1 Monday, 7 February 2005
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, good morning, Mr. Registrar. Could you call
6 the case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Case number
8 IT-03-68-T, the Prosecutor versus Naser Oric.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you.
10 Mr. Oric, good morning to you. Can you follow the proceedings in
11 your own language?
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours, ladies
13 and gentlemen. Yes, I can.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. You may sit down.
15 Appearances for the Prosecution.
16 MR. WUBBEN: Good morning, Your Honours, and good morning to my
17 learned friends of the Defence team. My name is Jan Wubben, lead counsel
18 for the Prosecution, together with co-counsel, Ms. Joanne Richardson, and
19 our case manager, Ms. Donnica Henry-Frijlink. Later this morning, also,
20 Ms. Patty Sellers will join the Prosecution team.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, and good morning to you and your team.
22 Appearances for Naser Oric.
23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. I'm
24 Vasvija Vidovic, together with Mr. John Jones. I appear on behalf of Mr.
25 Naser Oric. We have with us our legal assistant, Ms. Jasmina Cosic, and
1 our case manager, Mr. Geoff Roberts.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Madam Vidovic. Good morning to you and
3 your team.
4 Any preliminaries?
5 MR. WUBBEN: No, Your Honour.
6 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Now, before we bring in the new witness, what are
8 your intentions? Who is leading this witness?
9 MS. RICHARDSON: Good morning, Your Honours. Your Honours, my
10 intention this morning is to do a very brief direct-examination of the
11 individual who took the pictures of the houses that were damaged and the
12 monuments that were damaged in the various villages in our indictment, as
13 well as some of the other village that were made reference to by numerous
15 During that examination, I have selected a series of photographs,
16 not many, I would think less than 20, for him to sort of describe to -- to
17 Your Honours how, in his opinion, the damage to the houses occurred. And
18 I think it will assist the Trial Chamber, as you review the photographs
19 later on, and as you make your own assessment as to how the damage
21 I should add, Your Honour, excuse me, that this individual has a
22 wealth of experience as a crime scene technician, almost 25 years, and I
23 believe that his opinion with respect to the damage to the buildings that
24 he observed himself two years after the incidents will -- I think, will be
25 very illuminating to Your Honours.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Jones.
2 MR. JONES: Well, I'm somewhat dismayed that he's going to be
3 giving that sort of evidence, because the exercise will be greatly
4 protracted, I'm afraid, because it wouldn't do simply for my learned
5 friend to take a few photographs and to ask this person his opinion about
6 how the damage was caused for the following reason: This person took
7 photographs in July 1994, and possibly later, so we're talking about up to
8 maybe two years, nearly, after these events occurred. In our submission,
9 firstly, he doesn't know when -- it's impossible for him to say anything
10 of when any damage was caused. But also, as to how it was caused, we
11 would have submissions and cross-examination on that subject. And so if
12 my learned friend proposed to elicit that evidence from him, then we will
13 have to show him photographs and say, Well, surely this was caused by a
14 shell, surely this is consistent with people taking away roof tiles,
15 surely in this case -- Your Honour gets the idea of what the exercise will
16 be like. We certainly wouldn't finish today.
17 I'm happy to do that, and I've prepared on the basis that that's
18 cross-examination which I'd have to conduct. But certainly it would at
19 least take an hour and a half or two hours, on our part, to go through the
20 many photographs where we say there's either no damage evident, or damage
21 which is consistent with, as we say, with some innocent explanation.
22 We anticipated, based on the statement of this witness, which we
23 only received, after all, in August of this year, and it was served after
24 most of the statements, but -- fair enough, but that statement was simply,
25 I took these photographs on this date. And we're perfectly happy with him
1 giving that evidence, and I could cross-examine him very briefly on that
2 basis. But if he's going to come forward as some sort of expert to say,
3 in my view, this was arson, or in my view, this could only have been
4 caused by human agency, then we're in for a long exercise. And that's --
5 that's fine. I mean, we're happy to do that, but it does affect the
7 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, if I may just briefly respond.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
9 MS. RICHARDSON: The statements, in fact, were turned over to the
10 Defence in August, and I believe that's when they were taken.
11 With respect to the necessity of going into how the damage
12 occurred, I think it's highly relevant and probative to these proceedings.
13 I have seen the Defence cross-examine numerous witnesses and suggested to
14 them that the houses or the buildings were, in fact, not that much by fire
15 but maybe, possibly, by bombs and other type of heavy artillery. And I
16 think that it would be very helpful to the Trial Chamber to clarify, in
17 fact, how this damage occurred.
18 Now, the fact that I have selected a few photographs is just in
19 the interests of time. There are numerous photographs, I think there are
20 about 90 in all. I didn't think it necessary to go through all of them,
21 but to provide a sample for Your Honours and for this witness to explain
22 the damage, and from his own experience, what he believes the damage could
23 have been caused by. And I understand that the Defence would seek to
24 examine him further on other photographs that they might think relevant,
25 and I don't see the problem of them doing that. But in the interests of
1 time, I simply selected a sample of photographs.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Jones.
3 MR. JONES: Just one final matter. I'm not clear now if this
4 witness is actually being proposed as an expert, and if he is an expert,
5 then we're going to need to know his qualifications.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: This is the whole thing. Of course, I'm going to
7 refrain and suggest to my two colleagues to refrain from taking a decision
8 on whether he should be allowed to testify on what would have caused the
9 damage to the property, and we will reserve our judgement until the time
10 we have heard what his expertise in this area of forensic science is.
11 From my own experience in my jurisdiction, we're talking of highly
12 sophisticated -- or matters that require highly sophisticated expertise,
13 particularly when you come to fire. There are few real experts on arson
14 and on fire, and also on explosives, particularly ones we've heard that
15 fire and explosives could be caused by Zoljas, et cetera, et cetera, so on
16 and so forth. But anyway, when we come to that moment, we will put the
17 question as to his expertise, then we will withdraw, retire, for a couple
18 of minutes and decide whether to allow further questions on his --
19 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, just for the -- for the -- on the
20 part of the Prosecution, we have not proposed that this witness be
21 tendered -- submitted to the Court as an expert in fires. In fact, it's
22 our belief that his 25 years' experience includes crime scene
23 investigation, not only of fires but of other types of criminal
24 investigations. So with that, I would only ask that Your Honours take
25 that into consideration. And we're seeking to elicit tender his opinion
1 based on his experience.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: In the last 25 years, how many wars have there been
3 in the areas where he gained all this experience, Ms. Richardson?
4 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, understood. I -- Your Honour, I --
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Because there's only been one war, and that's 10
6 years ago, 12 years ago -- MS. RICHARDSON: Your honour, I'm not
7 suggesting that he is an expert in --
8 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers kindly slow down for the
9 benefit of the interpreters. Thank you.
10 MS. RICHARDSON: I apologise. Your Honour, I'm not suggesting
11 that he's an expert in investigating war, war crimes, or damages -- or
12 damage to buildings as a result of war. I'm simply proposing to the Court
13 that the Trial Chamber listen to his testimony, taking into consideration
14 the fact that he has 25 years' experience as a crime scene -- crime scene
15 technician, Your Honour, and that includes fires. And I would only
16 suggest that his opinion be taken as that based on his -- based on his
17 experience. And I say -- and I would also suggest that it's taken into
18 consideration along with the others' opinion -- other opinion given by
19 witnesses who were either present at the time that this occurred or later
20 visited the site. And it was elicited from them during cross-examination
21 how or what, in their opinion, caused damage to the buildings. And I
22 would simply think that his --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, you see --
24 MS. RICHARDSON: -- that his testimony would be helpful.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: We'll come that later on. Mr. Jones let's not --
1 Mr. Jones let's not --
2 MR. JONES: No, it's just -- Your Honour it's just one very
3 important point, though, which is that the question of notice and Rule 94
4 bis. I mean, certainly, if anyone were to come forward as an expert now,
5 without going under the procedure under 94 bis where we would have time to
6 consider the expert, his qualifications, that can't simply be bypassed.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: No.
8 MR. JONES: And then just to say that a crime technician's
9 expertise in this case is in taking photographs, that's what, in the
10 region, these people do.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: The way I know it, at least, is as follows: If you
12 have a fire, you will have an expert on fire that will go on site and
13 examine the terrain, examine the terrain, and after examining the terrain
14 and while he is examining the terrain, he would indicate to the officer
15 who was taking the photographs what photographs to take, but all
16 photographs will be taken under the direction of the officer who is
17 investigating. If it's an explosion, again -- I mean, if it's a fire, you
18 try to identify the source of the fire; if it's an explosion, you examine
19 all sorts of things with a view to establishing whether the explosion --
20 where the explosion occurred, whether it's on the inside or on the
21 outside, and what kind of an explosive material was used, so on and so
22 forth. I mean, this is expert -- an expert's work.
23 As Mr. Jones has suggested, I mean, if your client -- if your
24 witness is being put forward as an expert, then you haven't followed the
25 procedure laid down by our Rules.
1 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I would again reiterate that he's
2 not being put forward as an expert; he's simply being put forward as a
4 JUDGE AGIUS: But that's even more dangerous, my dear. If you are
5 going to present this person not as an expert, but you're going to put
6 questions to him with a view of eliciting from him his own personal
7 opinion of what could have caused the fire or what could have caused the
8 explosion or what could have caused the damage, knowing that he is not an
9 expert but he has got experience, and not presenting him as an expert,
10 that's the high -- that's highly irregular. I don't know, I will need to
11 discuss it with Judge Brydensholt and Judge Eser, obviously, because it's
12 not a decision that I can take on my own. But I consider it to be highly
14 MS. RICHARDSON: Well, Your Honour, I understand the Trial
15 Chamber's position with respect to an expert, and to have one qualified
16 and deemed an expert before the Trial Chamber based on his experience. I
17 am simply seeking to elicit from this witness, as we have with other
18 witnesses, his opinion as to how this fire was caused. And we have seen
19 that throughout this trial, Your Honour, through cross-examination, and
20 even on direct, a series of questions put to witnesses as to how, in their
21 opinion, the fire was caused, based on their observation, on knowledge of
22 weaponry, et cetera. And that is all I'm seeking to elicit from this
23 witness, Your Honour. And he is not, in our opinion, an expert --
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Anyway --
25 MS. RICHARDSON: -- on fires.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: -- let's suspend the hearing for five minutes, until
2 we discuss a little bit outside, and we will reconvene very soon.
