bodies. In
11 other words, like I mentioned previously, the uniformity of the graves,
12 the way the bodies were laid on top of each other, the articulation of
13 these bodies, it's a clear sign that these graves did not disturb other
14 graves. We also don't have remains from other bodies from previous
15 excavations being disturbed by these bodies. There are no features
16 within any one of these two graves that these interrupted previous
18 What we do have in both graves is that when these were dug there
19 was a pre-existing excavation that carried within it a water-pipe and we
20 found that. We were able to see that these two graves cut into
21 pre-existing ditches that carried water-pipes in them. So this type of
22 evidence is something that we can see in the ground. We did not see this
23 with any other type of grave. We did not see any feature whatsoever that
24 would lead us to believe that there was previous graves in any one of the
25 two locations where we exhumed Lazete 1 and Lazete 2.
1 Q. Thank you. These two bodies in Lazete 1 that were found in the
2 canal, was the canal filled up?
3 A. If you're referring to the drainage ditch, yes, it had soil over
4 them. These were not graves but the bodies were on the surface but
5 covered with soil. And these bodies also had the probable blindfolds and
6 they were in the same stage of decomposition as the ones in the graves.
7 As I said in my report, I believe that these two bodies were -- probably
8 fell there during the robbing incident that occurred later during that
9 year and were covered over by the machinery.
10 Q. Thank you. And now, to what extent did these ditches correspond
11 to the direction of the water-pipes or did they intersect each other?
12 More precisely, at what angle did the damage to the water-pipes occur or
13 did the direction of the ditch or the canal and the water-pipes
14 correspond exactly in direction and degree?
15 A. There is an image --
16 JUDGE KWON: Shall we upload it? I think it's e-court page 18 if
17 I'm correct in number.
18 THE WITNESS: In the report it's page number 12 of the report.
19 JUDGE KWON: I'm sorry.
20 MR. MITCHELL: That will be e-court page 13 --
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
22 MR. MITCHELL: -- Mr. President.
23 THE WITNESS: Here you can see evidence of this pre-existing
24 excavation of the water-pipe, and in the image below, the -- a little
25 higher, please, it says figure 19, in that one you can see how the grave
1 was dug on top of this and intersects the water-pipe. Now, if you go to
2 the lower image, I would say that the -- the question was what angle.
3 It's --
4 JUDGE KWON: The bottom part.
5 THE WITNESS: The bottom part, there we go. It looks like the
6 grave sort of falls obliquely over -- over the ditch that carried the
7 water-pipe -- not the ditch, the excavation that carried this water-pipe.
8 The drainage ditch ran in the southern part of the grave, more or less
9 where the arrows are coming from. So we're talking about different
10 features. We're talking about a drainage ditch that was sort of a
11 natural feature in the soil and then we're talking about an excavation
12 that carried a water-pipe in it.
13 JUDGE KWON: Do you have anything to say with respect to page 18,
14 hard copy page 17? We upload it.
15 THE WITNESS: This what you can see here in the background, this
16 is a secondary pipe that just fell along the ditch. We did not -- it's
17 not mapped in because it wasn't -- there wasn't an excavation that the
18 grave itself cut into. The other one we found particularly interesting
19 because the grave itself intersected that excavation and led us to see
20 that there was a pre-existing water-pipe that had been severed and later
21 reconnected. Once again, these two bodies were not in the grave.
22 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
23 Back to you, Mr. Karadzic.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Are these the two bodies that were found in the canal or the
1 channel, the one that you referred to as the drainage ditch?
2 A. Yes, that is correct. This is one of them.
3 Q. Thank you. Mr. Peccerelli, how did you rule out the possibility
4 that this was an old trench from which there was firing, a firing
5 position which after it was captured was widened and used as a location
6 for burial?
7 A. I'm sorry to say that that was not something that we considered.
8 What I did -- I mean, what you can see here, there is a grave, a mass
9 grave, 10, 15 metres away. And if you look at -- there's an image, one
10 of the aerial images on report page 11.
11 JUDGE KWON: Page 12 in e-court.
12 THE WITNESS: If you could -- yeah, the lower -- there we go,
13 that one. The location of those two bodies is directly where those --
14 there's a -- I don't know if you can --
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
16 THE WITNESS: I could mark it. See, these images are from
17 September, September 7th and September 27th, and you can see how the
18 grave was one size on September 7th and then there was a disturbance
19 again where you can see -- you can actually see tracks, you can see
20 tracks here and you can also see tracks here. Those two bodies laid
21 around this area here. So the conclusion that these two bodies were a
22 result of the robbing excavation comes from the evidence seen in the
23 aerial images.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. And how did you rule out the possibility that the grave was
1 refilled, that there were subsequent burials there? How did you conclude
2 that the changes were a result of additional burial because fighting was
3 still underway?
4 A. Once again, the grave showed no evidence of having any bodies,
5 any additional bodies, being put into it. What it had was evidence of
6 bodies being taken out of it. And this was shown by the creation of body
7 parts around the robbing excavations as well as the truncation or
8 segmentation of bodies around the edges of the robbing excavation.
9 JUDGE KWON: Would you kindly initial and date this marking.
10 THE WITNESS: Is it working?
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Mr. Peccerelli --
13 JUDGE KWON: Just a second, Mr. Karadzic. We'll admit this
14 marked photo as Exhibit -- as a Defence exhibit.
15 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D1989, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Peccerelli, would similar things happen with bodies that
19 would have been collected from the surface using machinery from a
20 different location which had spent a longer period of time on the surface
21 which were degraded, segmented, would those bodies be damaged if they
22 were brought to this location? Would we have fragmented bodies?
23 A. Well, first of all, if you had a surface -- bodies that laid on
24 the surface for prolonged periods of time would show evidence of --
25 decomposition works very differently when bodies are left in the surface.
1 You would have probably quicker skeletonisation. You would probably have
2 gnaw marks from animals, sun exposure to the bones which causes
3 bleaching, probably disarticulation due to also animal activity. If you
4 then recovered those bodies and placed them within this grave, they would
5 look very differently.
6 Q. Thank you. May I direct your attention to paragraph 8 -- to
7 section VIII of Lazete 2 and to its characteristics. And you state here
8 that the grave represents the place of multiple mass primary burial of
9 human remains covered by dug-over earth and with yellow --
10 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We need time to find the
11 place where Mr. Karadzic is reading from.
12 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, interpreters have difficulty following
13 you. Why don't we upload it. The second report, page?
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's page 14.
15 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Can you please see where it says below the bodies -- and
17 immediately below the same bodies clumps of earth were found surface
18 layer --
19 JUDGE KWON: Are you referring to Lazete 1 or 2?
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm speaking about what we're
21 seeing on the screen now.
22 JUDGE KWON: I'm afraid this is related to Lazete 1.
23 Yes, Mr. Mitchell.
24 MR. MITCHELL: Mr. President, I think Dr. Karadzic is reading
25 from Lazete 2. It's 65 ter 11151 and page 14 in e-court.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
2 MR. MITCHELL: And that's section VIII, the grave and its
4 JUDGE KWON: Yes, but the title of both documents on the same
5 page was identical. That's the reason of confusion. Thank you.
6 Is this it, Mr. Karadzic?
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I hope that it is and I think that
8 it's instructive and we should keep it on the screen for a while.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. So do you agree that it states here that below the -- "large
11 pieces of turf, top-soil, and clay were found under and directly over the
12 bodies within the grave. The mixed nature of the soil grave fill and the
13 disorganised interment of the bodies was probably the result of the
14 bodies being pushed into the grave ..." and so on.
15 How does the thesis seem to you, Mr. Peccerelli, that the bodies
16 were gathered up from a surface whereby the machinery also caught up
17 pieces of turf that happened to be below and above the bodies? Are you
18 able to rule this out?
19 A. If I understand correctly, I think we are saying exactly the same
20 thing. I'm saying that these bodies were on the surface and were pushed
21 into the grave, and that that took some of the -- you see -- on this
22 picture you can see how there is a mound of dirt in the background. When
23 you dig a grave you have to displace the -- to make the hole you have to
24 take the dirt out of it. So there's a combination. Let's say the bodies
25 were laying left of this grave and then they were pushed in, you were --
1 you're going to take some of the top-soil and some of the soil that was
2 excavated along with the bodies if you use machinery. It's different
3 than when you use -- when you place them in the grave manually when you
4 would only pick up the bodies and place them usually in order and usually
5 with no --
6 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. Why don't we lower the picture to
7 see the entire picture. Yes.
8 Please continue, Mr. Peccerelli.
9 THE WITNESS: Oh, I think I'm done. Thank you, Your Honour.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Thank you. How can we rule out and can we rule out a loader
12 gathering the bodies from the surface, whereby also it would catch turf
13 below and above the bodies. So it would not be bodies pushed in but
14 being gathered from different locations and transported together? How
15 can you rule that out? Because pushing does not necessarily mean that
16 turf would be disturbed that is below the bodies. A loader with a very
17 sharp bucket definitely would collect or pick up turf.
18 A. I -- what you're describing specifically is exactly what I'm
19 saying. Obviously I cannot rule it out. That is the same exact
20 mechanism whether it be a bulldozer or a front-loader. Both machines
21 have the capacity to turn over top-soil and pick it up and then are
22 delicate enough to only pick up the bodies. So that can happen.
