Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 8437

 1                           Tuesday, 12 February 2013

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.31 a.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone.  Madam Registrar, would

 6     you please call the case.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  This is case

 8     IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.  There are no

10     preliminaries, therefore could the witness be escorted into the

11     courtroom.

12             Meanwhile, Mr. Lukic, in view of the fact that the next witness

13     may be waiting, could you tell us, would you need the whole of the day or

14     would you --

15             MR. LUKIC:  I think I need the whole day.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  You need the whole of the day which means that the

17     next witness doesn't have to remain standby here.  That may be of

18     interest for you to know, Mr. Groome.

19             MR. GROOME:  Thank you for that, Your Honour.  We have asked the

20     witness to be on standby at the hotel this afternoon should things

21     change.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Even that seems to not be necessary at this

23     moment if Mr. Lukic needs -- even if he would not need the whole of the

24     day, but the greatest part of it, and with re-examination and there's

25     hardly any chance that the next witness would start his testimony today.

Page 8438

 1             MR. GROOME:  Thank you, Your Honour.  We'll take appropriate

 2     measures now.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Meanwhile there is a Defence request for

 4     extended response time on the Prosecution's 12th Rule 92 bis motion.

 5     That motion was filed on the 28th of January.  On the 8th of February,

 6     the Defence requested an additional 30 days to respond, and the Chamber

 7     grants this request for an extension of time.

 8                           [The witness takes the stand]

 9                           WITNESS:  EKREM SULJEVIC [Resumed]

10                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning -- good morning, Mr. Suljevic.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we continue, Mr. Suljevic, I'd like to remind

14     you that you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the

15     beginning of your testimony that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth

16     and nothing but the truth.

17             Mr. Lukic, you may proceed.

18                           Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic: [Continued]

19        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Suljevic.

20        A.   Good morning.

21        Q.   We will continue where we left off yesterday.

22             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I would like to call up 65 ter 10166

23     to start with.

24        Q.   You know what the document is about, because we discussed it

25     yesterday.

Page 8439

 1        A.   Yes.

 2             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Let's go to page 3 to remind

 3     ourselves of the schematic.  We discussed that yesterday, but now I would

 4     like to go to page 2 in B/C/S and in English.  We're on page 3 now, but I

 5     would kindly ask for page 2 to be displayed.

 6        Q.   The document describes the trajectory of the said projectile, and

 7     in the third line from the top it says the missile ricochetted off the

 8     gravel surface of the roof, flew over the corner above Studio C, struck

 9     and ricochetted off the wall between the first and the second floor of

10     the building where foreign reporters' offices are located, and fell next

11     to a wall of Studio C.  The missile exploded on the floor of the passage.

12             This corresponds to what we saw in the schematic, the

13     description, that is; right?

14        A.   Yes.

15             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And now I would like to call up

16     65 ter number 14206.  I'm interested in page 3 in both -- both versions.

17        Q.   Do you remember this is the place where the projectile struck

18     Studio C, the place of impact; right?

19        A.   Yes.

20             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And now we need page 6.  It seems

21     that in e-court there's a mismatch in the page number.  Can I go back one

22     page.

23        Q.   There is an arrow which marks the place where the projectile

24     struck before it ricochetted toward Studio C; is that correct?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 8440

 1             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And now I would like to call up

 2     1D768.  It is another photo.  I need page 3.

 3        Q.   And now I will kindly ask you to look at the photo, and can you

 4     see where the ricochet place is behind the man in front of the photo?

 5        A.   I can't see that.  Also -- also I do suppose that it would be

 6     somewhere over there.

 7             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we zoom in, please.  In the place

 8     behind the men closest to the camera.  The place between the men's legs,

 9     perhaps.

10        Q.   There behind him, exactly behind him, do you see the place marked

11     as the place from which the shell ricochetted?  Do you remember that

12     place?

13        A.   Yes, I remember the place, but I'm afraid I can't see the exact

14     spot.  It is covered by that individual.  Perhaps my sight is not that

15     good.

16        Q.   Well, then, let's go back to the original the way we saw the

17     first time it was displayed on the screen.  Please mark the Energoinvest

18     Dalekovod factory in this photo?

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, for the Chamber to be able to follow at

20     all, in which direction is the photograph taken, and are we facing north,

21     south, east, west?  Or you can also ask the witness about the sketch and

22     see how this relates to the sketch.

23             MR. LUKIC:  Usually I know exactly in which direction, but for

24     this photo I don't.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Then if you could relate it to the sketch we've seen

Page 8441

 1     earlier about the drawing.  Then to know which roof we are looking at in

 2     which direction and --

 3             MR. LUKIC:  Okay.  I will clarify that with the witness.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please.

 5             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation].

 6        Q.   Sir, Mr. Suljevic, the roof, the passage, what does that belong

 7     to?

 8        A.   I'm still receiving interpretation.  Could you please hold on.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you still not receive interpretation in your own

10     language, Mr. Suljevic?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am receiving interpretation, but

12     the only thing I heard was what it belongs to, but I don't know what "it"

13     is.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, I think the witness is now receiving

15     interpretation again.  Yes.  He is nodding yes, so it seems okay.  Please

16     repeat your question.

17             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   Would you kindly tell us about this roof, the place where all

19     these individuals are?  What does that belong to?

20        A.   It's part of the Radio Television building.

21        Q.   Could you please mark the Energoinvest Dalekovod factory in this

22     photo and can you also mark the direction north for us if you can.

23        A.   First of all, I would like to say the schematic that we saw a

24     while ago was drafted by the CSB, not me.  Just for the sake of clarity.

25     Here you can see the power transmission lines, Energoinvest tested them.

Page 8442

 1     The factory itself is a bit to the right as far as I can remember.

 2        Q.   Could you please mark the Energoinvest building with a letter E,

 3     and can you please try and tell us where the direction north is in this

 4     photo?

 5        A.   I believe this is north, because the building faces east-west.

 6        Q.   To avoid any confusion because E is Energoinvest and also the

 7     notation for east, could you please put the letters ENE.

 8        A.   [Marks]

 9        Q.   Let's assume that the explosion happened or, rather, that the

10     ricochet happened exactly behind the person who is closest to the camera.

11     Can you please draw the descent line of the projectile in the direction

12     of Studio C.

13        A.   I can do it only approximately.  [Marks].  I believe that this

14     would be the trajectory of that projectile.

15        Q.   How are we going to mark that?  Let's mark it with a letter C,

16     showing that its trajectory is towards Studio C.  And also can you draw a

17     line towards Safeta Hadzica 52.  Can you get your bearings in the photo

18     and try to do that for us.  Can you draw a line towards the Svrakino

19     settlement?

20        A.   It would go from the left across this part of the building.

21        Q.   Yes.  Could you please put letters SH next to that line standing

22     for Safeta Hadzica.

23        A.   [Marks]

24             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can this be preserved?  If you have

25     questions, please --

Page 8443

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  If we wait for a second first.  First of all, I lost

 2     half of my microphone.  But apart from that -- could we first look at the

 3     map and see where exactly we are.  Could you use some of the -- yes, we

 4     can save this first, perhaps.  Madam Registrar.  Mr. Weber.

 5             MR. WEBER:  Sorry, Your Honours.  The Prosecution would just

 6     inquire when this photo was taken.  The probative value of it may be

 7     impacted.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's first -- before we change anything, let's

 9     first save this picture.  Madam Registrar, the photograph marked by the

10     witness.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Receives number D203, Your Honours.  Apologies,

12     D204, Your Honours.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  D204.  Any objection against it being admitted,

14     Mr. Weber, although you would like to know when it was taken.

15             MR. WEBER:  Yes, Your Honour.  No objection.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  No objection.  D204 is admitted.  Now, the question

17     was when the photograph was taken.  Do you know, Mr. --

18             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, I do, Your Honour.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Of course, does the witness know?  If not, of course

20     you can't give evidence, but you can say something about the source of

21     your material you're using.

22             MR. LUKIC:  This photo was taken during the official tour by the

23     Trial Chamber in a case of General Milosevic.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

25             MR. WEBER:  Yes, I had a look at the date of that.  I was just

Page 8444

 1     hoping to put the date of it on the record if Mr. Lukic knew.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I ...

 3             MR. LUKIC:  And I have the number.  It's pretty long number,

 4     taken by -- from the site of the Tribunal.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.  Give -- if the number is long, write

 6     it down on a piece of paper and give it to Mr. Weber so that he can check

 7     it on the --

 8             Second, where are we on the Sarajevo map so that we have a better

 9     impression?  You can use Mr. --

10             MR. LUKIC:  We have one photo.  If maybe we can use it --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  I was talking about a map first because maps have

12     the advantage that you know where you are.  We have an mp3.  We have a

13     detailed map of Sarajevo divided into 16.  It's hard copy page 58.  Could

14     you tell us where we should go in town.

15             MR. LUKIC:  I don't have that map with me.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Please briefly explain and then we get the right

17     one.  Where are we?  Are we in Dobrinja?  Are we anywhere between the

18     town and Dobrinja?  Are we near Alipasino Polje?  Where approximately are

19     we?  Where's the Energo --

20             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] This is the building of Television

21     Sarajevo on the main street leading from SUP to Bascarsija.  It is in

22     Novo Sarajevo part.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me see.  Is it closer to town than Alipasino

24     Polje or is it --

25             MR. LUKIC:  Probably witness can guide us more precisely.

Page 8445

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could you tell us the building we're looking

 2     at at this moment, that is the television building, Television Sarajevo,

 3     where do we find it approximately on the map?  Could you guide us?  Is it

 4     west of the city centre, I take it?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is closest to Alipasino Polje.

 6     This is the beginning of Alipasino Polje or thereabouts.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we have -- sheet 10 is hard copy page 68 of

 8     P3, but it's a different page in e-court.  I'm aware of that.  Let's see.

 9             Mr. Weber, could you tell us where sheet 10 is in the e-court

10     pages.

11             MR. WEBER:  E-court page 75.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we have P3, page 75.  Perhaps we use the whole

13     of the screen for the map.

14             Witness, do we find the television building on this part of the

15     map?  If not, please tell us whether we have to go east, west, north, or

16     south.  If you'd like to have it enlarged, we'll enlarge it.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It does not have to be enlarged,

18     but just bear with me for a moment.  Yes.  This is the part of the map

19     depicting the Radio Television building.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  I saw that you had -- you started marking already.

21     We see that the river Miljacka is crossing the street.  That's where you

22     made a marking.  Now, is the television building, is that on the southern

23     part?  Is that south of the road or is it north of the road?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will mark the Radio Television

25     building now.

Page 8446

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  If you would not mind, then I notice that's the

 2     Radio Television building.  That is a -- you've marked that now.  That

 3     is --

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Both in the north and in the east, the river

 6     Miljacka flows along at that building.  Now we know where we are.

 7             The photograph with the Energoinvest building is taken in which

 8     building?  Is that taken east or is that taken in a westerly direction?

 9     Towards the east or towards the west?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can draw an arrow to show you

11     what I think about the direction from which the photo was taken.  I

12     believe that this is the direction from which the photo was taken, but I

13     suppose it was taken from the building.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could I invite you to erase again the arrow

15     you've made at this moment.  I noticed yesterday that you know how to do

16     it.  Yes.  Thank you.  And could you please mark from that building with

17     an arrow in which direction the photographer was taking its picture, or

18     another way is to tell us where the Energo building is, if it is on this

19     part of the map.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I wasn't there when the photo

21     was taken.  However, from memory about the position of the building and

22     the adjacent building, I believe that I can give you some sort of an

23     idea.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  If you go -- if you go from this television building

25     to the Energoinvest building, you are travelling away from the city.  Is

Page 8447

 1     that ...

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right.  Now I marked

 3     the place where the power transmission lines are, the ones that can be

 4     seen in the photograph.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That may be very helpful, because we have --

 6     on our map we have indicated towers and that may be electricity towers.

 7             Now we know approximately where we are, Mr. Lukic, we can perhaps

 8     go back to the photograph after we have stored this marked map.  Shall we

 9     make a D exhibit?  That's the easiest.  Madam Registrar.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Page 75 of the Exhibit P3 as marked by the

11     witness receives number D205, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

13             MR. LUKIC:  Can I continue, Your Honour?

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please.

15             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

16        Q.   [Interpretation] I will now misuse the Presiding Judge's efforts,

17     so I will ask you to use this same map of the city which is properly

18     shown with the north, south, east, and west, and I will ask you to draw

19     on it the building of the Radio Television, if you can, and also the

20     address Safeta Hadzica 52, if you can.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  I think the witness has marked the building.

22             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the building of the radio

24     and television.

25             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

Page 8448

 1        Q.   Can you mark Svrakino Selo as well?

 2        A.   Svrakino Selo, yes, but not the street and the house number.

 3     [Marks].  It's thereabouts in this area.