3 --- Break taken at 9.20 a.m.
4 --- On resuming at 9.23 a.m.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: So the position is as follows, and this is -- there
6 is unanimity amongst us on this: There should not be any questions put to
7 the witness as to what could have caused the damage or the fire or the
8 destruction, except insofar as he may be in an obvious position to say, in
9 other words, not as an -- not as an expert but as something that he could
10 have observed there and then on site. But not more than that. Otherwise,
11 there shouldn't be any questions which could present his testimony as
12 expert testimony or testimony which goes beyond his function as a
14 So let's bring the witness in. In any case, we will direct the
15 questions and we will stop you if we see that you are asking questions
16 that you shouldn't be -- that he shouldn't answer, anyway; not that you
17 shouldn't ask, that he shouldn't answer.
18 MS. RICHARDSON: Very well, Your Honour.
19 [The witness entered court]
20 JUDGE AGIUS: And you need to understand that there is something
21 very delicate here, that these photos were taken two years after --
22 roughly two years after the events, and we need to be extremely, extremely
24 Good morning, Mr. Jankovic.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: And welcome to this Tribunal.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Do I take it that you are receiving a translation of
4 what I am saying in English into your own language?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Indeed, I am.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Is the sound level in your headphones at
7 the right level, or would you like it --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's very good.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay, that's perfect. Very soon, you will start
10 giving evidence as a witness brought forward by the Prosecution in this
11 case instituted against Naser Oric. Our regulations require that, before
12 you start giving evidence, you make a solemn declaration, in the sense
13 that, in the course of your testimony, you will be speaking the truth, the
14 whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The text of the solemn
15 declaration is contained in a piece of paper which Madam Usher is going to
16 hand to you now. Please read it out carefully and loudly, and that will
17 be your solemn undertaking with this Tribunal.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
19 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
20 WITNESS: DRAGAN JANKOVIC
21 [Witness answered through interpreter]
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. You may sit down.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: So I take it that you have court experience, so I
25 need not lose much time in trying to explain to you what the procedure is
1 here. It's very much similar to what it is in local jurisdictions. You
2 have been summoned here by the Office of the Prosecutor, as their own
3 witness, but now that you are testifying, you are the Tribunal's witness.
4 And consequence number one is that, because of this, but also and
5 primarily because of your solemn declaration, your responsibility, your
6 obligation towards this Tribunal is to answer all questions that are put
7 to you truthfully and fully, to the best of your ability, irrespective of
8 who is putting the questions to you, irrespective of whether the questions
9 are being put by the Prosecution or by the Defence. You cannot
10 discriminate between one and the other, or favour one or the other.
11 The Prosecution will go first. You will be asked a series of
12 questions, and then -- by Ms. Richardson, and she will then be followed by
13 Mr. Jones, who is co-counsel for Naser Oric in this case.
14 Yes, Ms. Richardson.
15 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Examined by Ms. Richardson:
17 Q. Mr. Jankovic, please state your full name for the record.
18 A. My name is Dragan Jankovic.
19 Q. Please confirm the following information: You were born on the
20 24th of January, 1955, and you reside in Belgrade.
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. And you joined the police department in 1975, and in 1981, you
23 were transferred to the Directorate of the Criminal Investigations Police
24 in Belgrade, and that is the forensic team?
25 A. Yes, 1975. A small correction, though, service in 1981 that I was
1 transferred to the forensic team.
2 Q. And you qualified as a crime scene technician during that period
3 of time.
4 A. Yes, that's correct.
5 Q. And you are presently the chief of the photo laboratory of the
6 Department of Forensics, and that is with the Directorate of the Criminal
7 Investigations Police in Belgrade.
8 A. Yes, it's one of the labs within our administration.
9 Q. And how long have you been the chief of the photo laboratory?
10 A. Sixth year running.
11 Q. And during that period of time - when I say "the period of time,"
12 from 1981 to presently - you have investigated a variety of crimes, and
13 that includes --
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Again, I mean, I take objection to the use of the
15 word "you have investigated a series of crimes." He is not an
16 investigator, Ms. Richardson.
17 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, if I can --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: He is directed, in the course of investigations --
19 and please confirm what I am saying: As a forensic photographer, do you
20 work on your own, on your own initiative, or are you given directions by
21 the persons who are investigating a crime on a crime scene?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Whether you may not understand the
23 nature of my work, I will certainly make sure to set them right during my
24 testimony, wherever misunderstandings arise. What you've just said, Your
25 Honour, is quite correct. We are on call. We go to the crime scene. We
1 focus on whatever material evidence can be found at the scene of crime,
2 and forward them also to other forensic teams working on the same case.
3 Forensic medicine is also part of this, but not my department. That is
4 not within my personal remit.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: In the course of an investigation on a crime scene,
6 following the report of a crime, who would conduct the investigations?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In our line of work, and under our
8 present legislation, the investigating magistrate conducts the
9 investigations. We are merely at his disposal. He makes a request to do
10 whatever he deems necessary in a given case. We then do it for him,
11 whether he wants photographs, whether he wants specific packages of
12 material evidence, until all these are further processed, at his request.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: And will the investigating magistrate be accompanied
14 by experts in his investigation? For example, if we're talking of a fire
15 that has taken place in a building, and one is to establish whether that
16 fire was accidental or whether it was arson, criminal, would there be an
17 expert on fire assisting the investigating magistrate?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. In fact, it's quite necessary
19 in cases like these, since, during a fire, if that is what you have in
20 mind, changes occur from hour to hour, or rather, from minute to minute.
21 It's usually important for an expert to arrive at the crime scene as soon
22 as possible, even during a fire, before the fire is even out, because that
23 makes it possible for him to get a privileged insight into what occurred.
24 He can take samples during and after the fire which may lead him to
25 certain conclusions on the case, specifically on what caused the fire and
1 what the total damage might be. But this is only something that you can
2 conclude after all these stages of the process have been followed through.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I'm asking you these questions. I know the
4 answers already because I started my career as an investigating magistrate
5 way back in 1977, so I know exactly what the procedure is, and I know that
6 it is pretty much the same throughout the whole of Europe.
7 My next question: If we are still talking of a fire, and the
8 magistrate who will be the one who will do least at the time, because
9 there will be the expert who will be assisted by an entire team of
10 forensic experts at the time, and let's take it that you are there while
11 the fire expert is investigating the fire, what could have possibly caused
12 it, and so on and so forth, the photos that you will take, will these
13 photos be taken upon the direction, as you are directed, by the expert on
14 fire, or will you just go around and start shooting photos without any
15 instructions or without any direction from anyone?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You made a reference to forensic
17 medicine in your question. The forensic medicine team only ever comes in
18 if, during a fire --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: I never mentioned forensic medicine. I don't know
20 what the translation or interpretation may have been. Forensic team,
21 forensic team, forensic scientists, I'm referring to. Forensic medicine
22 comes in if there has been a death or someone who has been injured. But
23 leave forensic medicine out for the time being.
24 My question mainly elicits the following answer: In taking photos
25 on the scene of the crime when the investigation is taking place, do you
1 go around taking those photos you think you ought to take, or do you take
2 photos which -- as per the directive or direction of the experts? And
3 then my next question will be very much something related to it.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understood your question both
5 times. It's just that there may have been a misinterpretation in relation
6 to forensic medicine being mentioned, although that team too is sometimes
7 part of an investigation.
8 But as concerns what you just asked me, what we tend to do is,
9 when a fire occurs in a given building, to try to make it to the scene as
10 soon as possible, regardless of the fact that the fire may still be
11 raging. Why do we do this? Because that enables us to take photographs
12 of the progress of a fire until experts on specific individual fields
13 arrive at the scene.
14 In our legislation, there are several different branches of
15 experts. We have different kinds of technicians, and a team that
16 investigates a fire covers all the different aspects of a fire. What I
17 said about taking photographs of the initial stages of the fire, this is
18 something that needs to be done on an independent basis, because fire
19 changes throughout its progress. Once the ground is cleared, once the
20 scene of arson is cleared, and you can search for causes and take samples,
21 it is then that experts, pursuant to their own observations, request us to
22 take photographs of certain sections, of certain objects. This is the
23 procedure with the criminal police in Belgrade, and this is how it has
24 been for -- over the last 20 years.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I thank you for the time being I'll stop
1 here, I will not ask further questions. I think he's given us enough lead
2 to be in a position to decide later on, as we go along, what questions to
3 allow and what questions not to allow.
4 I do have, however, one final -- one final question to the
5 witness: If I ask you to walk into a building that has burnt down, say,
6 two years ago, and I tell you, "Now, please, Mr. Jankovic, could you
7 photograph this building from inside and from outside" - there is no
8 inquiring magistrate, no investigating magistrate, there is no one to give
9 you instructions what to do - what would you do? What would you
10 concentrate our camera or focus your camera upon?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This hypothetical case is very much
12 like what I had to do in this specific case, the case that I'm appearing
13 here for. I did the only thing that was possible for me at the time. It
14 is a very fundamental action in forensic procedure. I took photographs of
15 the general crime scene. Depending on when an individual fire occurred,
16 whether it occurred today or whenever it was observed, or if maybe a
17 building that has burned down is being observed after a great many years,
18 one must be fully conscious of the fact that changes, quite many changes,
19 in fact, tend to occur on these buildings, over time. This is a
20 fundamental skill that an expert like me possesses. Traces and indicia
21 simply disappear or rot away.