23 Obviously the evidence here not only within the grave but around the
24 grave suggests that there was shooting going on in this specific place
25 and, you know, because of its isolated location it would be logical to
1 think that the bodies in the grave came from the surface.
2 Q. But also there is the possibility that they came from a different
3 one; is that right?
4 A. I guess the possibility does exist, however remote it might seem
5 contemplating the whole investigation.
6 Q. Are you able to tell us what does it mean that a place is a
7 multiple mass primary interment site of human remains?
8 A. Yes, once again, this is a -- what that means by definition is a
9 grave. Primary which means that it was -- for the first time that
10 location was being used to deposit bodies into it. Multiple bodies means
11 that there were more than one. There is no specific number. In this
12 case you would have to look at how many bodies the PHR exhumations
13 collected. We only collected 16 bodies and I believe 26 body parts from
14 this exhumation, but that's -- that's what it means, that there was --
15 this was a hole that was created and turned into a grave when multiple
16 bodies were placed into it.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we look at that part of the
18 text in English on the screen so that we can see how this "multiple"
19 looks in English. Can we look at the text.
20 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Before that, Mr. Peccerelli, what did you follow when you were
22 excavating? What did you follow -- [In English] Just a moment.
23 "The grave is a multiple mass primary interment site of human
24 remains ..."
1 [Interpretation] Does that not mean that the burial was carried
2 out in several goes?
3 A. I can see how there is a misunderstanding but that's not what I
4 meant. What I meant was that this was a primary mass grave, and in this
5 specific case you have to remember that there was four different
6 excavations on this site. The original or primary excavation of the
7 site; the later robbing excavation of the site; the later PHR
8 excavations, which were two; and then finally the excavation we carried
9 out in 2000.
10 Q. But it's still not clear to me why you use the term "multiple"
11 instead of mass grave.
12 A. "Multiple" meaning more than one body, same thing as "mass." I
13 did not mean several different interments. That would not be -- see, the
14 terms are contradictory. You cannot have in a primary grave multiple
15 because the repeating excavation into a primary grave would make a
16 secondary interment.
17 Q. And how would you describe or call a grave where for the first
18 time in several stages a number of bodies are buried and bodies are
19 added? How would you refer to that type of grave?
20 A. Well, the original grave would be a primary grave with secondary
21 interment into it, and each one of those secondary interments would be
22 described as a secondary excavation and a secondary deposit of human
23 remains into it. They would be considered disturbances of the primary
25 Q. Even though these additional bodies would be buried for the first
1 and only time, you would still refer to it as a secondary grave even
2 though those bodies that were additionally buried would actually be
3 buried for the first and only time; is that correct?
4 A. The term "primary" refers to the incursion into the soil, not the
5 body itself. So you're talking about the excavation being the primary
6 excavation. Any excavation you conduct into an existing grave would be a
7 secondary one and the patterns of it are very different. So you can
8 deposit a body for the first time, but if you open an existing primary
9 grave you will be conducting a secondary interment.
10 Q. Mr. Peccerelli, I'm a doctor, and from what I know, secondary
11 burial means that one body was buried in one place and then reburied.
12 How is this possible that your terminology is different from mine? A
13 secondary grave means that the body was transferred from another place
14 and buried for the second time. Yes or no?
15 A. You see, we are talking about different things. You're talking
16 about bodies being removed and then reburied in a different place. I'm
17 talking about incursions into a primary grave which is something that we
18 don't see here so you're talking about something that did not occur. We
19 don't have any secondary disturbances of the primary excavation here.
20 What we have is a single event with posterior disturbances of the grave
21 to extract bodies not to put bodies in them.
22 Q. And how do you explain the surface layer between certain bodies?
23 There would be a layer of bodies, then there would be a layer of surface
24 or top-soil, then a thin layer of top-soil, then another layer of bodies.
25 If not by additional burial, how do you explain that this top-soil layer
1 was over one set of bodies and below another set of bodies?
2 A. Once again, they are not layers, they are pieces. They are
3 pieces of turf, top-soil. These are not stratography layers that cover
4 an entire area. These are just pieces of turf and top-soil and clay.
5 Again, I explain it by the same definition you gave, machinery
6 picking up bodies and taking top-soil and pieces of clay with it and then
7 throwing them into the grave, pushing them into the grave.
8 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, I note the time. It's time -- about
9 time to take a break now, and given that we have a somewhat longer break
10 due to technical difficulties and that we have about three hours from now
11 on until the end of today, so we are minded to have two short breaks,
12 i.e., two half-an-hour breaks and with two one-hour sessions. I hope
13 that would be okay with the staff. Okay. We'll do that.
14 We'll take a half-an-hour break now and resume at 12.30.
15 --- Recess taken at 12.01 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 12.32 p.m.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Mr. Peccerelli, when did you carry out this exhumation?
21 A. We began on the 13th of July, 2000, all the way to the
22 8th of August of the same year. Yeah, between the 13th of July to the
23 8th of August.
24 Q. Thank you. Who was the man in charge during that exhumation?
25 Who was the main person there, if you will?
1 A. You mean from ICTY?
2 Q. Yes.
3 A. The team leader at the time was Brian Strongman. He is, I think,
4 a retired Canadian Mounted Police if I'm not mistaken.
5 Q. In paragraph 4 you say that a senior forensic archaeologist
6 appointed a supervisor. Who were the two in this particular case?
7 A. In this particular case, since I was the deputy in an absence of
8 Richard Wright who was contracted as the senior forensic archaeologist
9 for the entire season, I was the acting senior forensic archaeologist and
10 I assigned different archaeologists to be the co-ordinator at the site.
11 Q. Who did you appoint as the supervisor?
12 A. The senior archaeologists all got a chance to be supervisors.
13 So, for example, Ian Hanson, Claudia Rivera, Jon Sterenberg,
14 Gaille McKinnon as well. There is a list of the people who participated
15 in the team, and we had senior personnel and junior personnel. The four
16 people that I mentioned, Claudia Rivera, Gaille McKinnon, Ian Hanson and
17 Jon Sterenberg, were the co-ordinators or the supervisors at the grave.
18 Q. Could you please cast a glance at chapter V, where you say in
19 paragraph 4 that the senior forensic archaeologist shall appoint an
20 exhumation supervisor, shall direct the excavators within the grave. Who
21 was that?
22 A. Once again, one week it was Claudia Rivera, another week it was
23 Jon Sterenberg, Gaille McKinnon and Ian Hanson.
24 Q. I see. Thank you. Are you the first and only ones who dealt
25 with Lazete 2?
1 A. No and no. We were not the first and we were not the only ones.
2 Q. Thank you. Who, when, and to what extent worked before you at
3 that location?
4 A. From limited knowledge I have, it was a team of Physicians for
5 Human Rights led by Dr. Bill Haglund sometime in 1996. To what extent, I
6 believe they only worked in two areas of grave -- of Lazete 2. They
7 found two body concentrations there.
8 Q. Aha. And then after that, four years after that, you worked
9 there; right?
10 A. That is correct, four years after that I worked there.
11 Q. Thank you. Did you describe that in your report, namely, that
12 you came after this intervention, or rather, after this work of Doctors
13 for Human Rights, Dr. Haglund, Dr. Kirschner and so on?
14 A. I believe so. I would have to find it, if you give me a second.
15 That would be on page 2 of the Lazete report, in the summary findings,
16 section (f).
17 "In 1996, the PHR exhumation team conducted an investigation at
18 this very site. They identified two graves, they named these Lazete 2A
19 and Lazete 2 B."
20 Q. And what happened then? Do you know that under the supervision
21 of Dr. Kirschner an exhumation was carried out and conclusions were drawn
22 up in relation to the cause and mode of death as well as a revision of
23 the final autopsy findings?
24 JUDGE KWON: Before you answer.
25 Yes, Mr. Mitchell.
1 MR. MITCHELL: If I can just clarify the question. I think the
2 evidence is Dr. Haglund was in charge of the exhumation. Dr. Kirschner
3 was the chief pathologist at the morgue. So if that could just be
5 JUDGE KWON: Are you content with that clarification,
6 Mr. Karadzic?
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I can understand that from
8 the documents that I see before me and that I'm going to tender when
9 Dr. Haglund comes. However, this is what I'm interested in.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Did you know that at that point in time exhumations were carried
12 out and that autopsies were carried out and that autopsy reports were
13 drawn up that were revised with the assistance of Mr. McCloskey, the
14 legal advisor of the Tribunal?
15 A. I had knowledge of the exhumations and I guess it's logical for
16 them to have rendered reports, but that's as far as I know.
17 Q. Thank you. How does that affect your work?
18 A. Which part?
19 Q. Lazete 2, is that the same location or not?
20 A. No -- yes, of course it is. If you mean -- I mean how does the
21 report affect my work or how does the excavation affect my work?
22 Q. How does their excavation affect your conclusions on layers,
23 positions, and so on? So somebody touched the grave four years before
24 you did, under conditions of heavy rainfall, bad weather in general, and
25 so on, and then after that, you draw conclusions about the content of the
1 soil there and so on and so forth.