 4        Q.   All right.  Thank you.  So that's to the south from the

 5     television building; right?

 6        A.   Yes, approximately.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  The advantage of this map, Mr. Lukic, is that, for

 8     example, Safeta Hadzica is just written down nicely on the map, and the

 9     witness has marked it approximately at that street.  Please proceed.

10             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  I would propose this

11     marked sketch with markings made by Mr. Suljevic to be admitted into

12     evidence.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  Document receives number D206, Your Honours.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.  Please proceed.

16             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Could we now please show

17     another sketch, 1D745.

18        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, would this sketch actually correspond to what we

19     saw, how there was this ricocheting from the roof.  This place is marked

20     with R2.  Then impact in the building and the explosion against the wall

21     of Studio C?

22        A.   Well, the trajectory more or less corresponds -- or, rather, the

23     direction, but as for the trajectory itself, I'm not sure how the

24     projectile was flying, so I cannot confirm whether this was the precise

25     trajectory that it flew along.  We can only speculate about that, about

Page 8449

 1     the trajectory.

 2             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] While we are looking at this, I will

 3     just read once again what 10166 says.  That's a Prosecution exhibit.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, let's try to be very precise.  You say

 5     the ricochet -- the first one was on the roof.  Is that R1?

 6             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  R1 is the ricochet on the roof.  R2 apparently is

 8     where --

 9             MR. LUKIC:  Is another ricochet from the building --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  -- at least where the projectile --

11             MR. LUKIC:  In the wall, yes.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  -- was stopped by a wall and went in the other

13     direction.

14             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, we do not know at this moment how the cut is

16     taken as far as the buildings is concerned, neither do we know what the

17     dotted line means, and we have no measurements, that is, whether the

18     altitude of the -- the size of the building, length, or the -- how high

19     the building was, it's not anywhere presented.  I don't know who made

20     this.

21             MR. LUKIC:  We'll have Mr. Berko Zecevic testify here, and he

22     testified before.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And this --

24             MR. LUKIC:  He measured the distance, and I will give it to the

25     witness and read one portion from the document we have already read.

Page 8450

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's all fine, because we do not see any of

 2     it on this picture, but please then proceed and keep in the back of your

 3     mind what I'd like to know looking at this picture.

 4             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I would like also to ask a question.  When this

 6     projectile ricochetted on R1, where did it come from?  Are we able to

 7     know the direction from where it came?  Further to the right?

 8             MR. LUKIC:  I can ask the witness if he knows --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  The witness has explained, I think that only with a

10     very acute angle of descent you can have a ricochet, so I even whether --

11     wonder how it ricochetted would fit into that, but it must therefore

12     logically come from the right although it's not indicated.

13             MR. LUKIC:  I can read what we have in the document.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  In what document, this document?

15             MR. LUKIC:  It's 10166.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Let's -- let's proceed, but logically - and,

17     Witness, if you would disagree, please tell me - but logically in view of

18     the arrows, it could only have come from the right, and what direction

19     that is, we do not know because we do not know how the cut through the

20     building was made.  Please proceed.

21             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   So we already read this a little while ago.  On page 2 of 10166

23     reads as follows:

24             The projectile bounced off or ricochetted against the gravel

25     surface of the roof, flew above the corner of Studio C, hit and bounced

Page 8451

 1     off from the wall between the first and the second floors of the building

 2     where offices of foreign reporters were located, and fell directly by the

 3     wall of Studio C.  The projectile was activated on the floor of the

 4     passage.

 5             Would you agree with me that the sketch represents exactly what

 6     the document says, what I have just read out to you?

 7        A.   Yes, only I said that the red line is probably approximate and we

 8     can accept it as such, because 1 would be the place where the projectile

 9     hit the gravel roof, and what is missing is the part of the red line

10     showing where the projectile came from.  It probably or, rather, must

11     have come from the right side.  It hit at R1, then hit and bounced off

12     the wall from R2 and hit next to the fence.  Now, whether it rolled on

13     the ground or hit the wall of Studio C, these are the details that we can

14     only guess.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, you would also agree with me, and the

16     witness would also, that, for example, indications as it hit between this

17     and that floor without any floors on the sketch, we do not know whether

18     it was at the fifth floor or at the tenth or depending on how many floors

19     there were in these buildings, but the sketch does not represent all of

20     that.

21             MR. LUKIC:  No, it doesn't, Your Honour, but --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  But let's proceed meanwhile.

23             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

24             [Interpretation] Let us now return then briefly to 14206

25     [Realtime transcript read in error "12406"].  I think that we were

Page 8452

 1     looking at page 5.

 2        Q.   Can you tell us how many floors the TV building has?  We see once

 3     again the place marked with an arrow which is represented as the location

 4     of the second ricochet, represented by R2 in the other sketch.

 5        A.   The building of the RTV has a number of levels, so this part of

 6     the roof with gravel, I'm not sure whether it's the third or the fourth

 7     floor, and the place where the projectile hit is the second higher part

 8     of the building which has perhaps eight or nine floors.  I don't know

 9     exactly, but it's much taller.  So the building is constructed in such a

10     way that it has varying levels, but how many floors exactly it has I

11     wouldn't know.

12        Q.   It reads here that it hit between the first and the second floors

13     of the building.

14        A.   Then it's possible that the flat part which is lower -- the place

15     of the first ricochet was three or four floors.  I don't know exactly,

16     but it's much lower than the central part of the building.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  That's all not reflected on the sketch difference of

18     sizes of the building, Mr. Lukic.

19             MR. LUKIC:  I think it would be possible if the trajectory, that

20     this line of that shows that the projectile is 15 metres.  It was said

21     that it should be 15 metres.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  What should be 15 metres exactly?

23             MR. LUKIC:  From R1 to R2.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, whether it should be or not, of course,

25     the Chamber is primarily interested in what it was, but we have at this

Page 8453

 1     moment not seen on the photograph yet the exact place where the

 2     projectile ricochetted, and all the measurements are not on the sketch

 3     you've given us.  Perhaps on the first sketch I do remember that there

 4     are far more details as far as measurements are concerned, but --

 5             MR. LUKIC:  If you want, we can go back to that 10166, page 3.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  If we could look at it very briefly, and then I'll

 7     let you further go, but please keep in mind that in order to get a proper

 8     understanding of the situation, that -- yes.

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Sorry, Mr. Lukic, if I may interrupt.  When you

10     asked for us to look at this sketch which is 14206, you asked for 14206,

11     and the transcript at page 15, line 1, has it as 12406.  I just wanted to

12     make sure that we've got the right number before it disappears.

13             MR. LUKIC:  Yeah, right, Your Honour.  It's 14206.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  That's right.

15             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If I may tell you how I see it.

17     You can see the roof in one part and it says P2, so I suppose it's the

18     ground floor plus two floors of the flat section of the building.

19             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Yes.  This is how it is usually marked in our parts at least.  Do

21     you also see in this sketch what is the distance between the place of the

22     first ricochet to the place of the second ricochet?  Can you see that?

23        A.   No.

24        Q.   Well, never mind, then.  We'll have to wait for Mr. Zecevic to

25     clarify that.

Page 8454

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.

 2             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 3             [Interpretation] Can we now please see 1D743.

 4        Q.   Let me just say that this is a document that you signed together

 5     with Mr. Jamakovic, dated the 17th of July, 1995, and the document

 6     discusses this incident.

 7             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] This document has not been

 8     translated, or at least we haven't found a translation.  We have sent it

 9     for translation, though, and I will just show by way of this document

10     that Mr. Suljevic dealt with this.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

12             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, yesterday the Prosecution continued to

13     look for any available translations of a copy of this document and we

14     were able to locate almost complete translation except for the last page

15     of the report and we did send that to Mr. Lukic yesterday.  It's not a --

16     the currently uploaded version of the last page is fully legible.  The

17     version that we had the translation for the last page was not fully

18     legible so that was what was incomplete.

19             MR. LUKIC:  Can we have that on the e-court, then?

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Is it uploaded in e-court by the Prosecution?

21             MR. WEBER:  We did not.  We provided it for Mr. Lukic.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Fine.  That's the answer.  Mr. Lukic, you have not

23     uploaded it into e-court.

24             MR. LUKIC:  No, we didn't know that there was --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  I suggest that you either upload it in e-court

Page 8455

 1     during the next break and that we then further look at it, or that's an

 2     alternative possibility that you print out the pages you want to use in

 3     the English translation so that we can follow it.  Either of the two

 4     would do, I think.

 5             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.  We'll try to do so.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  And then perhaps if you then put questions to the

 7     witness so that we are --

 8             MR. LUKIC:  Okay.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

10             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

11        Q.   You can see this document and do you remember that you were doing

12     this on the 28th of June?  The first paragraph reads the request says

13     that on the 28th of June, 1995, around 0922 hours in the 6th Proleterske

14     Brigade Street number 4, on the RTV building in Novi Grad municipality, a

15     projectile fell and exploded, killing one person and injuring 30 and

16     causing considerable material damage.

17             So you did work on this incident; correct?

18        A.   Yes.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

20             MR. WEBER:  Your Honours, I do have a courtesy copy of the

21     English translation if you'd like --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, and I think Mr. Lukic read almost literally

23     from this third paragraph in the -- which describes the date and the

24     explosion.  Thank you very much, Mr. Weber.

25             MR. WEBER:  I'm sorry, it's just one copy that we were able to

Page 8456

 1     print out.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We have one document, and -- yes, please

 3     proceed, Mr. Lukic.

 4             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.  Now we just need the last page of this

 5     document.

 6        Q.   [Interpretation] Up in the top of the page, three paragraphs from

 7     the end, I'm not sure what it looks like in the English because I haven't

 8     seen the English version, it says "Enclosure" and then two paragraphs

 9     above that it reads:

10             On the basis of the materials submitted for the expert analysis

11     and examination, it has been established that this is a destructive air

12     bomb probably weighing 250 kilogrammes.  The mass of the explosive charge

13     in the bombs of this type is 96 kilogrammes.  It also says that the bomb

14     was most probably attached to rocket engines, and it says that the

15     fragments of those rocket engines have not been found, which you already

16     told us.

17             So an air bomb of 250 kilogrammes, together with the engines,

18     probably weighs around 300 kilogrammes, and with the parts that attach

19     the engines to the body of the bomb; correct?

20        A.   Probably even more.

21        Q.   Do you know that the velocity of these bombs is around 150 metres

22     in second or -- per second or 540 kilometres per hour; is that correct?

23        A.   I did not engage in those analyses, so I can neither confirm nor

24     deny that.

25        Q.   All right.  Would you agree with me that this report is actually

Page 8457

 1     a report about an impossible trajectory, that the bomb having such mass

 2     with such velocity after ricocheting against the wall would not explode

 3     there but would change the trajectory once again and all of that at a

 4     distance of 15 metres.  Having the knowledge of mechanics as you do,

 5     would you be able to confirm this report or would you say that it's

 6     rather impossible?

 7        A.   You mean the report that I made?  Is that what you mean?

 8        Q.   What I read to you just a while ago, that this was actually the

 9     trajectory of the bomb.

10        A.   I wouldn't want to speculate, but I suppose that approximately

11     that was most probably the trajectory of the bomb.  What we don't know is

12     whether the bomb was set to explode immediately or was there supposed to

13     be a later explosion, whether it was a timed bomb.  So this is something

14     that we don't know and that we cannot determine in any way.

15        Q.   Did you determine what the fuse was like on this bomb?  Did you

16     look into that?

17        A.   We did not find any traces of the fuse, at least not any traces

18     that would indicate to us what was the fuse that made this air bomb

19     complete.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, while this was within 30 seconds and the

21     break is soon so that you have a further opportunity to consult.

22             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Sir, on the bombs which you showed to us in images which we

24     looked at yesterday, the Prosecution presented you that, I mean those

25     that were found in Lukavica, did you determine what types of fuses were

Page 8458

 1     used in those bombs?

 2        A.   If you mean the bombs that were found in Ilijas --

 3        Q.   Then it was my mistake.  I suppose in Ilijas.

 4        A.   Yes.  You said Lukavica, but it was in Ilijas.  I did not analyse

 5     those bombs, but one electronic scheme was brought to the department, the

 6     team which was in charge of that brought the mechanical and electronic

 7     wiring that was part of this bomb.

 8        Q.   Do you remember what the fuse was?  What was brought?

 9        A.   Well, I'm telling you that this was the mechanic and electronic

10     wiring which included the clock mechanism and there were other elements,

11     too, but I did not really analyse it in detail.

12        Q.   So you wouldn't agree with me that this explosion was actually

13     set there?