22 It is only with great difficulty, and after a lot of work, that
23 one may be able to reach a conclusion on how a certain building burned
24 down. However, there are normally basic indications in these cases based
25 on which one can give an opinion; at any rate, not a very specific opinion
1 on the cause of a fire or the time a fire occurred, especially not after a
2 great deal of time has already elapsed.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
4 Ms. Richardson, he is all yours. Thank you, Mr. Jankovic, for
5 those explanations.
6 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Q. Mr. Jankovic, please confirm your educational background, briefly,
8 for us. You received training in secondary school for criminal scene
10 A. Not quite, if I may be allowed to explain. I started specialising
11 in my job at the secondary education stage. I was specialising in traffic
12 and transport. And then once I obtained that degree of specialisation, I
13 was able to get a job with the crime technicians department. What you do
14 then is you attend a course which gives you the sufficient experience to
15 gain an insight into how crime technicians work, and also enables you to
16 apply these specific techniques. So that would be the gist of it.
17 Q. So you've taken a number of courses and examinations that
18 qualified you for a position as a crime scene technician.
19 A. Yes, that was initially, when I first started working in 1981.
20 But from that moment on, I pursued further courses of specialisation and
21 further studies, and I completed the highest school of the Ministry of the
22 Interior, one of the subjects on that programme being a specialised
23 subject for crime technicians.
24 Q. And you've also attended the University of Defence and Protection.
25 And is this in Belgrade?
1 A. Yes, as part of my continuing education. And I attend school
2 nowadays as well, although I don't have much time. But I am continuously
3 working on my education.
4 Q. And some of the courses you've taken at this university also
5 included general methods of investigation, protection of fire,
6 international law, and various other forensic-related courses; is that
8 A. Yes, that's right. That's correct. We had that in the School of
9 Interior Affairs that I attended in Belgrade, and in addition to that, I
10 also had a lot of subjects at the Faculty of Defence. I don't know if you
11 want me to explain each of those relevant subjects individually.
12 Q. No, that's not necessary. I think we have a pretty good idea of
13 your -- of the type of courses you've taken.
14 Now, with respect to your work experience, you mentioned to
15 Judge Agius that you work under the direction of the magistrate judge or
16 forensic experts. Now, with respect to fires, you have participated in
17 the investigation of approximately 200 fires in the scope of your career.
18 A. Yes, one could say so. These were the fires occurring in the
19 territory of the city of Belgrade, mostly fires erupting in apartments, in
20 socially-owned facilities, also industrial facilities, theatres, and so
21 on. I think that there was a sufficient number of cases for me not to be
22 able to remember now each individual case.
23 Q. Now I'd like to bring your attention to 1994. Do you recall being
24 contacted by the Commission for Gathering Information on Crimes Committed
25 Against Humanity and International Law?
1 A. Yes. Sometime in early 1994, I was contacted by them. Mr. Ilija
2 Simic, a judge at the District Court in Belgrade, was a judge who normally
3 was assigned to serious criminal offences. And the criminal investigation
4 department of the Ministry of the Interior in Belgrade normally conducted
5 the initial on-site investigation in such cases in the territory of
6 Belgrade. Sometime in May of 1994, Mr. Zvonko Djurdumovic were contacted
7 by this judge, and he wanted to know to what extent we would be able to
8 assist the committee in its work.
9 Q. And what were you asked to do by the committee?
10 A. In the discussion we had at the time, Mr. Ilija Simic told us that
11 the authorities of Republika Srpska had turned to them for assistance, for
12 technical assistance, in order to evaluate, document, and photograph, as
13 well as make sketches of damaged buildings in the territories of several
14 municipalities in that area.
15 The first area that we visited then was the Bratunac area. During
16 the discussion, they gave us a list of several places that we should visit
17 in order to see what the buildings looked like, and to make photographs.
18 We were told that they lacked technical possibilities to do something like
19 that, and they wanted to hear our opinion as to how that could be
21 Q. Now, you mentioned a Mr. Zvonko Djurdumovic. Could you tell us
22 about him, and what was his field of work?
23 A. Mr. Zvonko Djurdumovic is a land surveyor, engineer specialising
24 in land survey. He used to work at the Ministry of the Interior and then
25 retired. When he was active, he was chief of criminal investigation
1 department, the technical part in Belgrade. He was called by Judge Simic
2 for a very simple reason, because he could orient himself very well on a
3 map and knew how to survey territory. That was the reason he was invited
4 to participate in this.
5 Q. And did there come a time that you -- let me just rephrase the
6 question, and I have one question with respect to Mr. Djurdumovic and
7 yourself. Did you receive official authorisation from the committee to
8 carry out your work?
9 A. In the first discussions we had at the time, the initial
10 discussions, we determined that we would begin with work, and our work was
11 in its initial stage. We were given approval for going to that area in
12 order to contact local authorities and to establish with them the methods
13 of our work, and also who would be assisting us in our work. The official
14 written approval for our work arrived later, but I couldn't tell you more
15 about that, although I think that records of that should be somewhere in
16 the court's files.
17 Q. Now, with respect to carrying out the project, what steps did you
18 take after you received instructions from the committee? What steps did
19 you and Mr. Djurdumovic take?
20 A. We received from the committee a list of certain places, hamlets.
21 I couldn't tell you exactly how many there were on the list.
22 Mr. Djurdumovic and I worked on that list, and we approached the Bureau
23 for Geography for the former Yugoslavia, and that bureau had records and
24 files which traced the locations of wells and so on, and various maps. We
25 took maps and aerial photographs from the files of that bureau. So even
1 before we travelled to the location to conduct our work, we already had at
2 our disposal maps and locations of various buildings and facilities that
3 we were interested in.
4 So with that material, we went to Bratunac municipality, and we
5 told them that they had approached the committee for war crimes, asking
6 for assistance, that pursuant to that, we had arrived and made plans based
7 on the list that we had received from them.
8 In order for us to be able to go and visit the locations, the
9 buildings, the houses, and to take photographs and so on, and in view of
10 the fact that this was the first time we visited that territory, we needed
11 assistance, because we had no prior knowledge. And we also didn't have
12 any knowledge about the locations of these objects, and no information
13 about the owners. As a result of that, we needed assistance of local
15 So whenever we went to a certain place, local authorities would
16 assign some local residents who had a very good knowledge of that area,
17 and who were able to tell us who were the owners of the houses we
18 photographed. So this is how we worked. We had these local guides who
19 changed from one case to the next.
20 I think we started with Jezestica. Mr. Zvonko Djurdumovic
21 determined the position of the first house on a map. We would mark the
22 first house with a number, and then our guide would say, for example, Yes,
23 this house belongs to such and such person. We would frame the number
24 assigned to that person. And then we would photograph the house in such a
25 way as to ensure that the number assigned to that house was always shown
1 in the photograph. In addition to that, Mr. Zvonko Djurdumovic also made
2 sketches of houses we photographed.
3 I hope this was clear.
4 Q. Yes, thank you very much for that very detailed response.
5 Now, this project began, or at least you physically went to
6 Bosnia, in July of 1994, I believe the 7th.
7 A. Yes. This project, if we can call it that way, was conducted in
8 two stages, each stage lasting about ten days. The first one began on the
9 7th of August, and lasted for ten days or so. I remember that it lasted
10 around ten days, because the work was very hard. We worked almost 16
11 hours a day. We would start at 7 a.m. and then work as long as it was
12 daytime. And we had to travel between those locations, which would also
13 consume some time. Therefore, as I told you, we worked in two stages,
14 from the 7th until the 16th of July, and the second time was the second
15 part of August.
16 Q. And was that August 28th to the 31st of 1994? That was the second
17 part of the project. And I referred to it as a project for lack of a
18 better term, but to conduct the work that you were asked to do?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Now, just going back briefly to the committee itself, do you know
21 if there were any other --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Just for the record, once it has been raised by
23 Judge Eser, I had noticed that also before, but in line -- page 22, line
24 3, the witness is reported as having the 7th of August, when in actual
25 fact he did say 7th of July. He did -- if you look at lines 7 and 8 on
1 the same page, you have a confirmation of that. But just for the record,
2 7th of August is being corrected to 7th of July.
3 Yes, sorry, Ms. Richardson, you may proceed.
4 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. Going back to the work of the committee, are you aware of any
6 other individuals who were working with the commission with respect to
7 documenting the damage to the villages that had occurred in Bosnia?
8 A. Based on our professional experience, and in view of that, we gave
9 certain advice, professional advice. We told them that what we wanted us
10 to do would be pointless if those who wanted to learn how these buildings
11 had been damaged did not participate in that work. Our aim was also to
12 establish who were the perpetrators of these acts. Therefore, we made a
13 suggestion that, as members of the team, we should also have members or
14 parties who had prior knowledge, who had local information, who had
15 additional knowledge, and then we would participate in that team. And we
16 also suggested that we should have some representatives of local
17 authorities who would provide local information, such as who were the
18 owners of the house, who were the victims, and so on.
19 I don't know to this day whether they followed our
20 recommendations, because we did our work on our own. When we completed
21 the work that we were engaged to complete, I thought that it would be used
22 for a number of purposes; to ensure that damages were paid, compensation
23 was paid to the owners, because we knew that none of the houses were
24 insured. So we hoped that this information would be used to ensure that
25 the owners would receive compensation.
1 Q. Now, the villages that were selected, were these primarily Serb
3 A. One could say so. According to their information, the information
4 provided by municipal authorities, yes. However, we didn't know that
5 information. We simply used the information they had provided to us.
6 Q. Were any international organisations involved in this -- with the
7 committee and the work that you were conducting?