2 A. Yes, okay. Actually, as I mentioned earlier, this grave, it was
3 37.7 metres in length. When the PHR team exhumed, they did not -- as I
4 understand it, they did not conduct a surface recovery or a removal of
5 the top-soil or the layer on top of the grave. What they did was -- I
6 believe was trench and when they did that they found two accumulations of
7 bodies and they named these Lazete 2A and B. The way we dealt with that
8 was we had the initial excavation of the grave. Then you have the
9 robbing excavations. Then you have the PHR excavations. And then you
10 have our excavations. And these are clearly marked in the report. And
11 simply what we did was describe what we found. What they had done was
12 similar to the robbing excavations except they were more thorough because
13 they removed the bodies by hand, they exhumed these bodies by hand,
14 whereas during the subsequent robbing excavations they were removed by
15 machinery and created body parts and also segmented some of the bodies
16 that were left.
17 If you allow me, I'll show you what page is this on.
18 JUDGE KWON: How about page 16, e-court 17?
19 THE WITNESS: Yeah, that --
20 JUDGE KWON: Could you explain it.
21 THE WITNESS: Yes.
22 JUDGE KWON: Just -- yes. It will be coming up. If necessary,
23 you can mark the drawings here.
24 THE WITNESS: Okay. The initial grave was the entire extent.
25 This is what we call Lazete 2C, which is [marks].
1 Then you have robbing excavations A, which occurred here, and B
2 which occurred here. The PHR team located --
3 JUDGE KWON: Shall we change the colour now to blue.
4 THE WITNESS: Sure. They excavated this area here and this area
5 here, from which I believe or at least I was told there they recovered
6 complete bodies. So what you have here is similar to what you had in
7 Lazete 1, that there was removal of bodies and segmentation in the
8 two areas marked in red, but the two areas marked in green, the bodies
9 were not removed and they were found complete. Those are the two areas
10 that the Physicians for Human Rights team exhumed in 1996, and we later
11 took out -- again using the stratographic method took out the contents of
12 the grave and left the profile of the grave. That's how we can find
13 those features. Shall I ...?
14 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please.
15 THE WITNESS: And if you want, I can also do this.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. So if I understand this correctly, there were two exhumations in
18 this grave before you came there. However, did they cover up the grave
19 after that or did they just leave it open?
20 A. When we found it, the grave was covered.
21 JUDGE KWON: Yeah, that marked diagram will be admitted as D1990.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. So before you there were at least two excavations and possibly
25 some unauthorised excavation. Does that mean that you came to a grave
1 where there had been different physical manipulations and that then you
2 drew your own conclusions?
3 A. That is correct.
4 Q. Thank you. Did you know that there had been an investigation
5 about that first one. C.E. Moore, have you heard of that person who
6 worked with Dr. Kirschner and Dr. Haglund? I don't know if it's a lady
7 or a gentleman, but this person did take part in this excavation in 1996.
8 A. I'm sorry, I wasn't there in 1996. I don't know who you're
9 talking about.
10 Q. Have you heard of professional challenges, disputes, conflicts in
11 relation to Lazete 2 and that there had been some investigation that had
12 been carried out among an association of pathologists or something like
13 that in America?
14 A. No. The only thing I heard prior to the excavation in Lazete 2
15 during the excavation of Lazete 1 was that someone from the original team
16 said that there was still bodies in that grave and that they wanted it to
17 be exhumed. That's it.
18 JUDGE BAIRD: Doctor, now you mentioned, Doctor, that you drew
19 your conclusions when you came to the grave where there had been
20 different physical manipulations.
21 THE WITNESS: Yes.
22 JUDGE BAIRD: Now, would this have affected your conclusion in
23 any way at all?
24 THE WITNESS: Well, what we can see was that there had been
25 interventions into the grave and that was documented. But, you know, in
1 the end what we concluded that this grave had been disturbed several
2 times and we concluded more on our findings and less on what was not
3 there. So, in other words, the original contents of this grave I -- I
4 cannot testify to. I don't know how many bodies were exhumed by the
5 Physicians for Human Rights team nor do I know how many bodies were taken
6 away from those two robbing areas. But from the size of this grave, it
7 is a substantial-sized grave, there was probably a lot of bodies in
9 Would it have affected -- I mean, obviously if I would have
10 excavated this grave before any of this had happened, the results would
11 have been different because the findings would have been different. I
12 don't know if that answers the question.
13 JUDGE BAIRD: Thank you.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Did you know that during that first excavation when the
16 conclusions were being formulated, Mr. Peter McCloskey, who represented
17 the OTP, took part in that drafting process?
18 A. No, I don't know that -- I didn't hear anything about that.
19 Q. Thank you. And did you hear of this investigation carried out in
20 San Antonio in relation to the first exhumation of 1996?
21 A. I'm sorry, I haven't heard of any such investigation --
22 Q. [In English] Inquiry, sort of inquiry and -- [Interpretation] You
23 haven't heard of that; right?
24 A. No, personally, no. I don't know what it pertains to.
25 Q. This first exhumation from 1996 was professionally contested and
1 led to professional disputes within the ranks of that team from 1996, and
2 all of this led to an inquiry in San Antonio and a professional debate as
3 well. I'm not aware of the ultimate conclusions reached, but I certainly
4 know that this had been investigated. Now, was it a court of honour or
5 something like that, but anyway, there was this debate in San Antonio and
6 there was a professional dispute with regard to that team.
7 A. Is there a question?
8 Q. Well, you asked me to explain what this was all about. So it
9 means that that first team worked and then that led to a dispute --
10 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, the witness said he didn't know.
11 Let's carry on.
12 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. But my understanding
14 was that the witness wanted me to clarify what it was that I meant. [In
15 English] "I don't know what pertains to." [Interpretation] Line 4,
16 page 50, and that led me to try to explain.
17 Could we have the previous page now, the one with the photograph.
18 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. What was it that you followed in the case of this grave? What
20 was it that you followed in order to get to this shape?
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have the previous page. Can
22 somebody please help me with this.
23 JUDGE KWON: Page 16, Lazete 2.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. This one is different from the one we had had in colour. Tell
1 me, what was it that you followed? I mean, how did you -- yes.
2 A. Okay. As I mentioned earlier, what we do is a stratographic
3 excavation. In other words, we excavate -- we remove the contents of the
4 grave strata by strata from the inside and we do this by separating the
5 fill from the original soil. Now, what you see here on the walls is the
6 original -- some of it is the original grave, others is parts that have
7 been altered by robbing excavations. And you can see this on the left
8 side where there's actual pieces that were taken away. If you want I can
9 mark more or less where by -- you can see within those are machine marks
10 made as they were taking parts of the grave away. And the parts that are
11 higher, where the bodies are, are the ones that were left behind. This
12 is the same methodology we used in Lazete 1. And the difference is that
13 the fill is loose, so it's fairly easy to remove.
14 Q. Thank you. What I meant was actually how you got the idea to
15 move in this direction and how to dig such a deep trench, if you will.
16 Were you guided by the previous excavation of 1996 or something else in
17 that effort?
18 A. Sorry -- no, actually what we did was we took the top layer off
19 and we could see the outline of the grave in the ground. We then
20 proceeded to extract, take away, excavate the fill from within the grave
21 and we took it away, we removed it, as far down as there was fill, in
22 other words, till we found the original or virgin soil of the region.
23 Q. Thank you. A moment ago you mentioned that the previous team in
24 1996 had found some bodies in a trench. How was it that you ruled out
25 the possibility of that having been a combat position during one of those
1 44 months and that it was then used for a burial?
2 A. Once again, I didn't know about the 44 months you mentioned, so
3 it wasn't something I had to rule out. And I was told that the PHR team
4 had worked there and we were more or less given the locations of where
5 they worked. So what the new findings were, whether these were not two
6 separate graves but they were part of one larger grave.
7 JUDGE KWON: Just wait.
8 Mr. Karadzic or Mr. Mitchell, do you think we need to keep this
9 marked photo?
10 MR. MITCHELL: It might be safe just to make sense of the
11 transcript, Mr. President.
12 JUDGE KWON: Very well. That's sensible. Yes, we'll keep as the
13 next Defence exhibit, Exhibit D1991 [Realtime transcript read in error
14 "1999"]. Yes.
15 THE WITNESS: [Marks]
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. What about this, where is the water-pipe that you referred to?
19 Was it in this grave?
20 A. There is another water-pipe in this grave as well. I could show
21 you in the picture. You can actually see it in two places. If you look
22 at the picture on the cover.
23 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
24 THE WITNESS: And also on page 12 of the report. You might want
25 to look at page 12 of the report initially and then you can see the
2 JUDGE KWON: The first page of this report. Or page 12, yes.
3 E-court page 13, I take it. 14? Did you refer to this diagram?
4 THE WITNESS: Yes. You can see -- may I mark it?
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please. Did you push the button? Yes.