14        A.   No.

15        Q.   Now I would move to Safeta Hadzica, and we will need in e-court

16     P495.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Document is under seal, Your Honours.

18             MR. WEBER:  Your Honours, before we get too afield on a different

19     incident, I was just wondering if counsel plans on tendering 65 ter 10166

20     and 1D743, which we've now had multiple reference from the witness with

21     during the course of his testimony.  I appreciate that with respect to

22     1D743 that we need a completed translation.  Maybe if that could be

23     marked for identification.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic.

25             MR. LUKIC:  Whatever we've used we plan to tender, Your Honour.

Page 8459

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Shall we do it right away and then move after the

 2     break to the next subject.

 3             If you give the 65 -- if you give the numbers, Mr. Lukic, then

 4     I'll invite Madam Registrar to assign numbers.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 10166 receives number D207,

 6     Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, and just for my information, that was, Mr. --

 8             MR. WEBER:  That was the sketch of the RTV building.  That was --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  The sketch of the RTV building.

10             MR. WEBER:  And it has an attached legend that Mr. Lukic also

11     showed.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Yes.  No objections.  I take it D207 is

13     admitted.

14             Next one, Madam Registrar.

15             THE REGISTRAR:  Next one was 1D743, Your Honours, and this

16     receives number D208, Your Honours.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  And for my information, that was --

18             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, that was the report authored by the

19     witness in relation to the shelling of the RTV building on the

20     28th of June.  If we could have that marked for identification pending

21     the completion of the translation.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's the report.  Could I draw your

23     attention to the following.  I think as it is uploaded now in the

24     original, first of all, the last page is quite well legible, so therefore

25     from that version also the last page could be translated.  But there are

Page 8460

 1     other matters attached which do not appear in the one you have uploaded

 2     in the original.  I see in the translation at least one additional page

 3     photocopy of topographic map, et cetera, et cetera, and then it looks as

 4     if reference is made to all kind of photographs or the object marked

 5     number 2, for example, is described, the object marked number 3, so

 6     apparently there must be more in that document.

 7             Could the parties either agree that we don't need it, but for us

 8     to read it, we'd like to know what it refers to.  So completing and the

 9     document and the translation, please.

10             MR. WEBER:  Of course, Your Honour.  And the Prosecution also

11     forgot that the Defence did use --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's first for this moment, Madam Registrar, the

13     document which is -- no, there's nothing on the screen anymore.  The

14     document which is ...

15             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  1D743.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, 1D00743 would reserve -- would receive number?

17             THE REGISTRAR:  D208, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  D208 and is marked for identification.  And then the

19     next one, Mr. -- and to be completed and to be fully translated.

20             MR. WEBER:  Then, Your Honour, the Defence also used the photo

21     file related to the --

22             MR. LUKIC:  14206.  Judge Moloto warned us about the wrong

23     number.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Madam Registrar, and that would receive number?

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 14206 receives number D209,

Page 8461

 1     Your Honours.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  D209 is admitted into evidence.  I still have 1D745

 3     on my list which is --

 4             MR. LUKIC:  That's the that sketch we created but -- R1 and R2.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, with the red suggested trajectory.

 6             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

 7             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, the -- we would have an objection to

 8     this being admitted for its substantive value.  Much like last week, I

 9     believe a similar sketch was shown for demonstrative purposes, pending

10     any foundation as to the accuracy of it and addressing the concerns

11     raised by the Chamber, we'd have no objection to it being marked for

12     identification.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Did I understand you well that it will be further

14     discussed with a witness Mr. Zecevic?

15             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, of course.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Then that one will be marked for identification

17     under what number, Madam Registrar?

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D745 will be MFI'd as number D210,

19     Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  D210 is marked for identification.  We take a break.

21     Could the witness fault usher.  Apologies, Mr. Suljevic, for bothering

22     you with all this administrative matters, but unfortunately, it is

23     necessary.  You may follow the usher.

24                           [The witness stands down]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  We will resume at five minutes to 11.00.

Page 8462

 1                           --- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.

 2                           --- On resuming at 10.56 a.m.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.

 4             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour?

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Groome.

 6             MR. GROOME:  While the witness is being brought in, can I bring

 7     something to the Chamber's attention.  Last week the Prosecution filed a

 8     draft notice of the remaining witnesses in its case.  The Prosecution has

 9     not included in that list witnesses that the Prosecution no longer

10     believes it's necessary to adduce their evidence in reliance on the

11     Chamber's adjudicated facts decisions.  Over the course of the March

12     adjournment, the Prosecution will be formally filing a list of those

13     witnesses and the adjudicated facts upon which we rely.  The reason I

14     raise it now is that Mr. Lukic and the Chamber have made reference to

15     Mr. Berko Zecevic and that questions may be put to him.  At present it is

16     not our intention to call him, but to rely on adjudicated facts.  That

17     could change over the course of the spring, but at present that's our

18     intention.  So I wouldn't want Mr. Lukic to falsely rely on a witness

19     that may not be called and, you know, not put questions to this witness

20     that -- with that intention.  Thank you.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  If it is the intention of the Defence

22     through Mr. Berko Zecevic to challenge those adjudicated facts covered by

23     his statement, then of course it would be good to know that as early as

24     possible.

25             MR. GROOME:  Yes, Your Honour.

Page 8463

 1             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.  Thank you to my learned friend.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then meanwhile, I also use the time for a

 3     decision on Defence request for an extended respond time in relation to

 4     Rule 92 ter motion for Witness RM174.  That motion was filed on the

 5     25th of January, and on the 30th of January, the Prosecution was

 6     requested to refile it.  The Defence filed a motion on the

 7     8th of February requesting an extension of 14 days to respond starting

 8     from the date of the Prosecution's refiling of the motion.

 9             Mr. Groome, do we know already when you expect to refile the

10     motion?

11             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, if I can inform the Chamber at the end

12     of this session?

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we'll wait with that until the end of

14     this session.

15             Mr. Lukic, please proceed.

16             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

17        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Suljevic, I would like us to focus on the

18     developments at Safeta Hadzica 52 and some adjacent numbers, 102, 105,

19     110.  We find this in your statement on page 9, paragraph 53, where

20     that's in the English version.

21             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And now we will need P495.  The

22     document has been removed from the screen.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Again just for the record, document is under

24     seal, Your Honours.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

Page 8464

 1             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   This is the case in question.  Reports were drafted by the

 3     Sarajevo CSB, as well as the KDZ department, i.e., your department.  We

 4     have a document that you drafted on the same case.  Do you remember that

 5     particular incident?

 6        A.   Yes, I do.

 7        Q.   You were the expert who analysed the traces after the explosion?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Let us try and get our bearings first.

10             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] In e-court we need 18833, which is a

11     Prosecutor's exhibit.

12        Q.   In this photo please try and get your bearings.  Somewhere in the

13     middle is the Bosnian and Herzegovinian Radio and Television building.

14     Could you please mark it.  Do you recognise that building, first of all?

15        A.   Yes, I do.

16        Q.   Can you please mark the place where the projectile ricochetted?

17     Can you recognise the place on the roof?

18        A.   Yes.  I can do it more or less accurately.  It would be somewhere

19     around here.

20        Q.   Yes.  We agree on that.  And can you now mark the building at

21     Safeta Hadzica Street 52.  Can you locate that building in this photo.

22        A.   [Marks].  I believe that it is one of these buildings.  I don't

23     know exactly which one.

24        Q.   It's on the right-hand side.  That's number 52.  And do you know

25     where number 102 is?

Page 8465

 1        A.   No, I don't.

 2        Q.   Very well.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, could we invite the witness to write TV

 4     next to the small marking and 52 next to the big circular marking.

 5             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.  Thank you, Your Honour.

 6        Q.   [Interpretation] Would you kindly put letters TV next to the

 7     circle indicating the television building.

 8        A.   [Marks]

 9        Q.   And can you put numbers 52 next to the other circle.  Thank you.

10        A.   [Marks]

11             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can this document be admitted as the

12     next Defence exhibit?

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 18833 receives number D211,

15     Your Honours.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

17             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And now we need P495, under seal,

18     once again.  We're interested in page 10 in this document in B/C/S.  And

19     we need page 11 in English.

20        Q.   Do you recognise your signature in the B/C/S version, sir?

21        A.   Yes, I do.

22        Q.   In your report, which is now in front of us, you did not mention

23     the type of bomb; right?

24        A.   That's right.  There is no reference to the type of bomb because

25     it was not established.  There were no traces which would identify the

Page 8466

 1     type of bomb.

 2        Q.   Yes, that's right.  Thank you.  Likewise, you did not know how

 3     many engines it may have had, the GRAD-type engines; right?

 4        A.   We could only assume based on the traces which were supplied to

 5     us, and we could not be precise in respect of the number of engines.

 6        Q.   How many chambers does one engine have?  How many traces -- how

 7     many chambers would you have been able to find if there was just one

 8     engine?

 9        A.   A rocket engine equals one chamber.

10        Q.   In other words, this was your calculation:  If you find one

11     chamber, there's one engine.

12        A.   If you find a rocket engine body, that equals one rocket --

13        Q.   I'm talking about chambers.  How many chambers does one engine

14     have?

15        A.   I don't know.  I believe it was one chamber only, because it is

16     all encompassed within one rocket engine body with jets, and we

17     established the number of rockets based on the bodies of rocket engines

18     that were delivered for the expert analysis.

19        Q.   And now we're still talking about the same incident and the same

20     day according to this report issued by the Sarajevo centre CSB.  Several

21     dozens of artillery projectiles fell.

22             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I would like to call up 1D697.  I

23     believe that it already has a number, but if not, it is 1D697.

24             The same photo may be found on page 5 of P497.  It is photo 5 on

25     page 5, but our photo here is of better quality.

Page 8467

 1        Q.   Can you please tell us, this is Safeta Hadzica 102, the place of

 2     impact.  Could you please mark the place where the projectile struck the

 3     building.

 4        A.   [Marks]

 5        Q.   Can you also draw the paw, the remains of shrapnel in the wall,

 6     in other words.

 7        A.   This is where the density of the shrapnel is the highest.  This

 8     is what remains after the projectile exploded.

 9        Q.   Yesterday you explained to us that the shrapnel disperses in the

10     direction from which the shell came.

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Could we conclude based on the photo that the mortar shell,

13     therefore, came from the bottom of the building?

14        A.   I'm not sure that this was a mortar shell.  However, the

15     projectile which struck the wall most probably fell under an angle which

16     was below the horizontal level.

17        Q.   Could you please tell us that in layman terms.  Did the

18     projectile come from above or from below?

19        A.   The projectile -- I don't know what its trajectory was.  We

20     cannot say that it came from above or from below.  When it hit the

21     surface, the projectile was below the horizontal level, i.e., the

22     position of the projectile was below the horizontal level.  We cannot say

23     where it was fired from, whether it was from above the place of impact or

24     below it.

25        Q.   When you say "below the horizontal level," are you saying that

Page 8468

 1     the tail of that projectile was lower than its front part?

 2        A.   Yes, at the moment of impact.

 3        Q.   Thank you.

 4             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please see 1D750 in

 5     e-court.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Should we have this one marked first --

 7             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.  Thank you, yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  -- admit it having -- Madam Registrar, the

 9     photograph marked by the witness.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Photograph 1D697 as marked by the witness

11     receives number D212, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  D212 is admitted into evidence, and this is the same

13     photograph which was marked by the witness earlier and was admitted as

14     D172.

15             MR. LUKIC:  Different witness, yes.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Different witness, yes.  Please proceed.

17             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

18             [Interpretation] Now we need 1D750.  While we are waiting for

19     this photograph to show up on the screen, we can also find the same one

20     in P497, the first photograph on the first page, but this one is of a

21     better quality, and it's easier to discern what we need.

22        Q.   This is the place marked as the place where the projectile fell

23     into the yard of Safeta Hadzica 102.  To get our bearings, the red roof

24     is the roof of the police station in Prvomajska Street number 20.  Is

25     that correct?

Page 8469

 1        A.   I don't know.  I couldn't remember the roof the police station,

 2     but I do not deny it.

 3        Q.   I'm just saying if you know, fine.  If you don't, we'll establish

 4     that in some other way.

 5             Do you know whether there is a police station today in Prvomajska

 6     number 20?

 7        A.   There's the police station in Prvomajska, probably number 20, but

 8     I do not know the number.

 9        Q.   So to this day; correct?

10        A.   Yes.  Now it's the police administration.

11        Q.   Police administration.  All right.  Could you please mark the

12     place of the impact of the projectile on this photograph.  Can one see it

13     at all?

14        A.   Not with certainty.  You can see how the ground is not flat, but

15     whether someone was digging there or if it was caused by the projectile,

16     but probably if it was there and if it exploded, it could have been

17     there, probably.

18        Q.   Well, I don't know that, but I'm asking you whether you can mark

19     the place of the projectile's impact on this photograph?

20        A.   I was not on the site, but let me try and suppose where it could

21     be.