8 A. No, unfortunately not. This was one of several initiatives. In
9 Belgrade, in the committee, there was always an initiative to involve
10 international organisations in this work. However, we were unable to
11 reach final agreement on the issue. And the similar situation existed in
12 the territory where we worked. Despite the fact that the international
13 community had their presence there, and the fact that we attempted to
14 contact them, we were unable to involve them, and we relied on local Serb
15 authorities only, as well as local guides who provided information to us
16 as to what houses ought to be photographed and who were the owners.
17 Q. Once you arrived at a specific location, you said you believe that
18 Jezestica was the first -- Bratunac municipality, Jezestica was the first
19 village. Did you speak to the local people there to determine what had
20 happened to that village. In other words, with respect to damage to the
22 A. No. I have to tell you that at the time when we visited these
23 houses, a lot of people, almost majority of the residents, were gone.
24 They were not there in the vicinity of their houses -- in their houses,
25 because the houses could not be inhabited. They were in such a poor
1 condition. However, it wasn't our job, it wasn't our task then to
2 establish that. That was something that we had recommended should be done
3 by somebody else, not by us.
4 Q. Well, were you aware that --
5 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for counsel, please.
6 MS. RICHARDSON: Sorry, thank you.
7 Q. Were you aware that in 1992, some of these villages had been
8 attacked, or there was an exchange, or that there was some type of --
9 MR. JONES: Your Honour, I object to this line of questioning.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't even need to hear the objection. Objection
11 sustained, Mr. Jones.
12 MS. RICHARDSON: I'll rephrase.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, please.
14 MS. RICHARDSON:
15 Q. Were you aware that in 1992 and 1993 -- I'll rephrase the question
16 yet again. What -- prior to getting -- prior to going to the villages,
17 were you told how the damage to the houses occurred?
18 MR. JONES: I'm sorry, I really object to this line of questioning
19 for the following reason: This witness has been very clear that
20 absolutely no part of his job involved trying to work out when damage was
21 caused or by whom. If my learned friend, as she evidently is, is going to
22 seek by all means to elicit some sort of hearsay evidence about what might
23 have happened in 1992 and 1993, then it's completely inappropriate,
24 firstly considering what type of witness we have here, but particularly in
25 light of the very clear and honest answer he's given, which is that: That
1 was never any part of my job, it was not a concern of mine.
2 And a third point is a matter of disclosure. We have the
3 statement of this witness, we have proofing notes. We've never seen
4 anything which indicates these ever received any information about when
5 any of the damage was caused. And so if that evidence is going to be
6 given, who knows, we might have to adjourn to consider that evidence which
7 we've never had sight of.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Well -- yes, Ms. Richardson.
9 MS. RICHARDSON: I certainly wasn't trying to elicit information
10 from this witness about who caused the damage. I was simply trying to
11 establish that, when -- without giving --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Don't testify, because I can feel --
13 MS. RICHARDSON: Well, Your Honour --
14 JUDGE AGIUS: -- don't testify instead of the witness.
15 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I can move on.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: There is only a very simple question that he should
17 be asked.
18 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I was just going to ask the witness
19 if he was aware that there was military activity in the area.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't even -- I don't think -- I don't think you
21 should put that question. It's the -- the question that should be put is
22 very simply the following:
23 Before you started your photographing tasks in relation to each
24 particular municipality or village, were you given information by the
25 authorities there, or by anyone, as to what you were going to photograph?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. And what were you told?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They told us that we would be
4 photographing houses, socially-owned property, churches, and individual
5 monuments, perhaps even graveyards.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: And were you told how come that all these houses,
7 socially-owned houses, property, churches, individual monuments, et
8 cetera, had come to be damaged? Were you given an indication at all? Or
9 did you act on your own conclusions?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In order to remain within the sphere
11 of hearsay, if that is any evidence for you, I can only tell you this: If
12 it is true what they told us at the time, that many houses had been
13 torched and some destroyed, that some monuments had been damaged by
14 various weapons, they said that this is something that should be recorded.
15 That's what they told us at the time.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: In other words, to put it simply, you were quite
17 aware that you were not going to photograph an earthquake zone, for
18 example, where there had been devastation, you were going to photograph
19 something completely different.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Perhaps I have not understood your
21 question properly, but I'll say this again: They told us that we would be
22 photographing houses that had burned down, houses that had been damaged,
23 houses that had been partially torn down by the use of explosives, damage
24 done to monuments and churches.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: That's perfect.
1 Yes, Ms. Richardson.
2 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. Now, I'd like to go back to the work that you conducted, and how
4 you went about conducting the work. You said that you had some -- that
5 you were given, as a guide, a local person who would take you to the
6 various houses, and would identify the owner of that house to you.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And could you tell us whether you were able to take photographs of
9 all of the damaged houses in the village that you observed?
10 A. Throughout our work, we were not photographing every single house,
11 the reason being that our local guides, although we may have seen a of all
12 of the damaged houses in the village that you observed?
13 A. Throughout our work, we were not photographing every single house,
14 the reason being that our local guides -- although we may have seen a
15 person or two, of course. As I said, the reason being that our local
16 guide could not point to every individual house and name the owner. They
17 had no opportunity to consult with anyone on the ownership of a certain
18 house. We wrote in our report that the sum total of our efforts, we tried
19 to deal with this analytically, although what we conducted was not an
20 analysis of whatever happened in the area. This was field work. It had
21 to be quick; therefore, we did not go into any of this. But we didn't
22 photograph every single house, really.
23 Q. So you didn't photograph every single house that was damaged.
24 A. No.
25 Q. And were there other houses that you were unable to photograph
1 because you were unable to -- because of its location, unable to get to
2 them because of mines?
3 A. Yes. If you go through our records you will notice that there are
4 certain of houses that we were not able to reach because we were advised
5 against that by our local guides. They did know a thing or two about an
6 area being mined, which I had a chance to see for myself. On one occasion
7 I had to remove it myself, but fortunately I escaped. If you look at
8 these records, people identified certain houses. He said the second on
9 the right belongs to such and such a person, and that other one over there
10 belongs to that other person. We made a collective photograph in our
11 records, and in that photograph you can see the names of owners the names
12 of owners that we wrote down. But the image of the damage itself, the
13 damage that occurred, is not really that clear.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. My apologies to you, Mr. Jankovic.
15 [Technical difficulty]
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Witness, you will need to repeat a little bit. I
17 will help you, to tell you exactly from where you need to repeat because
18 what you said has failed to go into the transcript. So we will have to go
19 back a little bit, but I will tell you myself.
20 Now, Mr. Jankovic, again, my apologies to you. We had a problem.
21 You were asked a question, which I'm going to read out to you, and then
22 you started giving an answer. But we stopped there because we had a
23 technical hitch. The question that was put to you was the following:
24 "And were there other houses that you were unable to photograph
25 because you were unable to -- because of its location, unable to get to
1 them because of mines?"
2 And then you started answering, you said:
3 "Yes. If you go through our records ..."
4 And I remember what you said, but I think I cannot testify instead
5 of you, so if you would kindly repeat your answer to Ms. Richardson's
6 question. Thank you.
7 A. I thank you, and I will now repeat what I said.
8 If you go through our records, the documents that we have
9 submitted to you, you will see that, in certain photographs, I'm not sure
10 how many there are altogether, groups of houses were photographed, groups
11 of three, four, or five houses. And then below the photograph, you have
12 the names of owners. Our guides told us then, You see, the last house on
13 the right belongs to such and such a person, and that one over there, to
14 another person.
15 The images are not clear as far as damage is concerned, because
16 the photos were taken from a distance. But, for example, you can tell
17 that certain houses did not have a roof. We didn't go there because we
18 were advised against going by our guides. They said they were unsure
19 themselves about certain areas that were or were not mined, that they used
20 only those paths and only those roads that they knew for sure were safe.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Richardson.
22 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Jankovic.
24 MS. RICHARDSON:
25 Q. Now, did you follow the same procedure, and that is, of having a
1 local person identify the house -- the owner of the house to you, and then
2 photographing the house? Did you place a number next to the house so that
3 later on you were able to -- this would be part of your documentation
4 system? And also later linked to the maps that were created.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And underneath the photographs, did you indicate the owner of the
7 house, and did you also put additional information in some of the
8 photographs as to how the damage occurred or what you observed? Not how
9 the damage occurred, but whether it was damaged.
10 A. If you have gone through our files carefully, you may have noticed
11 differences in the captions below the photographs. Underneath some of the
12 buildings, it said "Destroyed," underneath others, "Partially destroyed,"
13 and underneath yet others, "Rebuilt." This is the difference in our
14 terminology. We deemed it necessary to define what we witnessed in these
15 very terms.
16 Q. The houses and the buildings that you photographed, were you able
17 to tell what type of materials these buildings were made of? Was it -- in
18 other words, was it brick or wood?
19 A. Once we completed the work that we were doing initially, no. But
20 after we had seen a number of different buildings, we reached the
21 conclusion that there were, in our assessment, three different types of
22 buildings in the area. The first type would be buildings built on stone,
23 on a stone surface, partially adobe and mud. Part of the building would
24 be made in brick with a special structure between the two floors. And
25 some of the buildings were relatively new, reinforced concrete and brick.
1 Q. Did you go inside any of the buildings?
2 A. Yes, some.
3 Q. And do you recall what you observed from the inside of some of
4 those buildings?
5 MR. JONES: We need to know which ones, I think.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: But also, what are you referring to? Because it's
7 so generic.
8 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I'll get back to that question at
9 the appropriate time.
10 Q. Were the photographs developed at some point? And could you tell
11 us how long after you took the photos were they developed?
12 A. All the photographs we took from the very beginning, the first job
13 we did between day one and day ten, the film rolls were developed after
14 ten days of work. This was due to the fact that we did not have the
15 technology needed in the area in which we worked. However, once this had
16 been done, it constituted a very good basis for our further work.
17 Therefore, at a later stage, it was no problem for us to piece the whole
18 thing together.