6 THE WITNESS: This was the water-pipe here and it's cut off right
7 about there by the grave and then it gets reconnected up top. But that's
8 the original -- that's the one running right above the line I made. And
9 you can visually see it in the photograph that's on the cover.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Thank you. And what is this diagonal line that we see, but I
12 don't see the marking that lies north to east? What does that line
14 A. Should I change the colour?
15 JUDGE KWON: Change the colour, yes. Let us change the colour,
17 THE WITNESS: If that's the one you mean, that's the reconnection
18 of the water-pipe. Once it was severed by the grave, it had to be
19 reconnected up top. So it's another water-pipe.
20 JUDGE KWON: So it's not legible very much. It says "new pipe."
21 Is it correct?
22 THE WITNESS: Yes.
23 JUDGE KWON: And then the -- on the old pipe you wrote down "pipe
24 out" in both places? The characters are so small. It reads --
25 THE WITNESS: It says "new pipe" and "pipe" --
1 JUDGE KWON: "Out."
2 THE WITNESS: -- "out."
3 JUDGE KWON: And "pipe disconnected," how does it read? With an
4 arrow -- left to the arrow.
5 THE WITNESS: "Reconnected."
6 JUDGE KWON: "Pipes reconnected." Thank you.
7 THE WITNESS: [Marks]
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Before we save this, could I ask you to mark this ditch that you
10 mentioned, saying that the first team had found some bodies in that
12 A. Oh, they marked two trenches which they did directly over the
13 grave. You can't see them, let's see, because they were extracted as
14 they removed the bodies.
15 Q. Thank you. And then can we please save this if it cannot be
16 marked. I would like to draw your attention now to --
17 JUDGE KWON: So did you refer to Lazete 2A and B?
18 THE WITNESS: Yeah.
19 JUDGE KWON: So you can mark the places here without any
21 THE WITNESS: [Marks]
22 JUDGE KWON: If you could mark A and B as well.
23 THE WITNESS: [Marks]
24 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. That will be admitted as Exhibit D1992.
25 I note the previous one was 1991, not 1999.
1 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Can we mark where this ditch or trench was, to the north or in a
3 different place, this part where they found the two bodies?
4 A. I think you're mistaken. The two bodies that were found in the
5 drainage ditch were in Lazete 1. This is Lazete 2. We only found bodies
6 inside the grave here.
7 Q. [Microphone not activated] Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I'm
8 talking about the two ditches that you mentioned that had to do with the
9 excavations from 1996 and which cannot be seen now. Do you know the
10 position? Was that below the grave or above the grave?
11 A. From -- I don't know the position, but if that's -- if the way
12 they found the two body concentrations were through trenching, then those
13 trenches are invisible because they were expanded into areas of the grave
14 and can only be seen by the -- by the areas where the grave extends
15 outside of its original form. Which can be seen in page 16 which we saw
17 Q. Very well. Thank you. Can I now ask you to look at chapter IV
18 about the artefacts that were found in the grave and around the grave.
19 You say that shells were found, live rounds, bullets, ribbons, hand
20 watches, soil samples, parts of pipes, documents, bags with clothing, and
21 all other artefacts that were not found with the bodies themselves. And
22 you say that 830 such objects were found in this operation. Is that
24 A. I'm afraid it's not this section. I don't know where it is.
25 Maybe VI?
1 JUDGE KWON: No, do you see in front of you in the monitor,
2 that's page 6 of your second report, Lazete 2, artefacts.
3 THE WITNESS: Let's see. Yes.
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. This corresponds to what I have in front of me.
6 A. Yes, yes. I've got it, yes. Yes. This is correct.
7 Q. Thank you. And 830 items were found that were recorded in the
8 evidence log. Is that correct?
9 A. Let me look for a second. Yes, 830 artefacts.
10 Q. Thank you. Using metal detectors and visually you found and were
11 able to see shell casings in the grave and around the grave. However,
12 you found a much larger number, and if you look at section VI, a large
13 number of shell cases, 671, more shell cases than live rounds. You
14 recovered only 46 of those. My thesis is that we cannot rule out that
15 this place was defensive position, a location where there was combat,
16 from where there was firing at another location, isn't that right, that
17 this option cannot be ruled out? We have trenches, we have shell cases,
18 we have bullets, we have watches, we have documents, we have thus
19 something that a prisoner of war would not have on him but a fighter
21 A. No, can't be ruled out I guess. Once again I think you would
22 have to look at the entire investigation in the multi-disciplinary
23 approach. This is one part of the investigation where we did find shell
24 cases that were on surface, maybe just below the surface, and that's with
25 the metal detectors. And yes, I do agree that this was a place where
1 firing did occur.
2 Q. Thank you. And then the number of shells -- shell cases was
3 15 times greater than the number of bullets that were found. Is that
5 A. I didn't do the math. There was 46 bullets and 20 live rounds,
6 something along that line, yeah.
7 Q. Thank you. Would you agree that the victims had a certain number
8 of wrist-watches, pocket-watches, documents, and some personal
10 A. Yes, I would.
11 Q. Thank you. Did any of your hosts or those who were providing you
12 with information, did they inform you that it is customary in our culture
13 that a prisoner of war cannot have any valuables or personal documents
14 because that could be used in order to bribe guards, to escape, and so on
15 and so forth?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Thank you. May I now draw your attention to Lazete 1, where in F
18 of the summary you concluded that that was the primary interment site of
19 human remains. Is that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. In paragraph E [as interpreted] you also mention in two places
22 unauthorised digging. Do you have information as to who did that and for
23 what reason, what was the purpose?
24 A. I'm sorry, could you tell me where again?
25 JUDGE KWON: I take it it's I.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
2 THE WITNESS: According to the information I was given and the
3 image I was shown, which is once again one of the aerial images, I was
4 told that Serbian forces came and exhumed or robbed or moved, tried to
5 remove the bodies from the original graves.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Who told you that?
8 A. Investigators, ICMP -- ICTY investigators.
9 Q. Did any Serbs at all take part in this providing of information?
10 Did you get anything from Serbs on that topic or were the only source of
11 information the Muslims?
12 A. I did not get any primary information from any witnesses. All
13 the information was given to the investigators and the information was
14 given to me by investigators. So I never had contact with any of the
15 witnesses or informants.
16 Q. Thank you. You were not permanently employed at the OTP, while
17 the investigators were; is that correct?
18 A. That is correct.
19 Q. Thank you. And did any members of the Defence have access to you
20 to tell you whatever it is that they had to tell you or was it just the
22 A. Well, this was on the site in 2000, so at that time no one from
23 the Defence. I was in the ground on this location so there was no one
24 from the Defence there.
25 Q. Nor was anyone there on behalf of Republika Srpska or
1 representing the Serbian side in the conflict; is that correct?
2 A. The only personnel there was US military personnel and ICTY
3 exhumation team and a demining team, as well as the investigators I
4 mentioned earlier.
5 Q. Thank you. A water-pipe was severed also in this grave; is that
6 correct? This is item VII.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Thank you. Three bodies with ligatures were found and a
9 substantial number of strips of fabric which you called probable
10 blindfolds. There were 37 such strips of fabric. You, I think, also
11 found some strips which had fallen from the heads, whereas there were
12 only three ligatures; is that correct?
13 A. Yes, that is correct.
14 Q. This is (p). And then in item (q) it said that you found
15 ten wrist-watches, three pocket-watches, and three identification
16 documents as well as in total of the 593 artefacts, 456 were shell cases,
17 nine live rounds, and 19 bullets. Did you have any conclusion as to this
18 difference between 19 and 456?
19 A. No, I did not.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 Probably you don't know -- well, I guess this could be maybe a
22 superfluous question. You didn't know about the combat, but I guess you
23 don't know either which side, at what point in time, was in control of
24 that particular area. Is that correct?
25 A. Yes. As I mentioned before, I had no prior knowledge of combat
1 in the area.
2 Q. Thank you. As one of the conclusions that a certain location,
3 specifically Lazete 1 and Lazete 2, you were able to connect with
4 Srebrenica, you referred to the fact that a factor would be whether some
5 people from Srebrenica were or were not in any particular grave. As to
6 the 28th Division, which had a number of independent battalions and five
7 brigades, did you know exactly in which area this unit waged battle?
8 JUDGE KWON: Not for this witness, Mr. Karadzic.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With all due respect, Your Honour,
10 the witness himself mentioned that if somebody was from Srebrenica then
11 it must be that there was an execution there. However, the combat zone
12 of the Srebrenica 28th Division included all of that area, practically
13 reaching to Bijeljina, up to Kalesija in any case, between Kalesija and
14 Tuzla bordering with Srebrenica --
15 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic --
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- that brigade waged battle.
17 JUDGE KWON: Witness said he didn't know the combat situation at
18 the time. You will have another opportunity to tender that evidence to
19 the Chamber, and based upon that evidence you can make your submission.
20 But it's a waste of time asking that question to this witness, who said
21 he didn't know.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All I wanted was to indicate that
23 the conclusion would look different had the witness known that the
24 brigade fought all over that area. But since you think that that is a
25 waste of time, I think that all that is left to me is that actually just
1 thank Mr. Peccerelli for his testimony and to conclude.
2 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Karadzic.