22        Q.   All right.  Please do suppose.

23        A.   [Marks]

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it has been marked, but the witness said he

25     couldn't know for certain, but if it was anywhere, most likely it would

Page 8470

 1     be there.  Please proceed.

 2             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 3        Q.   [Interpretation] Thank you.  Would you agree with me that in this

 4     photograph one cannot see that either the onions which have been planted

 5     here were destroyed nor the sticks which are dug into the ground or the

 6     wire fence which is visible in the lower part of the photograph?

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

 8             MR. WEBER:  I'm sorry, I've been letting this go, but I object to

 9     relevance at this time.  And we have no idea even if this photo is at or

10     near the time that the incident occurred and now we're going into sticks

11     in the ground and whether or not they were destroyed or not, things of

12     that nature.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, the basis for your question is --

14             MR. LUKIC:  We have this photograph offered by the Prosecution in

15     their admitted Exhibit P497 at page 1, photo 1.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

17             MR. LUKIC:  We are just offering better photo because that one

18     was murky and nothing could be seen.  On this photo we want to test with

19     this witness --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber -- but I don't think the problem is the

21     photo.  The problem is that the witness says he has difficulties in

22     establishing whether or not this is an impact of a shell, and you say the

23     onions are not damaged.  I do not know whether there are any onions also

24     on the place where the witness marked, because you could say that there's

25     no onion left, but we do not know whether there were ever any onions

Page 8471

 1     there, but the onions at a distance of 2 to 3 metres seem not to have

 2     undergone major -- it's all rather speculative.  But come to your point

 3     as quickly as possible but with such a level of certainty that it assists

 4     the Chamber.

 5             Yes.  And if it is the same photograph of better quality, could

 6     the parties - I'm looking both left and right - tell us when it was

 7     taken?  Was it immediately after the --

 8             MR. LUKIC:  This is the same photograph, Your Honours, only

 9     brought --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I remember --

11             MR. LUKIC: -- brought to the Tribunal but by one of the

12     Prosecutor's witnesses later on.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but I just ask you to help us to -- we have no

14     clear recollection at this moment when the photograph was taken, but I

15     think it was a photograph attached to an incident report upon

16     investigation almost immediately after the event.  That is what my

17     recollection tells me.

18             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, your recollection is right.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  And you said it was part of P --

20             MR. LUKIC:  497.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  P497.  Please proceed.  Come to your point as

22     quickly as possible.

23             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Did you examine the photo file while you were drawing up your own

25     report and opinion?

Page 8472

 1        A.   No.  While drawing up our report, we had no occasion to see this

 2     photograph.  I did see this photograph on the last occasion when I

 3     testified before this Tribunal, and as for the explosion, one can see the

 4     traces of shrapnel on the wall.  I mean, these concrete blocks.  You can

 5     also see that the roof is damaged because the shadows of the rafters can

 6     be seen on the wall, and there is a lack of the corrugated surface which

 7     covered the roof.  So these are the elements that indicate that there was

 8     an explosion.

 9        Q.   Quite the opposite.  We'll try to prove that by the following

10     photographs.

11             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] So could we please see 1D751 in

12     e-court now.

13             [In English} Please, yes.  Can we -- thank you.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Photograph marked by the witness,

15     Madam Registrar.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D750 as marked by the witness receives

17     number D213, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

19             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Thank you for the

20     warning, and thank you to Madam Registrar.  Now we need photograph 1D751.

21     It is a photograph included in P497 on page 3, photograph number 3.  Once

22     again, this one is of a better quality.

23        Q.   We see here a car.  Would you agree with me that the car is

24     parked next to the same building and the same garden we saw on the

25     previous photograph, which is 1D750?

Page 8473

 1        A.   Yes.

 2             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Let's zoom in and look at 1D752.

 3     This photograph is once again included in P497, photograph 4 on page 4,

 4     but the photograph that we are showing now is of a higher quality.

 5        Q.   Can you see anywhere in this photograph that there was an impact

 6     of shrapnel, or would you agree with me that this is rather a bomb that

 7     was planted, that the explosive which was under the hood of the car in

 8     the engine is the one that actually exploded?

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, is it your suggestion that this

10     photograph is the same as we find on page 3 or another page of --

11             MR. LUKIC:  It's page 4.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  -- page --

13             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you.  Please proceed.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wouldn't speculate, because I was

16     not there, so ...

17             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   But you worked with explosives.  Is this a typical photograph

19     showing that the explosive was planted below the hood?  You can see the

20     parts of the gears to the right from the windscreen and also below the

21     windscreen.

22        A.   It's obvious that the explosion did occur in this area.

23        Q.   You mean in an enclosed space below the hood?

24        A.   Well, thereabouts.  I cannot specify without doing a detailed

25     analysis and an on-site investigation.  On the basis of a photograph,

Page 8474

 1     there are few indications that would tell us all this.  It's certain that

 2     there was an explosion, but I wouldn't speculate what caused it.

 3        Q.   Is it correct that neither in the previous photograph nor on this

 4     one can we see any traces of the car's hood?

 5        A.   On this one we cannot see it on the car.  Whether it's somewhere

 6     to the side of the car, I'm not sure.  If we could have a look again at

 7     the previous photograph so that we can try to confirm that.

 8        Q.   Yes.

 9             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we please once again see 1D751,

10     please.

11        Q.   Can you notice anywhere on this car -- you can see the front left

12     side of the car, so can you see any traces of shrapnel there or on the

13     roof or anywhere else?

14        A.   Well, there are some black dots which I notice, but I cannot

15     claim whether it's that or not just on the basis of this photograph.

16     Some black dots both on the roof and on the left side.

17        Q.   Well, of course there was an explosion, but can you see that the

18     column next to the driver is twisted to the right?

19        A.   Well, the entire chassis is obviously deformed because of the

20     explosion.  That is obvious.

21        Q.   The licence plate numbers of the car are mentioned here but not

22     photographed.  Do you have any information as to why?

23        A.   No.

24        Q.   All right.  Thank you.

25             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] On the same day, the same incident,

Page 8475

 1     but a different shell, so we need 1D754.  Once again, we are offering a

 2     better photograph, but it can be found within P497, page 7, photograph

 3     number 7.

 4        Q.   This is the crater allegedly made by a projectile.  It is noted

 5     that it fell in the schoolyard of the Dzemaludin Musovic primary school.

 6     We even think that the name of the school is not correct.

 7     Dzemaludin Musovic was a well-known football player; correct?  And the

 8     name of the school should have been Dzemaludin Causevic.  Are you

 9     familiar with the information?

10        A.   I suppose that Dzemaludin Causevic is the name of the school.

11        Q.   You have heard of Dzemaludin Musovic, I suppose.

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   We all have, all of us who used to live in that area at the time.

14        A.   Yes, only we don't know whether there were others with the name

15     Dzemaludin Musovic even before him.

16        Q.   All right.  In this photograph can you see, and I will suggest to

17     you -- can you see any characteristic traces of a shell explosion or is

18     this an example of water washing away the ground below asphalt and then

19     the asphalt sinks?  Or can you see any traces of an explosion in this

20     photograph?

21        A.   Well, once again I wouldn't speculate, because this is a

22     microphotograph, so one cannot see anything that is in the surrounding

23     area around the crater.  One can see that a crater was formed, but what

24     caused it, once again I wouldn't speculate about this because I did not

25     visit the site and the photograph doesn't show the general area around

Page 8476

 1     the crater which would allow me to see if there any additional traces and

 2     the like.  Whether the projectile exploded or if it remained unexploded

 3     in the ground, we cannot say, and I wouldn't like to express any

 4     conjectures.

 5        Q.   But we may conclude that on this photograph one does not see any

 6     traces of an explosion.

 7        A.   We do not see the general area of the crater which would allow us

 8     to claim that.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  The witness says that he can't make such

10     determinations, and to say you do not see an explosion, of course you

11     never see an explosion itself.  You see the traces of an explosion.  The

12     witness said that he couldn't -- what we see is apparently what is a hole

13     in what seems to be the ground.  The witness --

14             MR. LUKIC:  I will move on.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please.

16             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

17             [Interpretation] The next document we need to see is 1D753.  It's

18     a photograph which can also be found in P497.  It's photograph number 9

19     on page 9 of that document.

20        Q.   It says that this is a projectile.  You will remember that it was

21     mentioned that it had some strange markings, and it says that it fell in

22     Safeta Hadzica Street number 70 and did not explode.  Do you remember

23     this projectile?

24        A.   No.  As I said, I did not go to the site, but I remember a

25     similar projectile which -- the traces of which I did analyse and include

Page 8477

 1     in a report, but as for this projectile, I did not receive it, nor was I

 2     at the site at the moment when this photograph was taken.  One can only

 3     see on the projectile that it was fired, because on these rings we can

 4     see the traces made by the -- made by the firing, and also we can see

 5     that the part where the fuse twists it is damaged.

 6        Q.   All right.  We'll come back to that.  You can also see that the

 7     head is damaged; correct?

 8        A.   Yes, I can see that the head of the shell is damaged.

 9             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And now we need P495.  The document

10     is under seal.  This is an official report which was drafted on the

11     1st of June by the Sarajevo Security Services Centre.  It says here that

12     the projectile -- and it is in both versions.  In English it's line 9 on

13     the second page.

14        Q.   The projectile which landed in the garden in front of the

15     north-west wall of the apartment building at Safeta Hadzica Street 70

16     resulted in a 200 by 80 by 35 centimetre crater, and it did not explode.

17             Later on we will also discuss the following sentence, which reads

18     as follows:

19              "The next projectile landed in the middle of Majdanska Street.

20     It ricochetted off the asphalt surface and hit the wall of

21     Dzemaludin Lujinovic's family house."

22             Does this look plausible for you?  Is it plausible for this shell

23     to land, not to explode, and to create a crater of this size, 200 by 80

24     by 35 centimetres?

25        A.   Again we should start from the assumption as to whether the

Page 8478

 1     projectile hit a surface and then went on moving.  200 is possible.  When

 2     it landed it may have created a crater 200 centimetres wide.  The depth

 3     that is mentioned here is the deepest, but it is possible that that

 4     happened.

 5        Q.   When it lands on soft soil, is it normal that the head of the

 6     shell breaks?

 7        A.   I said that it didn't break.  It was damaged.  There was no fuse

 8     on the shell.  Let me just give you an example.  There were cases when we

 9     found unexploded shells which were fired without fuses.  Either the fuse

10     was not screwed on properly or something else.  It did happen.  I don't

11     know what happened in this particular case, and the example that I gave

12     you does not apply to this particular case.

13        Q.   This specific case - on B/C/S page 2, and in English it is also

14     page 2, paragraph 3 - it says that on the projectile there was some

15     markings with a swastika and also an eagle sign depicting a swastika

16     which was also found on the projectile.  Do you remember that?  I asked

17     you about that at the beginning, and now I am making a reference to a

18     specific case.

19        A.   I said that I did not analyse this projectile, but I'm familiar

20     with these details that you've just mentioned.

21        Q.   It was also identified as an 88-millimetre projectile.  Did you

22     come across shells used by the Army of Republika Srpska of 88-millimetre?

23        A.   In one report everything indicated that the projectile was

24     88-millimetre, and I found the reference to such shells in professional

25     literature, and based on the traces, I concluded that that was the

Page 8479

 1     projectile.

 2        Q.   You're talking about this one in this image?

 3        A.   Yes, an 88-millimetre projectile, German made.  We did not have

 4     any markings, so I cannot claim for a fact that it was indeed that, but

 5     it was an 88-millimetre projectile in any case.

 6        Q.   Do you know if the VRS had barrels through which such projectiles

 7     could be fired?

 8        A.   I don't know that, but this type of shell according to expert

 9     statements which we consulted during our analysis can be fired from a

10     90-millimetre cannon, and the same tables, tables for this type of

11     projectile, can be used.

12        Q.   90-millimetre cannons are naval cannons; right?  And there were

13     no such cannons around Sarajevo on VRS positions?

14        A.   I don't know that.  I can't testify to that.

15        Q.   You told us that you consulted professional literature relative

16     to ammunition.  Do you know that in the JNA there was a regulation on the

17     overhaul of ammunition every 15 to 20 years?  So the ammunition that was

18     made before the Second World War or during the war would be overhauled or

19     destroyed.  You know that?

20        A.   Yes, I know that.

21        Q.   In this photo that we have just seen, did you see traces of a

22     recent overhaul, i.e., that the ammunition was repainted?

23        A.   No, I can't claim that based on any photo.  In any case, a

24     projectile which is overhauled has to be marked for that.  That has to be

25     specified on a projectile, and based on this photo I can't say anything

Page 8480

 1     to that effect.

 2             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Let's just go back a little and look

 3     at 1D755.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask one question in relation to the -- what

 5     we see on the screen at this moment and tell me immediately if you can't

 6     answer the question.