19 Q. Now, during the photographing process, could you tell us, just
20 generally, how you went about taking the photograph? Did you take -- what
21 was your aim? And was it necessary at any point to examine the inside of
22 any of the structures that you photographed?
23 A. Our aim was - excuse me - to photograph as many buildings as
24 possible as part of this project, but the aim was to photograph them in
25 such a way as to get a general view, to try to take in the whole building.
1 We would have loved, of course, had we only been able to, to take
2 photographs from all the different angles so that one could get an idea of
3 the entire building, as well as to take photographs of the interior. At
4 the time, however, in view of the scope of the whole task in this specific
5 area, as well as in many other areas in which we worked, it would have
6 taken an enormous amount of time. Therefore, we decided to stick to the
7 most basic kind of photograph, which is the general view, and what we have
8 is what you can see in photographs of that kind.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, because sometime, a few minutes ago or a
10 few seconds ago, you did agree with Ms. Richardson that there were some
11 instances in which you did enter into the house and took photos inside the
12 house. What made you choose these houses in which you entered to take
13 photos from the inside and not others?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I must enter a correction here, I'm
15 afraid. I did go into houses but I did not take any photographs. Now,
16 this is the one correction that I'm afraid I'll have to make.
17 Now, why did we enter certain houses and not others? We entered
18 those houses where it constituted no problem at all. We were able to do
19 it in passing, to just enter and get a general impression on the state of
20 the building. We did not have any reasons that were particularly
21 important for us that led us to actually enter these houses.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: In other words, part of your assignment did not
23 include you entering the houses to try and establish what could have
24 caused the fire or the damage; that was not part of the assignment. Your
25 assignment was basically to record, for posterity and for history, the
1 condition of the house, or the houses, or the property, as it appeared to
2 you at the moment you were taking the photo.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You mentioned that we were recording
4 this for posterity. That is one of the elements of our work. However,
5 the fundamental objective was the following: Someone files a claim for
6 damages for compensation. Our records would then form part and parcel of
7 their claim. That is why we could not go into these buildings, or even
8 try to define the total extent of damage. And this is something that we,
9 at the time, advised the local authorities on.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you.
11 Yes, Ms. Richardson, you've got two minutes before we break.
12 Choose the appropriate time for you.
13 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I can ask one question before the
14 break ends.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
16 MS. RICHARDSON:
17 Q. Mr. Jankovic, at some point did you prepare a report memorialising
18 your work and what you had -- the work you had conducted on behalf of the
20 A. Yes. Once our job was done -- we had taken notes, of course. And
21 then once all of our work was done in the area, we drew up a report,
22 including whatever we could, the nature of our work in the area, the
23 specific buildings that had sustained damage, and so on and so forth. I
24 think the report was written in late September or October. It is dated
25 September, but the data were being gathered over quite an extended period
1 of time. And it finally came out in October, I believe.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, at this time I think it would be
4 appropriate to take a break.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I thank you, Ms. Richardson. We'll have a
6 break of 25 minutes. Thank you.
7 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
8 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Richardson, you may proceed.
10 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Q. Mr. Jankovic, before the break, we were discussing -- you were
12 testifying about your report, and that you had documented your findings
13 and what you had photographed of the various villages, as requested by the
15 Now, as part of that report, did you prepare a table as well,
16 showing the villages, the houses, as well as the person who identified the
17 house to you, and that this table comprised your report as well?
18 A. Yes, we compiled a table. The table was separate; however, it was
19 attached to the report as a part of the report.
20 MS. RICHARDSON: At this time, I'd ask the usher's assistance in
21 handing the witness this document.
22 Q. If you could just confirm that the first page is, indeed, your
23 report, which summarises what -- the work that you did in Eastern Bosnia
24 on behalf of the committee.
25 A. Yes, that's the first page.
1 Q. The second page indicates the damage to the various facilities in
2 different villages.
3 A. Yes, that's right.
4 Q. And towards the end, there is a table overview of the documented
5 facilities burned and destroyed during 1992 to 1993, at least that's what
6 it says as part of that page, at the top of the page. It also lists, in
7 the first column, the album number which corresponds to the village and
8 the photographs. Would that be correct? I'm not sure you're looking at
9 the right page.
10 A. Yes. I'm looking at page 3, marked 01088658, and on that page,
11 you see marked houses which were not privately owned. And these buildings
12 are marked by their names. These are schools, monuments, and so on,
13 socially-owned facilities.
14 Q. If you could give your attention to the usher for a moment, I'd
15 have her place on the ELMO document with ERN 03599095, that is the B/C/S
16 version. And if you could just take a look at that particular page
17 and --
18 MS. RICHARDSON: Please, if you could put it on the ELMO for the
19 witness. Okay. Just a moment, Your Honour. If I could just hand the
20 usher my copy for the record. Again, for the record, it's ERN 03 -- I
21 apologise. I'll repeat. That's the B/C/S version of the table.
22 Q. And Mr. Jankovic, if you could just give your attention to the
23 ELMO. All right. And is that the table that you referred to that
24 illustrates the album number, the various villages, the buildings, and
25 apartments, school, if there was one, industry and health care, if there
1 was one, church and property and monuments, the photo numbers of the
2 facility, as well as the information on who provided the owner of the
3 particular structure that you photographed?
4 A. In this table that we can see here, there are figures pertaining
5 to the number of houses, number of socially-owned buildings, and also the
6 photograph numbers, which is in the penultimate column. In the last
7 column are the guides, the names of the guides who told us who the owners
8 of certain houses were.
9 Q. And this table also was part of your report.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Now, for instance, in Jezestica, it indicates that there were
12 42 -- the number 42. And that number, if you could confirm, represents
13 the number of houses that you photographed.
14 A. Yes, the number of houses, so that means that there were 42 houses
15 in that place.
16 Q. Right. There were 42 houses that you photographed, but there were
17 not 42 houses in the village of Jezestica, were there? Or does this
18 number only represent the buildings you photographed?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And the -- this number 42 does not represent all of the houses
21 that were damaged in Jezestica but only the ones you photographed. And
22 you said before, those were the ones that a local person provided
23 information on the ownership.
24 A. Yes, that's correct. Ostojic Dusan, in Jezestica, was our guide
25 who told us about the owners of 42 houses documented here. As for the
1 others, I don't know. I don't know how many additional houses, in
2 addition to the 42, there are.
3 Q. Just for clarification, the same is true with respect to all of
4 the villages that you were able to photograph, their structures, in that,
5 for instance, number 2, in album number 2, Kravica, you list 48 houses.
6 Now, that doesn't represent the total number of houses in Kravica but only
7 the photographs that you took.
8 A. Yes, I suppose that these are not all of the houses. And the same
9 goes for all other hamlets that I see in front of me right now. In some
10 places, the number included every house, but in some places it did not.
11 And I don't have any more detailed knowledge of it right now.
12 Q. All right, thank you. Next, I would -- that's all with respect to
13 this particular document for now.
14 MS. RICHARDSON: I thank the usher for her assistance.
15 Q. Now, in addition to the --
16 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Ms. Richardson --
17 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: -- because we need to log this, this it a number.
19 You're tendering it, I suppose?
20 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour, I am tendering this.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Because it is indispensable as part of your
22 evidence. So this will be P?
23 THE REGISTRAR: 487, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: 487. Thank you.
25 MS. RICHARDSON:
1 Q. Now, Mr. Jankovic, as part of your report, and as part of the work
2 that you conducted, maps were prepared by yourself and Mr. Djurdumovic; is
3 that correct?
4 And with respect to the report that was just shown to you,
5 Prosecution's Exhibit P487, you both authored this report; is that
7 A. Yes, that's correct.
8 Q. And just one point with respect to your report, something that I'd
9 like to point out. This report and the facilities that you photographed
10 only represented about 75 per cent of the facilities in the area, of the
11 various villages that you conducted your work in.
12 A. Yes. In that report, we wrote down that it was 75 per cent. It
13 seemed like a good estimate at the time when we composed it.
14 Q. Next, I'd like to turn your attention to the maps that were
16 MS. RICHARDSON: And I'd ask the usher's assistance in handing
17 this document - it's a map - to the witness. The document itself is a
18 map. There are two pages. One is the map. The second page has
19 signatures on it. So I'd like the witness to be shown the map. The
20 additional page that's provided is the translation of the map, just for
21 ease of -- just for Your Honours' benefit and everyone else's.
22 Q. If you could take a look at this map, Mr. Jankovic --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Can we have it also placed on the ELMO,
25 MS. RICHARDSON:
1 Q. If you could place it on the ELMO, with the usher's assistance.
2 Mr. Jankovic, is this the map that you prepared? And tell us what this
3 map -- what it represented in this map. And you can start with reading
4 the top portion of the map so that we'll have it for the record.
5 A. In the upper portion of the map, it says "Committee for Gathering
6 Data on Crimes Against Humanity and International Law, the Map of Central
7 Drina River Area, East Bosnia." And then it says "Information on Houses
8 Burnt Down and Destroyed," and then it gives the dates. This map was
9 compiled by Zvonko Djurdumovic, and I assisted him, to a certain extent.
10 Q. Okay, and there is also a scale on this map, as well?
11 A. Yes, that's right. You can see the scale.
12 Q. Now, the lower left-hand map of the key has a key. And if you
13 could just read out what that key states, the symbols as well as the
15 A. I can't see them very clearly. There is a symbol for municipal
16 centre. When the title was given to the map, it was given in general
17 terms, and the term used was "Kravica"; however, the area covered is much
18 wider. And then it says "Destroyed and Burned Places, Buildings,
19 Facilities," and so on, and the photo number within the documentation. So
20 here in this key, you can see what is shown on the map.
21 Q. All right. Perhaps it would be easier for you to look at the
22 document itself on the ELMO and not look at the screen. And if you could
23 point to the key, is that easier for you to read. On the ELMO itself,
24 look at the hard copy of the document.