3 Mr. Mitchell, do you have re-examination?
4 MR. MITCHELL: I don't.
5 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
6 Well, then, that concludes your evidence, Mr. Peccerelli. Thank
7 you again on behalf of the Chamber and the Tribunal for your coming to
8 The Hague again to give it. Now you are free to go.
9 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE KWON: But since we will rise all together, we can rise all
12 But, Mr. Tieger, before that briefly, with respect to the request
13 by Mr. Robinson asking for the lifting of ex parte nature of certain
14 motion, do you -- are you minded to respond to that request?
15 MR. TIEGER: No -- I'm not hearing anything in the microphone,
16 but since the light is on, I assume I'm being heard. The answer is no,
17 but I presume the Court would be hearing from the Registry.
18 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
19 We'll take a break now for half an hour and resume at five to
20 3.00 -- 2.00.
21 --- Recess taken at 1.25 p.m.
22 [The witness withdrew]
23 --- On resuming at 1.56 p.m.
24 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Welcome back, Ms. West. I was informed
25 that you have something to raise.
1 MS. WEST: Good afternoon, Mr. President. Good afternoon,
2 Your Honours. Mr. President, I would just like to answer a question that
3 the Trial Chamber posed to me last time I was here. On November 30th
4 Witness Rave, who was a DutchBat liaison officer, testified and he
5 testified about attending the first two Hotel Fontana meetings. He
6 testified that at the first meeting Mladic asked Karremans whether
7 Karremans could arrange for the buses. During his cross-examination
8 Mr. Karadzic challenged the Prosecution, noting that it was, and I quote,
9 "correct that only UNPROFOR and the Muslim sides were speaking about
10 evacuation and asking for the buses, whereas the Serb side was waiting to
11 hear about what the Muslim civilians wanted." And that was at transcript
13 On re-direct on that day, I asked the witness -- the witness
14 reconfirmed that Mladic asked Karremans if he was able to provide buses
15 and that referred to the first meeting. Then you asked whether the
16 Prosecution could locate any instance in the first meeting transcript
17 where the term "buses" was mentioned. And you asked before Mladic had
18 made that request. I did locate one instance, Your Honour, and I -- we
19 forward this to Sanction so we can see it on the screen. It was 17 pages
20 earlier to Mladic's request and it was in response to Mladic asking
21 Karremans what he wanted. Karremans then went on to describe the
22 humanitarian situation at the compound. And you can see it -- it begins
23 at the bottom of 7828, where Karremans says:
24 "There are now approximately 10.000 women and children within the
25 compound of Potocari and the request of the BH command is to ... let's
1 say, to negotiate or ask for the withdrawal of the battalion and
2 withdrawal of those refugees, and if there are possibilities to assist
3 that withdrawal. There are some women who are able to speak English, and
4 what I have heard from the soldiers who are now working to ... let's say
5 ease the pain for the population ... a lot of people, a lot of persons
6 women said 'we are waiting for the buses and can we leave the enclave'
7 because they are sick, they are tired, and they are very scared."
8 Mr. President, that was the only time that I located the word
9 "buses" before Mladic's request.
10 JUDGE KWON: Thank you very much for your thorough research.
11 Yes, you have a new member to introduce, Mr. Robinson.
12 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, thank you, Mr. President. We would like to
13 introduce Ms. Kate Emmerson, who is one of our interns working with our
14 case managers. Thank you.
15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Before we bring in the next witness
16 shall we move into private session briefly.
17 [Private session]
1 [Open session]
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes, let us bring in the next witness.
3 [The witness entered court]
4 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon, sir. Would you kindly take the
5 solemn declaration, please.
6 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
7 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, sir. Please make yourself comfortable.
9 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. West.
11 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 Mr. Registrar, may we have 65 ter 90306, please.
13 WITNESS: JOSEPH KINGORI
14 Examination by Ms. West:
15 Q. Good afternoon, sir.
16 A. Good afternoon.
17 Q. Can you please tell us your name.
18 A. Your Honour, my name is Colonel Joseph Kingori. I spell the last
19 name. K-i-n-g-o-r-i.
20 Q. Thank you, Colonel. Sir, you've testified in Krstic, the Krstic
21 case, in 2000; the Popovic case in 2007 to 2008; and the Tolimir case in
22 2010. Is that correct?
23 A. That's correct, Your Honour.
24 Q. And an amalgamated statement was prepared containing relevant
25 portions of your prior testimonies, and this is a statement which you
1 signed on the 8th of January. Is that correct?
2 A. That's correct, Your Honour.
3 Q. Colonel, do you see that statement on the screen before you now?
4 A. Yes, I do.
5 Q. And is this a statement that you reviewed and signed?
6 JUDGE KWON: Excuse me, shall we switch into e-court. Yes.
7 Thank you.
8 Please continue.
9 MS. WEST: Thank you.
10 Q. Colonel, is this the statement that you reviewed and signed?
11 A. Yes, Your Honour, it is the one I signed and I can see my
12 signature down there.
13 Q. Colonel, can you confirm that the statement accurately reflects
14 an amalgamation of the testimonies that you've previously given?
15 A. Yes, Your Honour, it does.
16 Q. Sir, if you were asked today about the same matters contained in
17 the statement, would you provide the same information to the
18 Trial Chamber?
19 A. Yes, Your Honour, I would.
20 MS. WEST: Mr. President, I tender the statement and I also
21 tender the associated exhibits. There are a total of 30 exhibits, four
22 of which we are requesting not tendered.
23 JUDGE KWON: Could you identify those four.
24 MS. WEST: Yes. Those are -- that's 65 ter number 1943 and it
25 has a Defence exhibit number D01966; second, 65 ter 02278, with a Defence
1 exhibit number D01062; the third is 65 ter 40582, and this is the
2 Srebrenica trial video and I think as the Chamber understands we will
3 tender that later; and the last is 65 ter 03099, and this again is a
4 compilation of photos that we'll tender at the end.
5 JUDGE KWON: So the number of associated exhibits you are
6 tendering in total is 26?
7 MS. WEST: Correct.
8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
9 Are there any objections?
10 MR. ROBINSON: No, Mr. President.
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
12 Mr. Kingori's 92 ter statement will be admitted as ...?
13 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P4140, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE KWON: And the other 26 associated exhibits will be
15 admitted into evidence and be given number in due course. But just one
16 matter, the last item, 65 ter number which is 16885, being the diary of
17 Mr. Kingori, but I'm not sure it's legible very much. It's -- I'm not
18 sure whether you have some clearer version.
19 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President. And I understand that the
20 Colonel actually has the original and perhaps we can take a better copy
21 of it and upload it.
22 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
23 MS. WEST: Thank you.
24 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
25 Yes, Ms. West.
1 MS. WEST: I'd like to now read a summary of the Colonel's
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could I get this by the end of
4 today because if I don't have it this evening, then it's useless to me.
5 JUDGE KWON: I think that can be sorted out, yes. Thank you.
6 Yes, Ms. West.
7 MS. WEST: Thank you.
8 In March 1995, Colonel Joseph Kingori, a United Nations Military
9 Observer, was stationed in Srebrenica. At the time he held the rank of
10 major. The Colonel's main duty was to monitor and report any violations
11 to the cease-fire agreement. He had contact with all parties, conveying
12 messages from one side to the other and attempting to bridge their
13 differences. Major Nikolic and Colonel Vukovic were the -- were
14 Colonel Kingori's main contact within the VRS.
15 Colonel Kingori described the lack of food in Srebrenica. Water
16 and electricity were also scarce. Some of this was due to the VRS's
17 restrictions on aid convoys coming into the enclave. Leading up to
18 July 1995, the VRS pushed further and further into the enclave itself.
19 The colonel occasionally attempted to penetrate behind VRS lines to
20 observe the military situation. There were times he could not reach even
21 the enclave's internal borders because the VRS stood in the way. During
22 this time he was only armed with a pencil and a notebook.
23 The colonel was one of two UN military observers present in
24 Srebrenica during the fall of the enclave. On the morning of July 6 he
25 was awoken by heavy shelling that continued on the 7th, 8th, and 9th. At
1 first the shelling seemed directed outside the town, as though to push
2 the population of the enclave into the town itself. Then the shelling
3 changed, targeting the town as though to drive the population out
4 entirely and towards the DutchBat compound at Potocari.
5 During the shelling, the two military observers were alternately
6 inside the bunker of the PTT building filing reports and going out on
7 patrol to examine the damage done by the shelling. Even from inside the
8 bunker, the military observers could hear and count the shells. Outside
9 the bunker they could see the shells falling. The colonel observed that,
10 among other weaponry, the VRS was using tanks to fire missiles. This was
11 in contrast to any weaponry the ABiH had inside the enclave. The colonel
12 testified that even if there were a few guns held within the enclave,
13 they were old weapons unable to withstand or provoke the kind of
14 fire-power levelled by the VRS.
15 On July 9th, the military observers left Srebrenica for Potocari.
16 The enclave had already been encircled by the VRS. The colonel testified
17 that it was as though the Muslims were being crushed in one place. The
18 population was forced to look for an exit, and like the military
19 observers, they streamed to Potocari in the thousands to seek refuge with
20 the UN. It was not an organised exodus.
21 On July 10th, the shelling continued. The Colonel could hear it
22 very well himself from the DutchBat compound. The military observers
23 also had a set of eyes still within the town of Srebrenica. An UNMO
24 translator went back to Srebrenica from Potocari, so as to report on
25 shells landing within the town. He had been with the UN for two years
1 and could competently report on artillery.