 7             This -- the projectiles are described as 90-millimetre

 8     armour-piercing explosive artillery projectiles.  Could you tell us,

 9     armour-piercing explosive artillery projectiles, are they usually

10     provided with a fuse which gives an explosion upon impact or a delayed

11     explosion, if you know?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There are combined fuses with

13     instant impact and delayed impact.  Fuses are adjusted, a certain part is

14     moved so as to make it explode instantly or with a delay.  I don't know

15     what the case was with this projectile.  In any case --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  It's not that on armour-piercing explosive that you

17     usually would use a certain type of fuse?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All projectiles had fuses that

19     completed them.  One fuse could not be used to complete all projectiles.

20     Some could be used for several different projectiles, and some could be

21     used exclusively for one projectile.

22             In this particular case, I don't know what type of fuse was used.

23     However, if I'm not mistaken, it was a projectile which was intended to

24     pierce armour.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  That's what I was focusing on specifically, yes.

Page 8481

 1     Would that be an indication of what type of fuse to be used with such a

 2     projectile?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't answer this question with

 4     any precision.  The difference between anti-armour projectiles and other

 5     projectiles is that the former hold less explosive and had a higher

 6     piercing power.  They were used, hence the name, to pierce armour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.

 8             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 9        Q.   Did you know that the Croatian forces had 90-millimetre cannons?

10        A.   No.  I don't know -- or, rather, I'm not aware of the complete

11     range of armament that the VRS had.  I don't even know what the Army of

12     Bosnia-Herzegovina had.  I'm not aware of the full list.

13        Q.   Very well.

14             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Let us go back to 1D755.  This is a

15     photo which can be found on page 10 of P497.  It is photo number 10 on

16     page 10.

17        Q.   Do you see the scratches on this projectile?

18        A.   Yes, I do.

19        Q.   Does the body of the shell demonstrate that it never went through

20     a barrel?

21        A.   I would not put it that way.  It would take into account the

22     copper ring on the lower part.  You can see that it did go through a

23     barrel.

24        Q.   At one point.  However, if that shell had been fired through a

25     barrel on that occasion, would the traces have been different?

Page 8482

 1        A.   There don't have to be traces at all.  Very little is left on the

 2     body of the shell.  The rotating ring is of a higher diameter than the

 3     body of the shell, so that's the place where you would expect more traces

 4     to be found.

 5        Q.   How would you account for the vertical lines that we see on the

 6     casing of this projectile?

 7        A.   I would not speculate.  It is not my intention to speculate at

 8     all.  I don't have an answer to that question.

 9        Q.   Very well.  Would you agree with me that a fuse never breaks when

10     an artillery shell lands on the ground.

11        A.   Again, I don't have a precise answer to that question.  In my

12     opinion, it may break.  It depends on the angle of descent, i.e., on the

13     angle of impact.

14        Q.   Even if we're talking about the soil surface?

15        A.   No.  No.  Unless there is a hard object or a concrete object in

16     the soil.  When it comes to that projectile, I could not see a fuse on

17     that projectile, that's true.

18        Q.   We're putting it to you that that shell was planted.  Somebody

19     had kept it in a cellar and then it was planted in order to lay blame on

20     the Serb forces.  Could you accept that?

21        A.   No, I would never accept that proposition.

22        Q.   But then how do you account for the shell in this place?  Was it

23     ever fired from somewhere?

24        A.   If -- if it was found in that place, my explanation would be that

25     it was fired like all the other projectiles.  As we saw in the previous

Page 8483

 1     report, a dozen of projectiles fell in the area over a short period of

 2     time.

 3        Q.   But there are no traces?  There was a building which was targeted

 4     from below; is that correct?  And then this shell with the German

 5     markings made before the Second World War, never overhauled, are all of

 6     these shells for which you claim that they were fired?

 7        A.   I didn't say --

 8        Q.   We will move on.  We have other examples.

 9        A.   I didn't say that the shell was never overhauled because I don't

10     know.  I didn't say that the projectile was fired from below, because I

11     am not aware of its trajectory from the moment it went through the barrel

12     to the moment it hit the surface, so I don't agree with that.  And these

13     are not my conclusions as you're putting it to me.

14             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  It's time for our next

15     break.  We'll continue after it.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll take a break.  Could the witness first follow

17     the usher.

18                           [The witness stands down]

19             JUDGE ORIE:  We resume at quarter past 12.00.

20                           --- Recess taken at 11.55 a.m.

21                           --- On resuming at 12.16 a.m.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.

23                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Groome.

25             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, at the last session the Chamber asked

Page 8484

 1     us some questions with respect to RM174.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 3             MR. GROOME:  I can inform the Chamber that it take some weeks, if

 4     not months, to redo the statement as the Chamber has requested us to do.

 5     In the schedule, the draft schedule we submitted last week, we have him

 6     down for calling him after the summer break.  Given -- one of the

 7     problems with this particular witness is that given the technical nature

 8     of the statement, we're a little bit reluctant to simply have an

 9     interpreter translate an English statement.  We think it's probably best

10     to have him be working in his own language in the new statement so -- but

11     anyway, that's the schedule the Prosecution imagines.  And we, of course,

12     as always, defer to the Chamber on setting the schedule for Defence

13     responses.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Your position as far as an extension of time is --

15             MR. GROOME:  As always, Your Honour, we defer to the Chamber and

16     we agree that whatever is necessary to ensure the fair trial rights of --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, because we recently had -- I think in respect

18     of the refiling of the expert report of Mr. Theunens, you opposed taking

19     the time from the date of refiling, but --

20             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, the difference there is, Your Honour,

21     we believe that all of the information necessary to make an informed

22     decision about their response is before the Defence at this stage.  The

23     fact that we may redact a paragraph or several paragraphs in compliance

24     with the Chamber's guidance wouldn't -- I don't believe would affect

25     their ability to make an informed response to that filing.

Page 8485

 1                           [The witness takes the stand]

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll further consider the matter.

 3             Mr. Lukic, you may proceed.

 4             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 5             [Interpretation] We would need once again P495 [Realtime

 6     transcript read in error "46795"].  Once again it's the official report

 7     from the Sarajevo CSB.  And this document is under seal.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  What we see at this moment is a P number where

 9     luckily we are not yet at.  We are not in the 46000 yet.  Let's ...

10             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] From this document we need page 2 in

11     English version, paragraph 1, and B/C/S version also page 2, paragraph 1.

12             Somewhere around the middle of this paragraph, in the B/C/S

13     version and in the English version, the last third of this paragraph

14     says:

15             The next projectile ricochetted off the asphalt surface and hit

16     the wall of Dzemaludin Lujinovic's family house in Majdanska Street,

17     exploding on impact and damaging the house.

18             Can we please see 1D759 in e-court.  And we can find the same

19     photograph of poorer quality in P497, page 11, photograph 11.

20             [In English] I'm sorry, before I continue, I just want to check

21     whether all our exhibits were on the record.  So have we asked for 755 to

22     be admitted, please.  No?

23             JUDGE ORIE:  No, you have not.

24             MR. LUKIC:  Can we do that now?

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

Page 8486

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D755 receives number D214,

 2     Your Honours.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  D214 is admitted.  Please proceed.

 4             MR. LUKIC:  Then next one we ask to be admitted, 1D752.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Have we seen that, Mr. -- we have seen it, and it's

 6     not yet tendered.

 7             MR. LUKIC:  Excuse me, Your Honour.

 8             JUDGE MOLOTO: [Microphone not activated] You can start at 751.

 9             MR. LUKIC:  751?  Now I saw that.  Thank you.  First 1D751,

10     please.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  1D751 receives number D215, Your Honours.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted.

14             MR. LUKIC:  1D752.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Receives number D216, Your Honours.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted.

18             MR. LUKIC:  1D754.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Receives number D217, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

21             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You also had 753.

22             MR. LUKIC:  I didn't ask for that.  Yes, 1D753, please.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  D218, Your Honours.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  D218 is admitted.  Mr. Lukic, 1D759, any --

Page 8487

 1             MR. LUKIC:  759 is on our screen, so I haven't finished that one

 2     yet.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.

 4             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you for reminding me anyways.  I will forget

 5     for sure.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And my colleagues are assisting me as you are

 7     aware of.

 8             MR. LUKIC:  May I continue?

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please.

10             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

11        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Suljevic, here in front of us is a

12     photograph relating to Majdanska Street.  You can see here next to

13     number 8, on the asphalt, the place which is marked as the one from which

14     the shell ricochetted and then hit the family house up there, also

15     visible on the screen.  Could you please mark the location on the asphalt

16     the place where the shell ricochetted and also whether you know what was

17     damaged on the house by the ricochet.

18        A.   No, no.  I did not go out on the site, so I'm not familiar with

19     the position or the house or which house was hit or any of that, and on

20     the basis of this photograph, I cannot even guess.  It's obvious that

21     there is some sort of damage on the surface next to the number 8, and

22     perhaps we might zoom in so that it would be more easily seen.

23        Q.   Yes.

24             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we please zoom in.  Yes, just

25     like that.

Page 8488

 1        Q.   Can you see it now?

 2        A.   Yes, it's visible.  The damage on the asphalt is visible.

 3     Whether there's anything else in the crater, I don't know that, because I

 4     cannot see it well.

 5        Q.   Can you please mark the crater, and mark the material on the

 6     right which can also be seen.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, the witness said the crater was to the

 8     right of number 8, while the Chamber is still able to detect that there

 9     is some damage to the surface of the asphalt and that there is some small

10     particles of whatever around.  The Chamber is still able to see that even

11     without being guided by the witness, unless you have any specific

12     questions to ask him, but the witness told us --

13             MR. LUKIC:  I -- I do, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, although please keep in mind that the witness

15     said that it's very difficult for him to draw any conclusions or make any

16     observations on the relation of the photograph.

17             MR. LUKIC:  I will ask the witness and if he can --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Let's then see, but the marking seems to be

19     unnecessary.

20             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

21        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Suljevic, you can see that all the fragments

22     from the crater are to the right of the supposed location of the

23     ricochet.  In your view, is this something normal, that fragments from

24     the surface would all be blown out to the right side?

25        A.   Can you be more specific in your question, please?

Page 8489

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we first zoom out slightly.  Let's first ask

 2     whether these are fragments of the crater or not.  Let's first ask

 3     whether the witness recognises whatever is there on the ground, whether

 4     you consider this on the basis of what you see, fragments of the crater.

 5     That's the first question.  And the second one, whether they're all on

 6     the right.

 7             Could you answer first that question.  What do you see on the

 8     surface?  Are these fragments of the crater?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To the right from number 8 we can

10     see the damage on the asphalt, but I cannot claim what caused it on the

11     basis of this photograph, whether it's the crater made by a projectile

12     that exploded or by a projectile that ricochetted and whether it's just

13     an imprint from the ricocheting of the ordnance.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Nor could I claim which street this

16     is just on the basis of the photograph, nothing.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's move on, Mr. Lukic.

18             MR. LUKIC:  Your Honour, I will have to dwell a bit more on this.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but then please be very concrete, because

20     apparently you see only small fragments of whatever to the right, whereas

21     I see quite a few to the left as well.  So therefore, I'm slightly

22     surprised by the question, but if the witness sheds additional light,

23     please put very concrete and precise questions to him.

24             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   Your colleagues mention this as the place where the shell

Page 8490

 1     ricochetted and that flying from there it damaged the house which we can

 2     see on the screen before us.  Do you doubt that report, because you say

 3     that you can not confirm whether this is that specific street and that

 4     specific location?

 5        A.   I wouldn't like to speculate.  I don't know where the projectile

 6     came from, where it flew on, but if you suggest that it ricochetted on

 7     the asphalt and that the damage can be seen on the house, then it would

 8     be logical that the incoming trajectory or the direction from which the

 9     projectile came is from the bottom of the photograph.  If my colleagues

10     wrote that, then this is what their writing says, but I cannot confirm

11     any of that because I didn't go out to the site, nor can I deny it.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Next question, please, Mr. Lukic.

13             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   Can you see in this photograph that this hole was dug out because

15     it has sharp edges?  Would you agree that it was not caused by the impact

16     of a shell but, rather, by digging?

17        A.   Well, let me repeat once again.  I wouldn't speculate or express

18     any conjectures on the basis of this photograph because I'm not certain

19     what this is all about.

20        Q.   All right.  We have finished with this.  Now we'll go back to

21     something.  Yesterday, I had to abandon a line of questioning because I

22     had an inadequate map in the e-court.

23             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] So could we now please see 1D722A.

24     And just for your information, it was an incident in

25     Dositejeva Street 224.

Page 8491

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Document is not in e-court, Your Honours.