25 A. Yes, I've already read it, as the usher was able to zoom in.
1 Q. Okay. Well, let's do this: This dot with the circle, does it
2 represent the municipal centres?
3 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we don't need him to repeat that. He's
4 explained it already.
5 MS. RICHARDSON: All right. That's fine, Your Honour. I can move
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
8 MS. RICHARDSON:
9 Q. Now, you also indicated that -- if we could -- if you could -- if
10 we could have a zoom-in on the Bratunac area on the map. Just by way of
11 example, you said there are numbers there, and those numbers represent the
12 houses from the various villages; is that correct?
13 A. Yes, I will explain that. Each circle on the map represents a
14 house, and each number depicted here stands for just one house. In
15 certain cases, which we explained previously, if several houses are marked
16 with one number, then this is indicated. Since the map corresponds to the
17 photo documentation, it is very easy to establish which number represents
18 what house.
19 Q. And this was basically the same procedure for all of the villages
20 and the municipalities.
21 A. Identical, yes.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MS. RICHARDSON: All right. At this time I would tender this
24 document, and if we could have a number assigned.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: So this document is being tendered and received in
1 evidence and marked as Prosecution Exhibit P488.
2 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Your Honour. I would --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: I hear no objections from the Defence bench. I take
4 it that there are none for the time being.
5 MR. JONES: Well, we have a point about the title, but it's a
6 matter I'll raise in cross-examination.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, okay. Thank you.
8 MS. RICHARDSON: And if I could have the usher's assistance with
9 one more document, if this could be shown to the witness.
10 Q. Now, Mr. Jankovic, could you take a look at this document. For
11 the record 0108733, that's the ERN number. Now, this is another map, and
12 was this also prepared for -- in connection with the work that you were
13 conducting? And could you tell us if this is similar to the first map we
14 just -- you just testified about?
15 A. This map that we're looking at now is practically a part of the
16 previous map that we have just seen, and it is an integral part of the
17 documentation but only for this limited area marked in red. All photo
18 documentation has individual maps as integral parts of it with photographs
19 taken and processed in that hamlet or in that place. However, all of that
20 together is a part of the comprehensive map, and all of these maps were
21 done in the same scale.
22 Q. Now, this --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, because, Ms. Richardson, this calls for
24 an explanation.
25 I notice, looking at the legend, that the damaged or destroyed
1 property is the one coloured in red. And in fact, I remember, I recall,
2 looking at the -- not the last document but the previous one, that in
3 Jezestica, for example, you had indicated that there were 42 private homes
4 that had been destroyed and one public building that had suffered damage.
5 So here you are -- you find 43 buildings that are marked in red because
6 they had sustained some damage. But I also see that in this map, there
7 are many other dotted places, and the number reaches up to 167. The other
8 buildings that are not -- that are not in red, do we take it that these
9 buildings you did not -- you simply did not photograph, or do we also take
10 it that these buildings were not damaged? What is the position? What are
11 we supposed to understand when we look at this map and we see 43 buildings
12 coloured in red and 124 buildings shown on the map but not coloured?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If it's of any assistance, if it's
14 any assistance, what do the numbers marked in red mean? The numbers
15 marked in red refer to one photo file. The remaining numbers that you can
16 see in this section of the plan, of the map, will reappear marked in red
17 in the following photo file. And every single location on this map will
18 have its own documents.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Precisely what I had imagined it would be, but it --
20 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour, I was going to get to that
21 point. Thank you for covering it.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I'm sorry to have preempted your efforts.
23 MS. RICHARDSON: Not at all, Your Honour. I do appreciate --
24 JUDGE AGIUS: But I think it was important, because you only have
25 this one, and I know that there are others, because we have seen others.
1 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes. I appreciate it, Your Honour, thank you.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: This will be marked P489. Thank you.
3 MS. RICHARDSON:
4 Q. Now, Mr. Jankovic, you -- the photographs that you took in Bosnia,
5 in 1994, you had an opportunity to view these photographs after they were
6 developed; is that correct?
7 A. Certainly.
8 Q. And you viewed these photographs in the Office of the Prosecution,
9 and they were also shown to you by an investigator.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. These were the photographs that you took of the various villages
12 as part of the work that you performed for the committee.
13 A. Yes, I confirm that.
14 Q. And those photographs -- the structures in those photographs
15 appeared to you as they did when you photographed them in 1994.
16 A. Yes.
17 MS. RICHARDSON: Now, Your Honour, I would like the usher's
18 assistance. We will hand out a sample of those photographs that were
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
21 MS. RICHARDSON: And with the usher's assistance, if we could have
22 the photographs placed on the ELMO, one by one.
23 Q. Mr. Jankovic, I'd ask you to take a look at that photograph, ERN
24 010870 -- I'm sorry, 010878038. Also shown in that photograph is
25 01087839. The first photograph that you're viewing, is this a photograph
1 that you took?
2 A. Yes, I took this. It's part of the files. On the face of it, I
3 can't really say which group or which area this belongs to, since it's not
4 part of the group as we see it here. But yes, essentially these are the
6 Q. Could you tell us, in this first photograph, if you could, in your
7 opinion, tell us what you recognise as damage to this structure.
8 A. By a purely visual inspection, I can see damage above one of the
9 windows. There's a blackening. You can see this black patch, a darkening
10 of the wall. I must say, though, that these photographs are copies. The
11 ideal thing would be to look at the originals, obviously. But you can see
12 this darkening here, this blot. Looking at this copy, it may be rather
13 difficult for you to distinguish, but I do have an idea about what it
14 might be.
15 Q. All right. Could you tell us what it might be? And could you
16 point to the area that you're referring to on the photograph.
17 A. This is a general impression and not a very specific impression.
18 As you can see, this house has no windows or doors, so this may be a
19 result of a fire inside the building, this building or a privately-owned
20 house, as I prefer to define it.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. The same applies to this other section. It is my assumption, but
23 I am, in fact, positive about it, the entrance to the lower level of this
24 house is, again, reflected in a darkening. Again, I must point out that
25 this is a copy. The section just above the door, or below the first floor
1 landing, the steps -- the stairs leading to the first floor of the house.
2 Q. In your opinion, would you say that this fire was started from
3 inside the house? And could you say if it was started by a grenade or
4 anything else?
5 JUDGE AGIUS: How can he --
6 MR. JONES: That was our objection.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: This is where we will stop you. It's even unfair to
8 ask the witness this question two years, almost two years after the event.
9 And, I mean, it's not that big a deal if you ask him whether he thinks
10 that the fire started from inside. I mean, there are no signs in the
11 photo that there was a fire outside in any case. But to ask him whether
12 that fire was precisely and particularly and specifically caused by a
13 grenade, I mean it's --
14 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I can take your point --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: I am sure that he himself will not answer that
16 question, or will try to avoid answering that question.
17 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I take your point with respect to
18 grenade -- the grenade. But -- however, I think the witness can answer
19 if -- based on his experience, whether, two years later, he can say
20 anything with respect to the damage of the house. And I think that's a
21 fairly -- that's a fair question, his experience of two years later --
22 MR. JONES: Your Honour --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: This is why I put some questions earlier on, because
24 precisely the witness has already stated or told us what his task was.
25 His task was to record the -- at face value, the damage that he could
1 visualise, moving from one house or from one building to the other, so
2 that then, those photos could serve a purpose later on, be it for
3 historical, be it for possible claims of damages, be it for possible
4 compensation, and so on and so forth.
5 Yes, Mr. Jones.
6 MR. JONES: Yes. Well, Your Honour, mostly I'd respectfully adopt
7 everything Your Honour has just said. Two points, really. My learned
8 friend doesn't seem to have taken on board the fact that if we're asking
9 this witness to give an opinion based on experience, that's expertise,
10 that's one of the characteristics of an expert. Based on his experience,
11 he gives an opinion which the layman might not be able to provide. And
12 he's not an expert. If he were an expert, we would have 94 bis and also
13 some other problems.
14 As far as anything which can conclude on the basis of the
15 photograph is concerned, we can draw the same conclusions. And that's why
16 the exercise is futile. Because if all he's to say is, Well there's a
17 blackening above the door or window, well, we can see that. And the
18 exercise will become very protracted because I will have to go through all
19 these photographs myself and make observations about holes in roofs and
20 things like that, which also have --
21 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: The only exercise that would make sense, but, again,
23 I'm -- I'm prepared to discuss this with everyone here --
24 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: -- and go through the whole exercise if necessary.
1 But if a witness comes forward and says, Well, I saw this house being set
2 on fire on such and such a date by means of hand grenades that were thrown
3 into the building, and then you ask the witness whether that would be
4 compatible with what he visualised two years later, I mean that is okay.
5 But, again, we have got the passage of time, two years later, and in the
6 absence of that much evidence put in place, I mean, you're still operating
7 in a huge vacuum here, because in two years' time -- in two years anything
8 could have happened. In two years, it could have been set on fire again,
9 it could have been further destroyed, it could have been -- anything could
10 have happened.
11 MS. RICHARDSON: Well, Your Honour --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: So I will leave it -- I would just like to hear what
13 the witness has to say about this, because he is a professional man. I
14 mean, the moment he started giving evidence, you can see that he is a
15 highly trained and a very professional -- a very professional man.
16 I mean, are you prepared to, while you're sitting there and
17 answering questions, tell us how this fire came to be, what caused the
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The first reason that,
20 professionally speaking, I would not put myself in that position is
21 precisely what you have just spoken about. A lot of time has gone by
22 since. Of course, it may have occurred at any given point in time
23 throughout that period. It is certainly not my place to specify the day.
24 From a professional point of view, it would be very difficult for me. If
25 Your Honours insist on my opinion, I could, perhaps, provide it, but it
1 would be extremely difficult.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: There you are, Ms. Richardson.