2 The Colonel attended a meeting with DutchBat and representatives
3 of the ABiH. The purpose was to discuss an ultimatum issued from the VRS
4 that Muslims needed to leave the enclave. By the end of the day on
5 July 11th, the Potocari compound was filled with Muslim civilians, both
6 inside the parameters of the compound and outside the fence.
7 On July 12th, VRS soldiers arrived at the DutchBat compound.
8 Those soldiers took up positions all around it, observing the whole area
9 and the approximately 30.000 refugees gathered there. The Colonel went
10 out of the compound to investigate. He saw General Mladic in a field by
11 the compound and then the two at first discussed informalities and then
12 the events. Mladic told Kingori that the VRS would provide buses for the
13 evacuation of the refugees. Within 20 or 30 minutes of this
14 conversation, buses began arriving. VRS soldiers herded women and
15 children onto the buses, but Kingori saw them pull aside men and boys who
16 were 14, 15, and 16. The men and boys were sent to the white house. The
17 separation of them from the women was traumatic. There were senior VRS
18 officers present as crying families were pushed apart. Kingori
19 approached Mladic again, complaining that the white house was
20 overcrowded. Mladic replied that as far as he was concerned, the people
21 were comfortable. He took Kingori to the white house, where Kingori saw
22 men seated on top of one another and with no space between them. Mladic
23 refused to allow the Colonel to enter the house.
24 Men were taken from the white house and put on separate buses
25 from the women and children. Young boys were shoved onto the buses as
1 well and the Colonel tried to ask their ages. If a boy answered "14,"
2 the Colonel took him back to the VRS soldiers and away from the buses.
3 The Colonel would then turn and see more buses -- excuse me, more boys
4 pushed onto the buses by the VRS.
5 The men were also forced on the buses without their belongings.
6 They left behind everything they had, including their identification
7 cards. According to the Colonel, this was an indicator that something
8 bad was going to happen. He explained it meant that these people,
9 whatever was going to be done to them, it would be very difficult to
10 identify them later. The Colonel tried to make a record of the men's
11 identities. He asked the men to shout their names to him so that he
12 could make some record of them. He testified that this is one of the
13 saddest moments he witnessed in Srebrenica.
14 On July 13th, the Colonel tried to investigate rumours that
15 Muslim civilians were being taken behind a building by VRS soldiers. He
16 was prevented by the VRS from going to the location but heard a gun-shot
17 from the building. On the 13th as well, the Colonel went with
18 representatives of MSF to evacuate patients from Srebrenica hospital to
19 the compound. Some didn't want to leave, but the Colonel was told by VRS
20 soldiers at the hospital that if he did not take the patients with him,
21 they would be killed.
22 The removal of refugees from the compound by the VRS continued,
23 and by the 14th, the refugees were gone and only the wounded remained.
24 Military observers helped MSF prepare a list of wounded and of local
25 staff to try to safely evacuate them. This was negotiated with the VRS
1 including Major Nikolic and the VRS civilian affairs officer
2 Miroslav Deronjic. During the negotiations, Professor Koljevic was also
3 called. On the 18th of July, the wounded were evacuated by the ICRC and
4 a few days later the Colonel left Srebrenica along with MSF, DutchBat,
5 and the local staff.
6 Mr. President, that concludes my summary.
7 Q. Colonel Kingori, when did you retire from the Kenyan Air Force?
8 A. Your Honour, I retired in August 2007.
9 Q. And after that, for what organisation did you work?
10 A. Your Honour, after retiring from the Kenya Air Force I joined the
11 National Disaster Operations Centre as the deputy director.
12 Q. And can you explain to us what your role was there, what your job
14 A. Your Honour, the role -- our roles at the National Disaster
15 Operations Centre was to monitor and co-ordinate disaster management,
16 that includes training and response and also risk reduction in the whole
18 Q. Sir, when did you finish your contract there?
19 A. Your Honour, my contract was for four years, which ended last
20 year in August.
21 Q. And what do you do now?
22 A. Right now, Your Honour, I'm working together with the
23 Moi University, that is the local university, in training of disaster --
24 district disaster management committees on disaster management in their
25 local areas.
1 Q. Colonel, we understand that from March 1995 until July 1995 you
2 were a United Nations Military Observer in Srebrenica. Can you tell us
3 generally the duties of a military observer?
4 A. Your Honour, the duties of a military observer are diverse, but
5 most of the apparent ones that we had was the monitoring of the violation
6 to the cease-fire agreement that was already in place and also ensuring
7 that those who were coming in to bring in aid, that is, in terms of food,
8 water, through UN agencies like UNHCR, were getting a clearance to get
9 into the enclave and also were assisted in getting out of the enclave
10 safely. That is just a few among many others that we had.
11 Also I think it's important to bring one more, that is bringing
12 the warring factions together through holding of meetings together in
13 with different functions. And then whatever we are told from this side
14 we inform the other side so that we can bridge the gap between the two
15 and so that we could be able to bring them together.
16 Q. Sir, in paragraph 5 of your statement, it's noted that military
17 observers were never armed. Can you tell us why this is so?
18 A. Your Honour, in terms it is difficult to explain, but normally a
19 military observer in any UN mission is never armed. The reason being if
20 you're not armed, you are able to go to any area without fear that
21 somebody might harm you because of the weapon you have or the other
22 person fearing that you might harm them in case you have a weapon. So
23 you have a free way of going to either side of the warring factions
24 without fear at all. That is the main reason. But also it's good to
25 note that we used to have a book and a pen on which to write notes that
1 we could see on the ground or hear or even investigate which through both
2 their functions it was a very strong weapon in that whatever we wrote was
3 taken very seriously by the UN system.
4 Q. Colonel, in order to become a military observer, what minimal
5 level of experience must a candidate have?
6 A. Your Honour, first and foremost, to be a military observer you
7 must be a senior military officer. Here we are talking about from the
8 rank of major and above, and you had to have -- for you to have reached
9 that rank you definitely must have served for ten years in the military.
10 So for sure you had to be a senior and experienced officer because
11 whatever judgement that you were going to make in the field could have a
12 lot of repercussions and also you are expected to make judgements
13 according to your experience and knowledge that you already have.
14 MS. WEST: May we have 65 ter 19423, please.
15 Q. Colonel, after you left Srebrenica, were you and the other two
16 military observers debriefed?
17 A. Yes, Your Honour, we were debriefed in UNMO headquarters in
19 Q. Can you tell us the name of the other two observers who were with
21 A. The other two observers, Your Honour, were Major David Tetteh
22 from Ghana and Major Andre de Haan from Holland.
23 Q. Now, we see the document in front of us and if we look at
24 paragraph 2, it notes that there were three of you and it also says that
25 the Kenyan officer took the lead role in the debriefing. Is that
1 referring to you, sir?
2 A. Your Honour, it does.
3 Q. Now if we can go to the next page, please, and we're going to go
4 to paragraph 4 and this is a paragraph that talks about the VRS take-over
5 of OP Echo. And just for the record, Colonel Kingori, in front of you is
6 also a copy of this document if that makes it any easier for you.
7 Actually physically, it's one of those pieces of paper. Paragraph 4
8 refers to OP Echo but it notes that OP Echo took place on the
9 3rd of July. Is that the correct date of the overthrow of OP Echo?
10 A. Your Honour, it was on the 3rd but not of July. I remember very
11 well and it is in my notes that it was in June, that is, the previous
13 Q. What was the significance of the road upon which OP Echo was
15 A. Your Honour, this was a very important road that led to the
16 southern side of the enclave through an area we used to call Zeleni Jadar
17 and which had some mineral deposits, that is, bauxite, and also there
18 were some factories in that area including a timber factory, and it was
19 one of the vantage points that any military would have wanted to occupy.
20 Q. Colonel, as a result of the BSA successful attack on OP Echo,
21 what was the response by DutchBat?
22 A. Your Honour, DutchBat tried to hold that place but they could not
23 be able to hold so they moved backwards a bit because the BSA could have
24 attacked them at any time, so they moved behind and left the OP.
25 Q. I'm now going to move to paragraph 9, which is the following
1 page, and this talks about OP Foxtrot and firing on the town of
2 Srebrenica. Were you in Srebrenica on July 9th?
3 A. Yes, Your Honour, I was in Srebrenica on July 9th.
4 Q. And, in fact, we're going to talk about the days before when you
5 were there as well. You describe extensively the shelling in your
6 statement. But in this debriefing you also described the inhabitants of
7 Srebrenica being paralysed and confused. Can you tell us what you meant
8 by that?
9 A. This was due to the shelling that was going on, in that the BSA
10 were shelling both outside the town and later on inside the town, so it
11 caused a lot of confusion which actually could have been the main aim of
12 the shelling, to make sure that everybody is confused. So they did not
13 know what to do or where to go and there was a lot of confusion. We
14 could see it inside the village.
15 Q. And as a result of that confusion, did you see people running all
16 over the place?