 2             MR. LUKIC:  Can we see 1D722 then?  Maybe it's replaced.  We had

 3     this map yesterday but it's too much enlarged, so obviously I'll have to

 4     return to that one again.

 5        Q.   We'll move on and go to incident in Mis Irbina 18.

 6     [Interpretation] For that we need something that you mentioned in your

 7     statement.

 8             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] In B/C/S it's page 20, paragraph 66;

 9     and in English, it's page 11, paragraph 66.

10        Q.   You say in your statement that in this incident, everything was

11     caused by 120-millimetre shell, which was fired from the VRS position in

12     Miljevici.  You also told us that Mirza Jamakovic was killed in this

13     incident.  I apologise.  Mirza Jamakovic's son was killed and his

14     daughter, 14-year-old, was injured.  This is mentioned in paragraph 67 of

15     your statement.

16             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we please see 1D722 in e-court.

17     In this case we will be able to work with this document.  We just need to

18     turn it around, this map, clockwise for 90 degrees, please.

19        Q.   Could you please mark on this map -- I see here below Marsala

20     Tita Street, Mis Irbina Street.  Can you please mark the building number

21     18 Mis Irbina Street.  There a letter P here; correct?

22        A.   Just a second.  [Marks].  It was around here, this incident.

23        Q.   All right.  Would you now please mark the place where the

24     security services centre is.

25        A.   Yes.  Across from there in Benovalencija.  [Marks].  Somewhere

Page 8492

 1     around here.

 2        Q.   Would you now please also draw a circle around the BiH

 3     Presidency, though we can see that it's written on the map.

 4        A.   Yes.  [Marks].

 5        Q.   Do you know where be the command of the 105th Motorised Brigade

 6     was located, in the Sipad building?

 7        A.   No.

 8        Q.   You don't know.  All right.  Do you know where the command of the

 9     1st Corps of the BH Army was in Danijela Ozme?

10        A.   I never went there.  I know that it was located somewhere there

11     in Danijela Ozme, but I wouldn't know in which specific building.

12        Q.   All right.  Let us move on.

13             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Now we would need 1D721.

14             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Lukic, yes, we have to have that admitted and

15     it would be helpful if you invite the witness to put some letters next to

16     the --

17             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.  I told you I'm going to forget something.

18        Q.   [Interpretation] Excuse me.  Could you please write number 18 by

19     the circle with which you marked Mis Irbina number 18?

20        A.   [Marks]

21        Q.   And next to the circle with which you marked the Sarajevo CSB,

22     just write CSB, please.

23        A.   [Marks]

24        Q.   And we have the last circle where we see the Presidency of BH.

25     So there's no need to mark anything.

Page 8493

 1             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And now I would like to tender the

 2     document into evidence, please.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D722 as marked by the witness receives

 5     number D219, Your Honours.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

 7             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I called up another document.  The

 8     witness participated in its drafting.  The document has not been

 9     translated.  A translation is pending.  We will use it only to establish

10     that the witness did participate in the on-site investigation.

11        Q.   On page 1 you see your name under number 6.  Is that right,

12     Witness?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Judge Zdenko Eterovic heads the investigating team; right?

15        A.   Yes.

16             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] In this document we need page 13,

17     which is a rough draft.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, I'm just wondering which 65 ter number --

19             MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] -- English translation --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  -- or which one the -- it's not on the record.

21             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It should be 1D721.

22             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, 1D721.  It's not from the Prosecutor's list,

23     it's our document.

24             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It was mentioned --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Oh, yes.  It was mentioned, you said, "Now we could

Page 8494

 1     need 1D721" at page 53, line 12.  It's clear now.

 2             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 4             MR. WEBER:  Your Honours, could we please get a little context on

 5     the record in terms of what incident and what date this material relates

 6     to?

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic --

 8             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, give me one second.  It's paragraph 66 of

 9     witness's statement, and 67.  It's Mis Irbina, 27th of June, 1995.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And the sketch is part of that report --

11             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  -- or is it separate?

13             MR. LUKIC:  It is part of that report, page 13.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me just have a look.  Yes.  Please proceed,

15     Mr. --

16             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

17        Q.   [Interpretation] We can see that somebody used English to enter

18     some data.  I apologise.  It is only in my version but not in the other.

19             Please look at this schematic and mark -- and I repeat, this is a

20     case that you participated in.  Can you mark the bunker in front of the

21     security services centre and subsequently we're also going to show a

22     photo depicting that bunker.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we do so, Mr. Lukic, could you first ask the

24     witness to identify where the -- the building you are apparently

25     referring to, where that is found on this sketch, if he knows.  What is

Page 8495

 1     the sketch at all?  I've got no idea yet.

 2             MR. LUKIC:  Give me one second.  I'll try to find where the

 3     sketch --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I see at least there seems to be some kind of a

 5     passage to the --

 6             MR. LUKIC:  Let us see, maybe I rushed too much.  Let's go back

 7     two pages.  So go to page 11 first.  I didn't want to bother Your Honours

 8     with the text since don't have the translation.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Page 11 is a cover page.

10             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Can you confirm for us that this document depicts the place where

12     the incident happened in Sarajevo in front of Mis Irbina Street number

13     15?

14             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter apologises.  Number 18.

15             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Can you confirm that, that this schematic depicts shelling in

17     Sarajevo in Mis Irbina Street in front of number 18?

18        A.   Yes, but I want to make things very clear for the Trial Chamber.

19     This was not part of our report.  It was part of the entire case.  It was

20     not us who drafted this drawing.  It was the CSB who did that.

21        Q.   Thank you for that explanation.  Photos were taken on the

22     29th of June, 1995; is that correct?

23        A.   Well, I did not participate in those activities, but if that is

24     what it says, then I suppose that is the case.

25             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we go to the following page.  Can

Page 8496

 1     we display it on the screen, please.  Page 12.  Zoom in on the lower part

 2     where it says "Description."

 3             "On 27 June 1995, at 1825 hundred hours, a mortar shell landed

 4     and exploded in the courtyard in front of the building at Mis Irbina

 5     Street number 18.  The shell was fired from the aggressor's positions

 6     from the south-west direction.  On that occasion Mirza Jamakovic was

 7     killed."  Actually, I'm not sure about the first name.  "Whereas

 8     Jasenkova -- Jasenka Jamakovic, Adi Habel, Milan Terzic, Davor Mitic,

 9     Vladimir Knezevic, and Alija Starogorac were seriously wounded."

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Did you read "Vladimir Knezevic"?  I see Davor.

11             MR. LUKIC:  Davor.  No, I said Davor.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

13             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] No, Davor Mitic.  [In English] Then

14     Knezevic Vladimir.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  I see, yes.  I see Vladimir is without a W, yes, or

16     a very small one, yes.

17             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

18        Q.   [Interpretation] Did you work on that incident?

19        A.   Yes.  That was the incident.  I didn't draft the report.  There

20     is obviously a mistake here.  It was not Mirza Jamakovic who was killed

21     but Hariz, his son.  And his daughter's name was Jesenka, not Jasenka as

22     is stated in here.

23        Q.   Thank you.

24             MR. LUKIC:  Your Honour, your mike is on.  Do you want to ask

25     something?

Page 8497

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  I was just -- I was just wondering how we are

 2     going to proceed with all this.  Is there any dispute as this is most

 3     likely is a report about that?

 4             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, this appears to be a file with respect

 5     to this incident.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 7             MR. WEBER:  The Prosecution was -- suggests from proceeding and

 8     especially in terms of the questions that have been raised, that the

 9     parties discuss what parts of this file to tender, acquire translations

10     for it, and then admit that.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And it is about a mortar, Mr. -- is that what

12     you read, Mr. Lukic?

13             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.  Yes, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, I don't know what you want to do with

15     it, but we are ...

16             MR. LUKIC:  I just want to go back to the drawing to ask the

17     witness to mark some additional stuff on the drawing for us.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  And that's the drawing on page 13, is that --

19             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

21             MR. LUKIC:  Coming after that page -- that, yeah, page number 12

22     with description.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I've got no idea what it draws, but ...

24             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   First of all, in my previous question I did not -- or, rather, I

Page 8498

 1     was not very precise.  The Judge insists on the location of the building

 2     at Mis Irbina 18.  Can you mark that for us.

 3        A.   [Marks]

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  What are we looking at, streets or buildings or what

 5     are we looking at, Mr. ...

 6             MR. LUKIC:  This witness would say, "I didn't draw this," but --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  No, but I take it if you want to ask --

 8             MR. LUKIC:  -- those are buildings.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  If you want to ask questions about it --

10             MR. LUKIC:  I understand that those are ...

11             JUDGE ORIE:  I see, for example, I see a shape, I don't know

12     whether it's a building or not, which, forgive me, looks like a -- it

13     looks like an ice cream on a -- what is that?  It apparently hit

14     something or not, or is that just a middle of the page --

15             MR. LUKIC:  I started with a building because you were interested

16     in the building in the first place.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.

18             MR. LUKIC:  I'll move on.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  That is then a building, yes.

20             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation].

21        Q.   This is the building at Mis Irbina 18; right?  Or 20, perhaps?

22        A.   I don't know the exact number, but this is just one part of the

23     building's wall.  I encircled the entrance into the building from the

24     side of the passage.  To be more precise, this is the entrance into the

25     building on the side.

Page 8499

 1        Q.   Could you mark the bigger circle with number 18.

 2        A.   [Marks]

 3        Q.   And you mark the smaller circle with the letter E standing for

 4     the English word "entrance," if you will.

 5        A.   [Marks]

 6        Q.   Now can you mark the building of the Sarajevo CSB, please.

 7        A.   I don't know whether what we see here is the end of the CSB

 8     building or whether it is already the adjacent building.  I'm not sure.

 9        Q.   If you're not sure, don't mark anything.

10        A.   I don't -- I don't think that this is a part of the building.

11     Currently there are some commercial premises on the right-hand side, and

12     I believe that the adjacent building is the CSB building.  I don't know

13     whether they shared a wall or not.  I really don't know.

14        Q.   And the cone-shaped building or the ice cream-shaped building,

15     would that represent a mortar shell?  How do you understand this drawing?

16        A.   No.  I don't know what the author of the drawing had in mind.  Is

17     there a description of -- anywhere?  I don't know what is depicted in

18     here.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, please put clear questions to the witness

20     and -- because the witness apparently is a bit lost as well what it all

21     presents.  Either you introduce in such a way that it's clear to everyone

22     or move on.

23             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we go back to the previous page,

24     page 12.  We will not keep this -- [In English] We'll have to come back

25     anyways, first.

Page 8500

 1             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  But you will lose the markings.

 2             MR. LUKIC:  I will -- I will -- we'll make them again.  Thank

 3     you.

 4        Q.   [Interpretation] We're interested in the top part.  We'll have to

 5     retain this in our memories, then I will jog your memory.  Number 1 it

 6     the place where the shell landed, its crater; right?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Number 2 are traces of blood.  Number 3, damage on the entrance

 9     door.  There's no number 4.  Number 5, again traces of blood.  6, traces

10     of blood.  Letter B, a sentry box.

11             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  I would suggest to put both on the screen, this

12     list on the left side and the sketch on the right side.

13             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.  That would be a good idea.

14     Can we have it that way.

15        Q.   [Interpretation] Now, look at the drawing.  Can you see number 1?

16        A.   Number 1 is in a smudged area in the drawing.

17        Q.   Yes.  Can you mark it?  It's the place where the shell landed.

18        A.   [Marks]

19        Q.   And do you see number 3, damage on the entrance door?

20        A.   I can't see number 3, but I know what door you are talking about.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Number 3 seems to be in a detail A, which is found

22     to the -- at the right side of the sketch, and where it is a detail of is

23     unclear to me yet, but if the witness could tell us.

24             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   I can't see number 3, but could you nevertheless mark the door.

Page 8501

 1     You've already done it before.

 2        A.   Yes, and I will also include letter A.  I'm sure that there must

 3     be a line leading from this letter A, but it's not visible in this copy

 4     of the drawing.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  There seems to be a dotted line from that door going

 6     down to the right.  It's a dotted very thin line, and it is then -- it

 7     seems that it -- where we have the cone, the top of the cone goes into

 8     the left then and further down.  So I see a line, Mr. Lukic, but I have

 9     great difficulties yet in comparing the shape of the detail of A with

10     what we find as number A on the sketch as a whole.  It seems not to be

11     much similarity.  I don't know where the door is.  I'm totally lost.  And

12     we are looking at this moment only at a part of the sketch.

13             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.  On the other part you just see that detail A.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but that's where we find the 2 and the 3, isn't

15     it.

16             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  So if we are going through the legend, then we'd

18     have to look at that as well.  And then it says it's a detail of A.  If

19     we could move a little bit to the right.

20             MR. LUKIC:  We cannot now move anywhere.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  We can not move at this moment because it's marked,

22     yes.