3 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, if I may just respond briefly. I am
4 aware, and the point is taken, that it was two years after the fact, and
5 anything could have happened during that period of time. However, we have
6 heard testimonies -- testimony from various witnesses who either observed
7 their houses being set on fire, or who -- going through the village. So
8 that is the link, Your Honour. This witness is simply here who sought --
9 person saw the structure, who took the photograph, who documented the
10 damage to the structure. And I take issue with counsel who states that,
11 asking the witness, in his experience. We've had witnesses here who've
12 been repeatedly asked about their experience and what caused the damage,
13 and it was not a problem then. I only asked this of this witness because
14 he does have experience in investigating crime scenes, and if he could
15 tell us, two years later, what he was able to determine, looking at the
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Two years, this is precisely why I won't allow you
18 to ask the question. Because I know that asking the witness to explain,
19 on the basis of a photograph, or on the basis of what he could see
20 visually on the spot, what had caused a fire -- the fire two years
21 earlier, you're even being specific. You're telling him when the fire --
22 I mean, how can he know when the place was set on fire or when the
23 explosion took place? He doesn't know --
24 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: -- he wasn't there when it happened.
1 MS. RICHARDSON: Your --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: You have got the other witnesses. Stick to
3 those. And with this witness, you just ask him to confirm that this is a
4 photo he took, and that it showed at the time soot or blackening which is
5 indicative that there was a fire at some point in time inside the
7 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I will withdraw my question with
8 respect to the grenade and what caused the fire. Your point is noted.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Let's move, Ms. Richardson.
10 MS. RICHARDSON: I would ask the usher to show the witness the
11 next -- the photo of the houses on the next page, which is 01087840.
12 Q. And again, ask Mr. Jankovic if you recognise this photograph, one
13 of the photographs that you took as part of the project. And could you
14 tell us what damage you see to the house from the photograph, and what you
16 A. Yes, these are the photographs I took.
17 Q. And do you see any damage to the house which would indicate that
18 there was a fire?
19 A. The same applies as to the previous photograph. The damage to
20 this house can be clearly seen. It should be easy enough for a layman,
21 and even easier for a person like me. Now, when did this damage come
22 about, and what caused it? This is not something that I can say.
23 Q. Clearly, and that's not my question. I'm simply asking if you're
24 able to recognise from this photograph that there was a fire. And could
25 you tell us if this fire was started from the inside, in your opinion?
1 A. The same applies as to the previous series of photographs. There
2 is no substantial damage on the outside. These blackenings, the dark
3 spots or patches that you can see, are clearly a result of something that
4 occurred inside the house. That would be my answer.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. And I think, Ms. Richardson, the witness is
6 teaching us all a lesson. How can you expect Mr. Jankovic to tell us,
7 answering your question, whether the fire was started from inside? It
8 will take an expert to come to that conclusion. And the witness has told
9 us that there were very few houses in which he actually went in, and he
10 didn't go into those houses to establish whether the fire or the damage
11 had started from inside. How can he do it two years after the fact? It
12 could have started outside, moved into inside, and what we see here is the
13 result of the fire that was happening at some point in time on the inside.
14 But it's not necessarily that it was started inside.
15 MS. RICHARDSON: Well, Your Honour, perhaps we can go --
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment before you answer.
18 Judge Eser.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's have a short break of about five minutes.
21 Thank you.
22 --- Break taken at 11.40 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 11.45 a.m.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Thank you. Let's proceed.
25 Mr. Jankovic, while we are going through some of these
1 photographs, I suppose -- don't think we're going through the entire --
2 MS. RICHARDSON: No, Your Honour, it's just a sample.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: If there are any remarks or comments that you would
4 like to make with regard to any particular photo that you are being asked
5 questions about, please go ahead. I mean, don't wait for questions.
6 THE WITNESS: Okay.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: For example, let me give you an idea. If, say,
8 looking at, I don't know, the photo -- the fourth photo on the second
9 page, the one in the bottom, you see blackening outside the left-hand
10 window or veranda door and you think that that blackening is not the
11 result of fire -- no, the bottom one, the second page. It's S1-5, number
12 5, photograph number 5. If you, for example -- that blackening above the
13 left-hand door or window at first-floor level, according to you, is not
14 the result of fire but is the result of, for example, mold or something
15 else that could have blackened the appearance of the building, then, of
16 course, please do point out that to us. In other words, if there is
17 something that we may mistake for signs of fire which are not signs of
18 fire but the signs of something else, then do let us know, please.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Let us focus on the photographs, or
20 rather, by photographs alone, it would be difficult to establish what
21 caused the damage. However, I was present there, I saw all of this with
22 my own eyes. I took pictures of it, and now I comment on these pictures.
23 So now I am giving you my impression from that time. So if we take this
24 approach, then this photograph marked 5, and the one marked 4, I can say a
25 very similar thing: Some have black marks, some have floors that have
1 completely burnt down, but since these are brick structures, I can say
2 that if we were to disregard shadows that can be seen in certain
3 photographs, depending on what time of the day the picture was taken -
4 sometimes we took pictures in the morning, sometimes in the evening - so
5 if we were to disregard the shadows, then we would still be able to see
6 some details that I can give you my opinion of.
7 I hope this is clear. These are the black marks that can come
8 about as a result of a fire.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. If there are black marks on any photo
10 that you think may not or could not be the result of fire, then please do
11 indicate those to us so that we will be aware of them. Because we are not
12 experts like you are, and as you said, after all, you are the one who took
13 these photos, and you were on site when you took them.
14 Yes, Ms. Richardson. I'm making your life difficult this
16 MS. RICHARDSON: No, not at all, Your Honour. I appreciate your
18 If I could have the usher turn to the next two photographs, 10 and
19 11, and that is ERN number 01087846 and 01087847. Now, again, these are
20 not the originals, and they are photocopied.
21 Q. And I'd appreciate, Mr. Jankovic, your impressions, as you're
22 looking through the photographs, as well as going back to your memory, as
23 to what you observed on these two structures.
24 A. I want to be sure that you understand my evidence properly. The
25 photograph marked with number 10, we keep referring to these black marks
1 which are a result of the movement of the smoke, not necessarily the fire
2 itself, just the way that smoke moved. But we already said that we are
3 not going to comment on the causes of fire. But here, above this small
4 window, and here, by the entrance, which is an entrance into the house,
5 you can see black marks.
6 As I've said, this is something that you will see in numerous
7 pictures which are part of this photo file.
8 The same can be said of the photograph marked with number 11.
9 However, even on this picture -- looking at this picture, it is difficult
10 to give a comment.
11 Q. Now, with respect to photograph number 10, it appears, and you can
12 correct me if I'm wrong, this -- could you tell us about this particular
13 structure. It appears as though the roof on this structure is undamaged,
14 and could you tell us a little bit about that, and whether you recall the
15 condition of this roof when you took the picture.
16 A. I cannot remember this house specifically. However, in certain
17 houses, in certain cases, the owners, in order to preserve the house, to
18 prevent any further deterioration, rebuilt just the roofs on their houses
19 and prevented further damage. This is one of such cases. In some other
20 pictures, if you zoom in, you will be able to see that the roofs are newly
22 Q. Thank you. Now, the next set of photographs, 16, 17, ERN number
23 01087852 and 853. Looking at these two photographs, could you tell us
24 what are your impressions with respect to these photographs, and anything
25 that you observed on that day, whether there was any damage caused by fire
1 or anything else. And also, if you could tell us what types of structures
2 these two -- these two buildings are made of. Is it brick, wood, or
3 anything -- other type of material?
4 A. This house belongs to the second group. As I've told you
5 initially, there were three groups of buildings, and this house would
6 belong to the second group. It was built of brick, and the construction
7 in between the floors was built out of wood, so in a somewhat different
8 way than the houses built of reinforced concrete. Normally, in such
9 cases, only the walls remained. Everything else that was constructed
10 simply deteriorated and was destroyed and collapsed in a pile inside the
11 house. So if you stood next to the house, even without entering the
12 house, you would be able to see this construction material, wood piled in
13 the middle of the house. I couldn't tell you how many such houses there
15 Q. And you said this wood that would be in the middle of the house as
16 a result, could you -- do you recall if there was any indications of a
18 A. In cases such as this, where lime was used, the water washed it
19 out to such an extent that it was impossible to say even then, let alone
20 now based on the photographs, what exactly had caused it. There was so
21 much water damage, and so much was washed out by water, that even plants
22 started growing inside the houses.
23 Q. All right. If you could turn to the next two photographs, and if
24 there's anything specific that you'd like to indicate regarding these two
25 structures. In fact, I think the second one, ERN 01087861, I think, we
1 can leave out. Just the first structure, which is 01087860. If you could
2 comment on that structure, and if you recall if there were any indications
3 of fire that you remember.
4 A. As you can see, the owners of these houses who came to visit their
5 homes cleaned the area so that the construction material which had caved
6 in was now taken to the middle of the house. This house belongs to the
7 same category as the previous one, and it is very difficult now to say
8 what exactly had caused the house to look as it looks nowadays.
9 Q. All right. If you could turn to the next photograph, and
10 specifically the photograph at the bottom of the page, ERN 01087867. Now,
11 you took this photograph of this structure. Could you tell us why this
12 photograph was taken, and whether you had any impressions at the time.
13 A. If you are referring to photograph 131 --
14 Q. Yes, I am.
15 A. This house and similar, unfinished houses were photographed
16 because, in certain cases, it was obvious that the construction material
17 had been hauled away; windows, doors, even roof construction. I couldn't
18 tell you now who had taken it. However, this is what the guides told us.
19 Therefore, houses such as this one were photographed, although there were
20 not that many of them.
21 Q. And of those houses where you said the materials had been taken
22 away, was there any indication that you recall, I know -- I don't think we
23 have a photograph of that example that you're giving, but was any
24 indication of fire of those structures, even though it was apparent that
25 people had taken some of the material away? If you recall.