17 A. Your Honour, that was the most evident thing, in that people were
18 running all over, they didn't know where to go, where to hide, what to
19 do. And so we could see it and then there was a lot of fear in their
20 eyes and everything, but of course it was caused by the shelling that was
21 still ongoing.
22 Q. And at paragraph 11, a little bit further down, you noted that:
23 "The BSA knew of this weakness in the chain of command and timed
24 their attack to exploit it."
25 Can you tell the Trial Chamber what this weakness in the chain of
1 command was.
2 A. Your Honour, there were several significant things that had
3 happened and one of them was the accident that the Chief of Staff Ramiz
4 Becirovic had. There was an air crash and we were told by the BSA in a
5 meeting that they called us through Colonel Vukovic that there was a
6 crash, and later on, when we investigated, we found that it's true, there
7 was an incident and Ramiz Becirovic, who was the Chief of Staff, was
8 injured. And also we were being told about the rumour of Naser Oric
9 being around and that he was confusing the leadership of the whole ABiH.
10 So I think they were weak at that particular moment, in that there was no
11 proper leadership.
12 Q. I'd now like to move to paragraph 18, which is on the following
13 page, and this discusses shelling in Srebrenica from July 6 until the
14 town fell. Was there any pattern to the shelling that you observed?
15 A. Your Honour, we noted a pattern that was there --
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Suggestive, leading. This witness
17 is eloquent as it is, why lead him?
18 JUDGE KWON: Ms. West just referred to the paragraph 18 which
19 refers to a pattern. I don't think it's a leading question.
20 Please proceed.
21 Do you remember the question, Colonel Kingori?
22 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, I do. Your Honour, we had noted
23 a pattern in that the BSA could shell over a certain period, then stop,
24 and later on after a few moments start shelling again. And we found that
25 to be a bit interesting. To us it was advantage, yes, in that there was
1 a time that we could go into the town, do crater analysis, and come back
2 safely, also collect those who were injured and those who had been killed
3 and take them to hospital. And also get time to inform the locals that
4 they should stay indoors and not get out so that they can not be harmed.
5 So the pattern was there and we utilised it positively.
6 MS. WEST:
7 Q. Colonel, what date did you leave Srebrenica?
8 A. Your Honour, we left I think on the 9th.
9 Q. And after the 9th, did the shelling continue in Srebrenica?
10 A. Yes, Your Honour. The shelling continued.
11 Q. How did you know that?
12 A. Your Honour, while in Potocari we could be able to hear the
13 shells landing and also overflying our place and especially the rockets,
14 at least we knew where the rocket-launcher was, it was just next to
15 Potocari. And secondly, we had our own interpreter whom we had sent to
16 Srebrenica to go and monitor what is happening -- what was happening in
17 that area. So he could also give us the reports of what was happening in
18 Srebrenica and the surrounding areas.
19 Q. I'd like to move to paragraph 25, it's the following page. And
20 this is talking about July 11th in the compound itself. On the 11th
21 that's where you were located; right?
22 A. Yes, Your Honour.
23 Q. And by the end of the day on the 11th, can you give an estimate
24 about how many people converged in Potocari?
25 A. Your Honour, around that time we had about from about 3.000 to
1 3.500. The figure obviously may not be very correct but around that
2 figure had already streamed into Potocari.
3 Q. And does that include the number of the people on the outside of
4 the compound as well?
5 A. No, Your Honour. Those were the people who were walking in --
6 into the factory. There were others who had to be kept outside because
7 the factory could not be able to hold everybody.
8 Q. And if you know, do you have an estimation of how many people
9 were on the outside of the compound?
10 A. Finally, Your Honour, we had a figure of between 5 and 7 outside,
11 but there were estimates which were going up to 10.000 depending on the
12 kind of people who were doing the estimates. Because we had the UNHCR
13 doing it, we had the IOM, we had other agencies who were doing it, but we
14 knew the figure to have been about between 5.000 and 7.000.
15 Q. Now, at the end of this paragraph you had indicated that there
16 was a massive refugee problem to deal with. Can you please tell the
17 Trial Chamber what it was that made you come to that conclusion.
18 A. Your Honour, DutchBat -- one thing I can say is that DutchBat was
19 the main supplier of our food and water and even diesel. So there
20 already were strains because they were not being allowed to bring in
21 these items into the enclave by the BSA, they were not giving them a
22 clearance to bring it in. And so when you bring in refugees, when you
23 add refugees now to this problem you find it was very difficult to
24 manage. It was a humanitarian catastrophe in that we did not have enough
25 water, we did not have enough food and even shelter for these refugees in
1 that place.
2 Q. Colonel, can you tell us who Petar was?
3 A. Your Honour, Petar was our interpreter from the BSA side.
4 Q. And how often did you work with him?
5 A. Your Honour, Petar -- we used to call him whenever we needed him
6 or whenever he wanted to convey something to us like maybe a request for
7 a meeting with the BSA. And because he had a radio, a UN radio, we could
8 easily communicate. So it was whenever there was a need.
9 Q. Did you speak to Petar in the late morning of July 11th?
10 A. Yes, Your Honour, I did.
11 Q. And who called whom?
12 A. In the morning I -- Your Honour, he's the one who called us.
13 Q. What did he say?
14 A. He was requesting for a meeting with the CO of DutchBat that
16 Q. What did you do?
17 A. Your Honour, that is the time we were -- we -- a request for an
18 air-strike had already been given to the UN headquarters, and we were
19 expecting air-strikes any time. So we got advice from UN headquarters in
20 Zagreb that we should not attend that meeting because the UN personnel
21 may be held hostage as a human shield to avert an air-strike.
22 Q. Colonel, later in the day did you speak to Petar again?
23 A. Yes, Your Honour. We talked to Petar. That was -- actually, the
24 air-strike had already been done if you can call that an air-strike
25 because only one aircraft attacked and very few -- there were only two
1 targets which were hit. So everything was over and that time we
2 requested for a meeting, and we were not that afraid because there were
3 no more air-strikes and we had not heard of any threats from the BSA up
4 to that time.
5 Q. And ultimately was a meeting held?
6 A. Yes, Your Honour, the meeting was held.
7 Q. Did you attend the meeting?
8 A. No, Your Honour, I did not.
9 Q. Now, I want to go to paragraph 27, which starts at the bottom of
10 this same page, and it notes that:
11 "All the trucks and buses were arranged by General Mladic and it
12 was clear that everything was planned including the evacuation. Mladic
13 made a very good show for the BSA TV cameras ..."
14 Colonel, what facts did you consider when you concluded here that
15 everything was planned?
16 A. Your Honour, we told General Mladic - and I remember personally
17 once talking to him about it - that the UN will provide transport to take
18 the refugees out of the enclave. And then he declined and said that he
19 had his own buses to take the people outside the enclave. And within a
20 very short time the buses were there. So to me, I could see that because
21 the buses were not being sought from the Yellow Bridge or Bratunac which
22 were the next towns, obviously this is something which had been
23 prearranged. And considering the number of buses and trucks, that could
24 have been a very big logistical issue so it must have been preplanned
25 according to my own assessment.
1 Q. Now, you just mentioned that you had this conversation with
2 Mladic. Was there also a second separate conversation with Mladic?
3 A. Yes, Your Honour. There was a second time that I talked to
4 General Mladic, and that was concerning the people -- the men who had
5 been taken to one white house, where they were put together. And to me
6 it looked very sad because they were all huddled in one particular place
7 and there were too many of them for that particular area. So I thought
8 the conditions therein were not good for them and I wanted him to do
9 something about it. That's when I talked to him a second time.
10 Q. When the two of you had the conversation, was it near the
11 white house itself?
12 A. No, Your Honour. It was not very near the white house but it was
13 not very far because that time it was slightly towards where the refugees
14 were outside -- in the outside compound. But he offered to take me to
15 the -- to that white house so that we could see the conditions. He was
16 still insisting that the conditions were good, that the people were happy
17 inside there, and so he offered to take me there and later on we went
19 Q. Can you tell us what happened when you went there?
20 A. Your Honour, when we went to the white house we found the men
21 were still cramped together, there was no space for them to do anything,
22 but then General Mladic offered to, you know, to supply them with
23 candies, soft drinks, beers, and for sure it looked very real, it looked
24 like they were very happy because everybody was scrambling to get
25 something. So they were shouting, "Give me this," "Give me that," and
1 they all looked like they're okay. But to me it was just for the
2 cameras. It was just acting for the cameras to depict that.
3 Q. Colonel, ultimately did you ever get inside the white house?
4 A. Your Honour, General Mladic denied me access to the white house.
5 I asked him for it. I asked him whether he can let me go in there and he
6 said no, I'm not allowed to go inside there, so I did not.
7 MS. WEST: Mr. President, I would tender 65 ter 19423.
8 JUDGE KWON: That will be admitted.
9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P4165, Your Honours.
10 MS. WEST:
11 Q. Colonel, you -- early on today you described your role as a
12 military observer and, if I may, as some sort of liaison between the
13 parties. With whom on the VRS side did you primarily meet?
14 A. Your Honour, we were primarily meeting Major Nikolic who was the
15 main contact guy and also Colonel Vukovic.
16 Q. And how many times did you meet with Colonel Vukovic?
17 A. Your Honour, I met Colonel Vukovic at least four times, at least
18 four times.