23             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.  But I will ask only one more question and then

24     we'll go to that detail part.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.

Page 8502

 1             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, look at the drawing and tell us whether you can

 3     mark the sentry box in the illustration key.  It is under B.

 4        A.   I can see letter B, and I suppose that it refers to this part

 5     here.  [Marks].

 6        Q.   Precisely so, and we will later see that in a photo which is also

 7     part of the file.

 8             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And now can we tender this drawing

 9     with the witness's markings into evidence, please.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, the number would be?

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D721 as marked by the witness receives

12     number D220, Your Honours.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted.  Mr. Lukic, there seems to be also

14     something under number 5 which is very difficult to read.  1, 2, 3, and 4

15     says "mjesta fotografisanja," and then there's a 5 which is not well

16     legible.  It looks like "pravac" or "pravas."

17             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] "Incoming trajectory of the

18     projectile." [In English] The direction of ...

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Oh, that is --

20             MR. LUKIC:  I would rather have it translated by the booth.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, yes.  I see that.  But is that a 5 or is that

22     a -- or is that on a photograph number 5?  I've got no idea.  Could you

23     please take care that we are assisted by the evidence and not confused by

24     it.

25             MR. LUKIC:  That's the only version we found, Your Honour.

Page 8503

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  No, it's about your organisation of the questions

 2     you put to the witness and the organisation by which you introduced this

 3     evidence to us.

 4             MR. LUKIC:  I didn't ask about this part at all.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  You are putting something to us where we have no

 6     idea what we are looking at, and if you want us to consider it in the

 7     interest of your client, then please present it in such a way --

 8             MR. LUKIC:  I'm trying, Your Honour, but I'm working with the

 9     documents not composed by us.  We are -- we have to use semi --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, it's a matter of being organised.  That

11     is it, nothing else, nothing more.  Start with what we can understand.

12     Put clear questions.

13             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please have 1D721,

14     page 4.

15             JUDGE MOLOTO:  We have just had 1D721.  It's D220.

16             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, but we had page 13.  Now we have to have page 4,

17     Your Honour.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Page 4.  That's where the photographs are.  Yes.

19             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   This bunker or guard post as it is referred to in the report is

21     in the immediate vicinity of the explosion and marked accordingly in the

22     sketch; correct?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   This is the guard post in front of the security services centre

25     of the Ministry of the Interior in downtown Sarajevo; correct?

Page 8504

 1        A.   Yes.  That's the check-point where the policemen used to stand.

 2     I wouldn't call it a guard post, because all facilities secured by police

 3     have posts for a security person, and this one was secured against

 4     projectile impact with these sandbags.

 5             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I would like to go back once again to

 6     the sketch now.  So if we could please show page 13 of the same document.

 7        Q.   The children were in the entrance hall of the building which is

 8     marked here as detail A; is that correct?

 9        A.   That's correct.  And if I may clarify a bit so as to make it

10     clearer for the Trial Chamber.  Numbers 5 and 6 are the markings for the

11     places where traces of blood were found, and the following places are

12     marked in such a way. [Marks].  5 and 6 indicate those locations, but I

13     do not see where the trajectory is drawn.  Probably it cannot be seen on

14     this copy.  I can suppose where it had come from and where it is.  We can

15     discern something here, so that's probably the incoming trajectory of the

16     projectile, but without the original drawing, it's difficult.

17             And let me continue.  Detail A indicates the entrance to the

18     entry hallway where the children were injured and one of them killed, and

19     that is here as we marked a while ago.  [Marks].  That is the entrance.

20     That was entry hall and the staircase inside the building.  That was the

21     entrance leading into the building.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, what you marked, and let's put an E to that for

23     "Entrance."  If you'd please be so kind.

24             THE WITNESS: [Marks]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, apparently at the right lower part there

Page 8505

 1     is a detail sketch of what is A, and we find A where you earlier marked

 2     entrance.  Now, I have difficulties in comparing the shape of what is

 3     found under detail A with what I see around where you marked it E for

 4     "Entrance."  But perhaps first we should look at the text under the

 5     detail.  Perhaps that may clarify something.

 6             Could we zoom in if its legible at all?  No, we cannot zoom in.

 7             Mr. Lukic, it's just a matter of reading, and Mr. Weber has not

 8     objected yet.  Can you tell us what approximately an arrow upwards and

 9     under that there is some text --

10             MR. LUKIC:  I cannot read this.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  You cannot read it.  Then we will not know what it

12     says.  Then please proceed.

13             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14        Q.   Before this is removed from the screen, can you please also draw

15     a straight line from the place marked as the place of explosion in this

16     drawing to the place where the entrance is and where the doors are

17     through which one piece of shrapnel pierced according to the report?

18        A.   Yes.  The Judge noticed this dotted line a while ago, and this is

19     the line that indicates that.

20        Q.   Can you please just draw on top of it so that it's stronger and

21     more visible, and please draw number 1 above the line.  Thank you.

22        A.   [Marks]

23        Q.   The sketch of the site says the following:  Someone read it and

24     we can see here that the distance is 17.60 metres.  Do you have any

25     information about this?  And your line, the line that you marked last,

Page 8506

 1     crossed the number now.

 2        A.   I do not doubt the measurements.  It's around 15 metres from the

 3     place of the impact to the doors of the building.  So that's it.

 4        Q.   Yes.  Thank you.

 5             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we please tender this document?

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, page of a report marked by the

 7     witness.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Receives number D221, Your Honours.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.  Could I ask the

10     witness to look at it and perhaps have it enlarged slightly, the middle

11     part.  No, the middle part.  That part, yes.

12             Witness, do you see that apparently the dotted line does not only

13     go downwards in -- to the right but then apparently at -- I don't know

14     what it is, then goes back and is -- also there are two dotted lines,

15     each of them apparently going to a place where traces of blood are found.

16     Do you have any idea what -- is that also what you expect to be the

17     trajectory of shrapnel after the explosion so that it would have caused

18     the blood at 5 and the blood at 6?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.  The dotted lines

20     show precisely the distance between the crater and the places where

21     certain traces were found.  5 and 6 are traces of blood, and in the

22     detail on the other side is the hole on the doors caused by the

23     projectile which pierced through them.  So the precise distances are

24     marked here, and the shrapnel had the trajectory from the place of the

25     impact to the door that was pierced by the shrapnel.

Page 8507

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Which means it follows the dotted line, unless it

 2     did not go in a straight line.

 3             Let's move on.  I slowly start grabbing at least some of what it

 4     all presents.

 5             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  But could we also ask the witness, because that's

 7     still unclear, the -- the cone shape with the little Vs in the centre,

 8     what does that represent?  You see it?  It's a double line surrounded by

 9     an irregular shape and little Vs and at the top of it we find the

10     impacts.  Could you tell us what that is?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, I will try.  I

12     suppose, and we'll confirm that from the photographs if we have them,

13     that it is a grass plot with no concrete, and I think that the little Vs

14     stand for grass and that everything surrounding it is a concrete surface,

15     but from this point in time I cannot really remember if this is so.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Would everyone agree that it's quite common to use

17     little Vs for grass?  That is then one.

18             And then I also see what looks as little -- possibly little

19     cameras.  Would that indicate how photographs were taken?  I see two

20     little structures, one facing, if I could say so, the door, the other one

21     facing the grassy -- grassy patch.  Would that be camera positions as far

22     as you're aware of?  And I see a few more on --

23             MR. LUKIC:  Your Honour, yes.  We can find it on page -- which is

24     prior to this page.  On -- we have B, "strazarska kucica,"

25     [Interpretation] "guard post," [In English] and then we have and then I,

Page 8508

 1     II, III, IV, in Roman letters, places of taking pictures.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I see that we -- in O, what seems -- looks

 3     like cameras.  That we have numbers in it.  I see a I, II, III, II and

 4     III close to each other, and most likely IV in the lower left part of the

 5     sketch.

 6             Yes.  Please proceed.

 7             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  But perhaps after the break, because it's time for a

 9     break.  Mr. Lukic, if you would have carefully studied all the maps and

10     the report, which I cannot study because it is not in a language I

11     understand, all these matters like photographs, camera positions, grassy

12     patch, et cetera, you could have introduced that in approximately five to

13     seven minutes.  We now spent approximately 45 minutes in total chaos, and

14     we slowly now think that we understand some of it.

15             Mr. Weber.

16             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, the Prosecution would just ask that

17     1D721, the entire file get marked for identification pending

18     translations.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Mr. Lukic?

20             MR. LUKIC:  We agree, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D721 receives OTP number or --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  No, we give it a Defence number.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  D222, Your Honours.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  D222 is marked for identification.

Page 8509

 1             The witness may follow the usher.  We'll take a break.

 2                           [The witness stands down]

 3                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, could you tell us how much time you think

 5     you would still need?

 6             MR. LUKIC:  I think I will have to use all my time I asked,

 7     Your Honours.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but we'll consider -- we're also considering

 9     the way in which you used your time, and we'll also consider that all the

10     time which is written down on our bill, to say so, that it's mainly to

11     clarify what seems to be Defence evidence and just for the Chamber to

12     make it digestible and, to that extent, assisting the Defence in

13     presenting its evidence, and we'll consider that and I'll ask for a time

14     report from Madam Registrar.

15             MR. LUKIC:  I just want to ask Your Honours that although this

16     statement is pretty short, there are so many --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, the only thing I'm talking about is the

18     chaotic way in which you present all this at this moment.

19             We take a break, and we resume at 20 minutes to 2.00.

20                           --- Recess taken at 1.18 p.m.

21                           --- On resuming at 1 .41 p.m.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.

23     Meanwhile, Mr. Lukic, could you explain in two or three lines what the

24     purpose of your line of questioning at this moment is.

25             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  We want to prove that a kid that

Page 8510

 1     died in this incident killed himself.  Actually, he was playing with

 2     explosives given to him by his father, and it's obvious from the

 3     photographs there is only one fragment of the shell entered through that

 4     door allegedly killing him, destroying his face and wounding five other

 5     kids.  According to us, it's not possible.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Then it's clear what you're heading for.

 7             Mr. Groome.

 8             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, if I can take advantage of these free

 9     movements.  Your Honour, the Prosecution is always looking for ways to

10     reduce the size of its case and in discussing the matter of investigators

11     from Sarajevo with members of the team, we've come to the conclusion that

12     RM175, who is scheduled to testify at the end of next week is no longer

13     necessary because many of the documents that we would have tendered

14     through him have now been admitted in evidence.  Your Honours, in an

15     effort to ensure that next week is full, we will be endeavouring to

16     advance RM013, who is scheduled the following week, that's week 24, into

17     the end of next week.  Thank you, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll hear from the Defence whether there's any

19     problem with this change in scheduling.

20             MR. LUKIC:  It's hard for us to know at this moment, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  I'll wait for you.  You have an opportunity to think

22     about it.

23             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

24                           [The witness takes the stand]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  You may now proceed, Mr. Lukic.

Page 8511

 1             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 2             [Interpretation] I would like to call up 1D721.  We're interested

 3     in page 6.

 4        Q.   Sir, what we can see here is a glass door; right?

 5        A.   I believe that it is a tin door.

 6        Q.   Very well.  There's a number 3 here on page 12, and the key says

 7     that number 3 indicates the damage on the door, and we can see that

 8     there's one shrapnel trace on the door.

 9        A.   Yes.  There's just one shrapnel damage on the door.

10        Q.   Would you agree with me that there's no damage on the wall,

11     however?

12        A.   On the right-hand side you can see some damage.  This is a wall

13     made of facade brick, so there is some damage.

14        Q.   Could you please mark what you believe is damage on the wall.

15        A.   Yes, I will mark what I think is damage.  [Marks].  And there are

16     others somewhat smaller which I can't see, but I can't claim that there

17     is no more damage.

18        Q.   Very well.

19             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we now call up 1D724.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Lukic, you asked about the one shrapnel damage

21     on the door.  I would like to be shown that.  I can't see it.

22             MR. LUKIC:  We have marked one number we have on that door

23     according to the official record made by CSB Sarajevo.  They said one

24     penetration.  It's marked with one.  If there was more, we would have

25     more numbers.

Page 8512

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Where is it on the door?  I don't know.  I can't

 2     read B/C/S.

 3             MR. LUKIC:  I trust them that there is one.  I cannot even also

 4     see penetration.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  But you were asking the witness if he could see

 6     the damage on the -- the one shrapnel damage on the door and he said yes.

 7     And I'm trying to find out which --

 8             MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... it's above number 3 what I

 9     see.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, would it assist you, and we could not use

11     this one, so let's have this one first out to look at page 7 of the

12     document.

13             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  But this should be tendered before.

14             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  It should be tendered before.  Madam Registrar.

16             MR. LUKIC:  Before -- before it's tendered, maybe we can ask the

17     witness.