19 Q. And on one of those occasions did take place at the
20 Hotel Fontana?
21 A. Yes, Your Honour, one of those occasions we met at Hotel Fontana.
22 Q. Can you tell us about that, please.
23 A. Your Honour, it was just one of, you know, like any other
24 meeting, but this one was a bit different, later on we learnt, in that
25 there was something he wanted to convey to us and also there were very
1 many senior officers from his side, from the BSA side, that is, there
2 were about six of them. And one of the questions that he posed to us is
3 what the UN might do in case the BSA attacked the enclave, attacked and
4 took the enclave. He wanted to hear from us what the UN would do.
5 Q. Colonel, can you remember when this meeting took place?
6 A. Your Honour, it took place quite early, quite early, just before
7 the attack. I think it was around June, around June.
8 Q. Colonel, I'm going to show you now some video footage, and this
9 is 65 ter 4582, the first part is part 2 of that video, and for the
10 record that's V0009035. In total we'll only play about five minutes.
11 Colonel, this is a July 12th. It's about 1.00 in the afternoon.
12 MS. WEST: And for the Trial Chamber, during the testimony of
13 Colonel Rutten you saw up to this point of where this video starts.
14 [Video-clip played]
15 MS. WEST: And for the record, we've stopped at time 25 and
16 31 seconds.
17 Q. Sir, is that you in the middle of the screen?
18 A. Your Honour, right now I can't see it.
19 JUDGE KWON: Please wait till our usher assists you, Mr. Kingori.
20 My apologies.
21 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, that's me.
22 JUDGE KWON: Ms. West, would you like the witness to view the
23 video again?
24 MS. WEST: Yes, if we could start again. Thank you very much.
25 [Video-clip played]
1 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
2 JUDGE KWON: Ms. West, I was told that the Colonel watched the
3 video but -- is it true? Can you confirm that you watched the video?
4 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, I've watched it.
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
6 We can carry on then. Yes.
7 MS. WEST: Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. President. If we
8 can -- we are now at 23.59. We are beginning the video. On the screen
9 we see July 12th at 13.13 in the afternoon. Now we can start.
10 [Video-clip played]
11 MS. WEST:
12 Q. Colonel, we just stopped at 24.39. Do you recognise this area?
13 A. Yes, Your Honour, I do.
14 Q. And is this an area in which you spent some time that particular
16 A. Yes, Your Honour. I was there, moving around and checking the
17 situation the whole day, actually.
18 Q. And the people we've seen on the screen, so presently in the
19 minutes earlier, do you recognise some of these people who were there
20 that day?
21 A. Yes, Your Honour. These are people we were with.
22 Q. Thank you. We'll continue.
23 [Video-clip played]
24 MS. WEST: Now we've stopped at 25.20 and this is a frame of
25 General Mladic speaking to the crowds.
1 Q. While he was speaking to the crowds, did you remain in the
2 general area?
3 A. Your Honour, I was there throughout and I could see him. We were
4 with him around that area. And he was visibly -- you know, he was
5 present throughout.
6 Q. And were you able to see the reaction of the crowds to his words?
7 A. Yes, Your Honour. They were very happy. They were assured that
8 everything would be okay. So there was no cause for panic, which is
9 normal in any military operation. You've got to assure the people --
10 that everything is okay to win their hearts and minds so that they can be
11 on your side. This is normal. Whatever he was doing was what an
12 ordinary leader would do.
13 MS. WEST: Can we continue, please.
14 [Video-clip played]
15 MS. WEST: Now we've stopped at 28.59 and where we've stopped,
16 for the record, it was showing a crowd of people.
17 Q. Colonel, you mentioned earlier that this was part of winning
18 their hearts and minds. Considering your experience, why do you think
19 that this was normal?
20 A. Your Honour, this is what we call psychological warfare in that
21 you don't want the multitude to rise against you because of what has
22 happened to them. So you want to reassure them, you want to show them
23 that everything is okay, you are taking care of them, and that you ensure
24 nobody is hurt, nobody is harmed. Everybody will go to where they should
25 go to. So it's just to reassure them, though mainly you don't
1 necessarily have to mean what you have said.
2 Q. Colonel, I'm going to show you one more video.
3 MS. WEST: Mr. President, this video is just a total of 8 minutes
4 long. It's part of 65 ter 40582. This is part 3. For the record, it's
5 9016 of that 65 ter number, and we're going to begin at 2 minutes and
6 44 seconds.
7 [Video-clip played]
8 MS. WEST: We've stopped at 3 minutes and 55 seconds.
9 Q. Colonel, do these events on the video look familiar to you?
10 A. Yes, Your Honour, they do, in that I was there during this period
11 and that these people were being led into boarding the buses.
12 Q. Thank you. We're going to continue.
13 [Video-clip played]
14 MS. WEST: We've stopped at 6 minutes and 15 seconds.
15 Q. Do you recognise the person in the middle of the screen?
16 A. Yes, Your Honour, I do.
17 Q. Who was that?
18 A. This was one of the few men from the BSA side who could speak
20 Q. And did you have an opportunity to talk with him during that day?
21 A. Yes, Your Honour. I was conveying some messages through him to
22 the higher echelon, the leadership of the BSA that time.
23 Q. Let's continue.
24 [Video-clip played]
25 MS. WEST: That's 7 minutes and 2 seconds.
1 Q. We have seen that this road continues on. To where does it go?
2 A. This is a road that leads to Bratunac from Potocari and all the
3 way up from Srebrenica.
4 Q. Thank you. We'll continue.
5 [Video-clip played]
6 MS. WEST: We're at 7 minutes and 29 seconds.
7 Q. Do you see yourself in this frame?
8 A. Yes, Your Honour, I do.
9 Q. And do you remember being in this area?
10 A. Yes, Your Honour, I was there.
11 Q. We'll continue.
12 [Video-clip played]
13 MS. WEST: We're at 8 minutes.
14 Q. And if you can tell, you're in this screen and you seem to be
15 coming up behind someone. Do you recognise that person in front of you?
16 A. Yes, I do.
17 Q. Who is that?
18 A. It doesn't look very clear, but I think it was Krstic.
19 [Overlapping speakers] -- remember very well.
20 Q. Okay. What were you trying to do while you were in that area?
21 A. Your Honour, I was looking for any possible means of telling the
22 leadership, that is, the military leadership of the BSA, that what was
23 happening was not right and especially where the men who were being put
24 in one big house -- in one small house, many of them there, and without
25 any air, without food, without water, without anything. I just wanted to
1 convey that message through somebody.
2 Q. Okay. We're going to continue on.
3 [Video-clip played]
4 MS. WEST: We're at 8 minutes and 50 seconds.
5 Q. Colonel, you were just mentioning a place that was too crowded.
6 What was that place?
7 A. Your Honour, here I'm referring to the white house where all the
8 men had been taken.
9 Q. We continue.
10 [Video-clip played]
11 MS. WEST:
12 Q. Sir, we're at 9 minutes and 54 seconds. What is this you see on
13 the screen?
14 A. Your Honour, what you can see here is the belongings of the men,
15 that is, the Muslim men who had been taken to the white house, because
16 they were being forced to leave all these belongings outside the house.
17 These belongings included the clothes that they had, that they were
18 carrying, the identity cards, that is, the pass, they could leave the
19 pass there, the identity cards, everything that they had they had to
20 leave it there.
21 MS. WEST: We'll continue, Mr. President. We only have one more
22 minute of this video.
23 [Video-clip played]
24 MS. WEST: I'm going to stop at 10 minutes now.
25 Q. Earlier I asked you to identify a person and you mentioned that
1 it was sort of fuzzy. Unfortunately this is kind of fuzzy as well. I
2 know this was a long time ago, but can you identify the person who is
3 standing sort of directly in front of you, if you can remember?
4 A. Your Honour, it is not very clear. I can't remember him very
6 Q. Okay. Do you remember what you were talking about here?
7 A. Yes, Your Honour, even here we were just discussing about the
8 general humanitarian situation in that place but through this guy with a
9 blue flak jacket who actually could be able to interpret from English to
10 Serbian language and vice versa.
11 Q. We'll continue now to the end.
12 [Video-clip played]
13 MS. WEST: Just for the record, this is that same footage but
14 it's the Serbian -- version they played on Serbian television. It will
15 continue for a few more seconds.
16 Q. Colonel, what we see at the screen at 10 minutes and 53 seconds,
17 do you recognise that?
18 A. Your Honour, I do recognise this. And as you can see very
19 clearly, this is the upper floor of the house where the men had been
20 taken after being separated from the women and children. And you can see
21 there's no space. They don't have any space at all. And this was the
22 same even in the ground floor, the floor below this, it was the same very
23 bad condition.
24 Q. And when you had that discussion with General Mladic, was this
25 the vicinity in which you were standing?
1 A. Your Honours, this is was what I was referring to.
2 Q. Colonel, I have no more questions.
3 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Ms. West.
5 We'll adjourn for today, and Mr. Karadzic will start his
6 cross-examination tomorrow at 9.00. The hearing is now adjourned.
7 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.07 p.m.,
8 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 12th day of
9 January, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.