18        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, can you mark the place where you see damage

19     on the door?

20             JUDGE ORIE:  We started saving already, so, Mr. Lukic, I suggest

21     to you are -- it's gone.  Yes.

22             Witness, can you now mark where you see damage on the door,

23     shrapnel damage, if you can see it.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the quality of the

25     photo is such that there -- that without the key under the photo and the

Page 8513

 1     number 3, I wouldn't be sure where damage is.  However, under the photo

 2     it says that number 3 denotes damage on the entrance door probably caused

 3     by shrapnel.  I can mark a little arrow above number 3 which probably

 4     points to the damage on the door.  That's what I can mark. [Marks].

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I don't think there's any need for having that

 6     marked.  Well, you marked it already.  Now you have a circle around the

 7     3.  Could you again make the marking you made earlier, that is the damage

 8     to the wall.  Could you make that same marking again.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  [Marks]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  The right marking is the damage on the wall,

11     the marking on the 3 is the other one.

12             Madam Registrar, this would receive number?

13             THE REGISTRAR:  D223, Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Is admitted into evidence.

15             Mr. Lukic, if it would assist you, you could consider 1D00721,

16     page 7.  But please proceed as you wish.

17             MR. LUKIC:  Okay.  I see nothing here.  [Interpretation] I would

18     like to call up 1D724 now.

19        Q.   Sir, this is the same door.  The photo was taken in 2010, and it

20     is the same wall.  Do you agree with me that there's no visible damage in

21     this photo?

22        A.   I agree.  There is no noticeable damage, at least there's none in

23     this photo.

24        Q.   Very well.  My next question is this:  Did you find any

25     casualties, any victims when you got to the spot?

Page 8514

 1        A.   No.

 2             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And now we would like to see page 10

 3     in 1D721.

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Before we move, I would like to ask the witness

 5     in relation to this photograph on the screen, do you recognise that this

 6     is the same location as the door we have seen before?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I could assume that it's the same,

 8     but without the instructions, I can say that the door is different.  The

 9     wall is the same.  If we were to look at the photo independently, I could

10     not confirm that it's the same place.  I do not have any doubts that it

11     is the same place, but the photo was taken much after the war.  And it is

12     true that this is the door to number 20 at the moment, as it is at the

13     moment.

14             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  This door seems to be a door made of glass.  The

15     door you have seen earlier, you said it was made of tin.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  During the war,

17     there were very few glass surfaces which were intact.  Most of those were

18     damaged by war.  I don't know what kind of door existed before the war.

19     During the war the door was made of tin.  It had a tin surface, not a

20     glass surface.

21             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.

22             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  And now I would like to

23     call up page 10 in 1D721, but before that I would like to tender into

24     evidence the document that we have just had on the screen, D1724.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

Page 8515

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D724 receives number D224,

 2     Your Honours.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  D224 is admitted into evidence.

 4             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation].

 5        Q.   Although the photos are black and white, and I know that it is

 6     not easy for you to be looking at the photos of your colleague's dead

 7     son, did you see Jamakovic at the time?  Did you see what kind of

 8     injuries he had sustained?

 9        A.   No.

10        Q.   Can you see that in the black and white photos?  I'm going to

11     tell you that those injuries were caused by the explosion that happened

12     in the vicinity of the child's face and not by shrapnel.  Could you agree

13     that that was the cause of his injuries and that five other children were

14     injured by the shrapnel of a mortar shell which exploded 15 metres away?

15        A.   I'm sure that they were not hurt by one single shrapnel fragment.

16     I don't know why you think that one single shrapnel fragment injured all

17     of the children.

18        Q.   Let me tell you.  All of the children were indoors, behind the

19     closed door, and it is stated that one shrapnel pierced the door.  Do you

20     think that more than one shrapnel pierced the door at the same time?

21        A.   I'm not saying that the door --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

23             MR. WEBER:  Objection to the form of the question.  Counsel's

24     essentially testifying and describing an event.  If that is stated at a

25     certain report or page, we just ask that the witness be allowed to see

Page 8516

 1     that before he comments on such a thing.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Before that, are these people lying on their side

 3     or are they standing?  How are these photographs supposed to be?  Are

 4     they okay like this?

 5             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, that's a dead body.  Dead body.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, there are a lot of -- a lot of

 7     suggestions in your question.  Could you explore with the witness to what

 8     extent he can verify the factual description you gave or put to him where

 9     it's found in the report.

10             MR. LUKIC:  I'm asking the witness.

11        Q.   [Interpretation] You have just stated that you think that they

12     could not have all been hurt by one piece of shrapnel.  According to your

13     information, were there more pieces of shrapnel that pierced the door?

14     Is it not stated in the report?

15        A.   I don't have any other information, but I don't know that the

16     door was closed during the explosion.  I never came by that information.

17     I don't know whether the door was closed.  It is possible that it was

18     open, so there would be no shrapnel traces on the door.

19        Q.   Can one expect that there would be no damage on the wall from a

20     mortar shell that exploded 17 metres away, bar one that you noticed?

21     Judging from your experience, what would you say?

22        A.   We did not establish the exact number of and extent of damage

23     during the explosion.  I would not go into speculation as to why we don't

24     have sufficient information.

25             Every projectile is tested during the manufacture process for the

Page 8517

 1     number of pieces of shrapnel that will be caused by its explosion.  I

 2     don't know -- I'm not sure that any analysis based on the information

 3     that we have at our disposal would yield the correct result.  What we saw

 4     in that photo is a door and a very narrow strip of wall around the door.

 5     What went on around the area, behind the door, we can't see and there is

 6     no way for us to know that.

 7        Q.   Please look at the screen in front of you.  The photos are black

 8     and white.  If we're talking about a mortar shell shrapnel, can it cause

 9     this type of injury which Jamakovic sustained and which caused his death,

10     or would it be more consistent with an explosion of an explosive device

11     which was in his hands, perhaps, or in his very close vicinity?

12        A.   According to the information available to me, the boy died of

13     shrapnel wounds.  I can't conclude that based on these photos.  The

14     photos are blurred, and I don't want to go into analysing something that

15     I can hardly see.

16        Q.   If we're talking about mortar shells, an 82 mortar shell, how

17     many pieces of shrapnel is it fragmented into?

18        A.   I don't know.  I can't even give you an approximate number.  I

19     don't want to speculate.

20        Q.   Now just bear with me for a moment, please.  Let's go to the flea

21     market in Bascarsija.  You've already testified about that.

22             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We need P12822 in e-court.

23             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  I think instead of P it should be a 65 ter

24     number.

25             MR. LUKIC:  It is 65 ter, sorry.

Page 8518

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  You drive us to P numbers well over 10000, which

 2     scares us a bit.

 3             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] 12822.  That's what we have on the

 4     screen.

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone for the counsel, please.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Microphone, please.

 7             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] In English we need page 1, and in the

 8     B/C/S version we need page 5, bullet point 4.

 9        Q.   This is to demonstrate that you were indeed a member of the team.

10     It is stated here following the information:  An on-site commission was

11     formed, and under number 4 we see your name; is that correct?

12        A.   Yes, it is correct.

13        Q.   Allow me to retract a little and go back to the questions

14     relative to the late Jamakovic.  If you found any shrapnel that injured

15     the children and killed Jamakovic, was that documented in any way?

16        A.   We received shrapnel for analysis, and that was described in our

17     analysis.  I don't know if any shrapnel was extracted from the dead boy's

18     body.

19        Q.   This was just a little digression.  I'm going back to the flea

20     market from here.

21             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We need the same document, page 9 in

22     B/C/S, the penultimate and final paragraphs, and in English page 4, two

23     paragraphs from the bottom of the page.

24        Q.   You signed this report on the expert analysis?

25        A.   Yes, with my initials.

Page 8519

 1        Q.   To say for the record it happens in Telali Street, which was

 2     formerly called Petra Kocica; correct?  You can see it here.

 3        A.   Yes, the report mentions the name of the street at the relevant

 4     time.

 5             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We now need to see the sketch which

 6     does not exist in the English version, so we do not need any page from

 7     that version.  We need the sketch on page 17 of the B/C/S version.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Microphone, please.

 9             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   As these were two shells, could you please mark for us in this

11     sketch the places where the shells fell.  We can see one down here.

12        A.   One explosion, but there is no key.

13        Q.   Yes.  First we should show the key.  It is my mistake and thank

14     you.

15             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] The key can be found on page 16 of

16     the B/C/S version and at page 7 of the English version.

17             We can see what the key says.  I will read it now.  Number 1,

18     location of explosion of one of the projectiles in front of a shop.

19             Under number 2, location where the other projectile was activated

20     at the curb of Oprkanj Street.

21             Number 9, fragment of a projectile fuse; 06 and 30 [as

22     interpreted], projectile fragments, and then under 10 and 11, projectile

23     fragments.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, looking at the English version and the

25     original version, there seems to be quite a difference.  Unless it is not

Page 8520

 1     the same page.

 2             MR. LUKIC:  It is the same page.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, for example, in the English, 12 is missing

 4     where it clearly appears in the original.  06 and 30 appear after 9,

 5     before 10.  It doesn't appear in English.  Therefore, I think if this is

 6     a Prosecution uploaded document, we should have the translation be

 7     verified.  Yes.

 8             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.  Can we now

 9     please move on to the sketch.

10             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  In the meantime, we should make a correction of

11     the transcript.  Page 79, line 14, I think it was one of the interpreters

12     misspoke.  You are dealing with number 1 fragment of a projectile fuse,

13     number 6 and 13 but it's written "30," which is obviously a mistake.  It

14     should read "13."

15             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you.

16             [Interpretation] Can we now move it a little bit just -- or we

17     can see everything in the sketch.

18        Q.   Can you see numbers 1 and 2?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   These are -- let us focus on number 1.  If you can mark it and

21     explain what sort of an explosion that was.

22        A.   This is number 1.  This is the explosion right next to the wall

23     of a building.

24        Q.   And number 2 as well, please.  Just mark it so that it will be

25     easier for you to follow.

Page 8521

 1        A.   [Marks].  This is the place where the projectile impacted against

 2     the curb.

 3        Q.   Under number 9, it's said that this was the fuse.

 4        A.   Yes.  That was the body of the fuse.  That is the place where the

 5     body of the fuse was located.  It was found at this spot.

 6        Q.   Next to number 1 at the top of the sketch there is no crater.  No

 7     crater is documented.  And the fuse, can you determine first of all what

 8     was the direction from which those shells came?

 9        A.   Yes, and I can confirm that there were craters in both locations.

10     Now, whether this is documented or not ...

11        Q.   Can you tell us where did these shells come from?

12        A.   Approximately from this direction.  [Marks].  Whether it was

13     perhaps a little bit to the left or to the right, that's a different

14     thing, but the angle is precisely determined in the report.

15        Q.   The fuse marked with number 9 is oriented in the opposite

16     direction from the direction that the shell came from.  Isn't that what's

17     documented here?

18        A.   It is located next to number 9.

19        Q.   I would suggest to you that this is impossible.  Would you agree

20     with me that it is impossible for a fuse to be found in the place showing

21     the direction from which the shell flew?

22        A.   No, because the projectile which is marked by number 1 -- or,

23     rather, the place of its impact, it impacted in the place at the bottom

24     of the wall of this building, just next to the ground.  So it's not

25     impossible that many pieces of shrapnel bounced off the wall and flew

Page 8522

 1     back, and the same goes for the fuse.  So this is how the fuse came to be

 2     in the location where it was found.

 3        Q.   All right.  Thank you.  It is the end of our time for today.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could I ask one additional question in

 5     relation to this.  There is an arrow with an N on the top of the

 6     building.  Does that mean that the top of the building is north, the top

 7     of the sketch is north?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  So therefore the shells came from approximately the

10     southerly direction.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Perhaps south-eastern direction,

12     but the angle is included in the report.  As far as I remember, it was

13     south-east but it's specified in the report.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

15             MR. LUKIC:  Before we break, I would just ask to tender this

16     document.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Madam Registrar, sketch marked by the witness.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Sketch marked by the witness receives number

19     D225, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  D225 is admitted into evidence.

21             We adjourn for the day.  I'd like to instruct you, Witness, that

22     you should not speak or communicate in any other way with whomever about

23     your testimony, whether already given yesterday and today or still to be

24     given tomorrow, because we're quite confident that we'll conclude your

25     testimony tomorrow.

Page 8523

 1             You may follow the usher.  We'd like to see you back tomorrow

 2     morning at 9.30 in this same courtroom.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All right, Your Honours.

 4                           [The witness stands down]

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  We adjourn for the day and we resume tomorrow,

 6     Wednesday, the 13th of February, in -- at 9.30 in the morning in this

 7     same Courtroom I.

 8                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.17 p.m.,

 9                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 13th day of

10                           February, 2013, at 9.30 a.m.