1 A. No. In this particular case, in this photograph, there was no
3 Q. All right. Let's look at the next couple of photographs, 01087870
4 and 871, specifically focusing on 870. Could you tell us what your
5 impressions are, at that time and now, of the damage to this particular
7 A. Now, just as then, we can see that this house had been fired upon.
8 I don't know what certain units at the time used as weapons. However,
9 what we can see now is that part of the roof has caved in. There's damage
10 to the windows and walls. But I couldn't tell you more about the specific
11 weapon used.
12 Q. All right. And the next set of photographs, 010 --
13 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
14 MS. RICHARDSON: Sorry.
15 Q. The next set of photographs we'll look at, 01087874 and 875.
16 Could you tell us what your impressions were of these two structures, and
17 if there were any indications of a fire or anything else.
18 A. As in previous cases, we can see -- or rather, as in the previous
19 case, we can see here, in these two photographs -- I can tell you that my
20 assumption is that the damage here is identical to the one we saw in
21 photograph 131, naturally, without the fire.
22 Q. Now, turning to the next two photographs, 01087995, just focusing
23 on that particular area. Now, there's no house there. Could you tell us
24 what your impressions were at that time of whatever is left of, I assume,
25 a house, at one point.
1 A. This house, marked 140, belongs to the third group of houses, in
2 the construction of which, mud, hay, and solid construction material was
3 used. The foundation was made out of stone, and everything that was used
4 between the storeys was termed light construction material. In this case,
5 this is all that remained, just a pile of dirt covered by weeds.
6 The house marked 141 is a house that was also fired upon. I
7 couldn't be more specific as to the weapon from which they fired. The
8 damage is great. There was no fire here, but you can see what damage was
9 caused to this house built of reinforced concrete.
10 Q. Okay.
11 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I will not go through all of the
12 photographs. I'll just select the remaining few.
13 Q. If you could take a look at number 176, ERN 01088038, and tell us
14 what your impressions are with respect to the structure we're seeing.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, because you said, according, at least,
16 to the transcript that I have here, is photograph 176, ERN 038. What we
17 have on the screen is 176. All right, but that is not 037 -- not 038 but
19 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: So I don't know which one you want to show --
21 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, it's 037, Your Honour, the first photograph.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, thank you.
23 MS. RICHARDSON:
24 Q. Sir if you could just look at this structure and tell us what your
25 impressions were of the damage to this structure.
1 A. This photograph is marked 176. This is an old building with brick
2 used here, no reinforced concrete. Looking at this photograph, and
3 bearing in mind at the same time what I saw on the spot, on some of the
4 buildings, you can see small spots which is the form of damage to the wall
5 of this house. If you expect me to base my judgement on this photograph
6 only, it could be interpreted in any number of ways. However, since I
7 personally looked at these buildings on the ground, I could tell that
8 these are pockmarks, because the walls were hit by missiles. My
9 conclusion at the time was that there had been fighting going on in the
10 area and around these houses, but nothing more specific than that.
11 Q. All right.
12 MS. RICHARDSON: Just a moment, Your Honour.
13 Q. If you could look at this last photograph that I'll be showing you
14 for now, that is, ERN 01088470, it's marked as photograph number 603. Do
15 you recall this particular -- I believe it was at one point a house. Do
16 you recall taking this photograph and visiting this particular structure?
17 A. I can't remember specifically. My memory can hardly be expected
18 to be that good, in view of the total number of buildings under
19 consideration. But this other one, I think this is the building that we
20 spoke about a moment ago, a mud and straw building. It is quite ruined.
21 This section you can see over here, what remains of the house was used as
22 some sort of a larder, a pantry, or even as a barn, to keep cattle. And
23 then above was this house made of mud, straw, and wooden beams, that I
24 described a moment ago.
25 Q. Could you -- do you recall seeing any evidence of a fire with
1 respect to this structure when you visited it?
2 A. In buildings of this type, that is something that is impossible to
4 Q. All right. Thank you.
5 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Madam Usher, for your assistance.
6 Your Honour, at this time, and Mr. Jankovic, at this time, the
7 Prosecution would seek to tender the photographs taken by Mr. Jankovic,
8 and that is ERN 0107832, 01087879 to 0108847-- 447, 0108-8 --
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Go slower, please, because I don't want mistakes to
10 be made, or to appear in the transcript.
11 MS. RICHARDSON: Specifically, Your Honour, just for
12 clarification, I'll repeat the ERN numbers.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, please.
14 MS. RICHARDSON: Just for clarification, the photographs that we
15 are now tendering were the photographs taken by Mr. Jankovic with all of
16 the markings as were originally made to the photographs. They are very
17 different from the ones that were used by the witnesses where we took out
18 the information that was put in by Mr. Jankovic. So at this point, we're
19 seeking to tender that whole range of photographs taken by Mr. Jankovic as
20 part of the project, and that -- those photographs are contained, as well
21 as the map of each village, and that is specifically ERN number ERN
22 010-7832 --
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, I guess this is already in as P489.
24 MS. RICHARDSON: Just a moment, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: I think this is all going to be very much confusing.
1 [Prosecution counsel confer]
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Richardson, you have used this bundle of
3 photographs --
4 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: -- which is only an infinitesimal, small part of the
7 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: But this is what you relied upon not even totally
9 when examining this witness. Why don't you signal this set of photos
10 separately as the photos out of which you used some when examining the
11 witness, and present it, or file it, tender it, as just one new document,
12 irrespective of the fact that some of these photos we have seen during
13 other -- testimony of other persons, and some we'll probably see during
14 the testimony of persons that have still got to come, I don't know. But
15 you can select this as the specimen that you used for the purpose of this
16 witness only, and tender it as an exhibit.
17 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, that's a good idea. So at this
18 point, I'd like to tender this group of photographs that were used during
19 the testimony of Mr. Jankovic, and I believe the ERN number's already in
20 the record.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
22 MS. RICHARDSON: Now, there is an additional -- I just need a
23 minute to discuss with my case manager, Your Honour, the tendering of
24 other photographs.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
1 [Prosecution counsel confer]
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Gerold, can you count the photographs.
3 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
4 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, thank you, Your Honour. At this time --
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the number will be P4 --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Just a moment, because I do not know whether
7 Ms. Richardson agrees with this or not.
8 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I do agree with placing into
9 evidence the photographs that were used by Mr. Jankovic -- with
10 Mr. Jankovic during his testimony. What we also have, his entire file, of
11 all of the photographs, and we will submit that as well, and I believe
12 that can be 365 point --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: So let's start with this first. For the record, the
14 Prosecution is tendering as Exhibit P489?
15 THE REGISTRAR: P490.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: 490, 38 photographs contained in 19 pages, with a
17 non-sequential ERN numbering; this being the specimen that she used during
18 the examination-in-chief of Witness Jankovic, Dragan. Jankovic Dragan.
19 Yes, now you may proceed with the rest. And there is -- I suppose
20 there shouldn't be any problems forthcoming from the Defence. The
21 Prosecution is, from what I can see, offering to tender these photos in
22 electronic format.
23 MR. JONES: Yes, that's fine with us.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay, all right.
25 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you. With respect to the other exhibits,
1 previously tendered on January 10th, we have copies of the photographs,
2 and these are without captions that were used with our witnesses. And
3 this is Prosecution Exhibit 365.1.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Can you give it to me, usher, please.
5 MS. RICHARDSON: All right. The clarification -- I believe
6 there's a clarification. This is an entire set of the photographs. Some
7 were used -- some of the -- some of the photographs were used with our
8 witnesses, but this is the entire set, without captions.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: So this, I take it, is a replication of what we
10 should already have in the record, because it shows P365 here. Has P365
11 been tendered already, or has it just been prenumbered but not tendered
13 MS. RICHARDSON: Just a moment, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: We'll need the represent of the case managers here
15 and the registrar. Do you have P365 on record already? Yes, please go
16 ahead. Your microphone, registrar, please.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, it was on the 15th of October, 2004.
18 The Prosecutor submitted a set of photographs which was marked as P365,
19 but it was marked only for identification on the very day. This set of
20 photographs contained comments and therefore the Trial Chamber asked the
21 Prosecutor to tender another clean set of documents and to substitute the
22 provision. So on the 22nd of October, the Prosecutor tendered a clean
23 version, and this clean version substituted, then, the old versions. The
24 old versions were taken out of the record, and this new set got the number
25 P365, marked for identification.
1 Then in January, when Witness Manas was here, the Prosecutor
2 sought to add to this P365 additional -- a lot of additional photos, the
3 whole set, but they didn't have all the documents here. Therefore, we put
4 on the record that these additional photographs should be all under P365,
5 and the Prosecutor announced he would provide, in the near future, these
6 additional pictures.
7 Now, I was told informally by the Prosecutor that -- we agreed,
8 actually, that it might be better to keep the old and initial pictures
9 marked for identification as P365, and tender all the -- the whole set as
10 P365.1. And this would be on the CD-ROMs.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that's very well put and also practical.
12 Do the parties agree to that approach?
13 MR. JONES: I think we're happy with that. We may have to check
14 whether we've got ones with captions or without captions --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: These will be without captions, supposedly,
16 according to what the Prosecution is saying.
17 MR. JONES: Okay, well, then, we need to receive that then,
18 because the current one we have has captions --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: That's the old one which supposedly we have already
20 removed from the record, and which the registrar is suggesting that we
21 should get back. And I agree because I don't think it should have been
22 removed in the first place even for purposes of comparison.
23 MR. JONES: It's just that for this witness, I was going to show
24 pictures from the CD, and it was evidently the old ones with captions.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Don't worry. With this witness you can show from --
1 photos from the old --
2 MR. JONES: Thank you.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: That's not a problem.
4 So do you agree with this approach as well?
5 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour, and thank you to the registrar
6 for that very detailed clarification.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. My suggestion goes a little bit beyond
8 what you have stated, Mr. Siller, Mr. Registrar, in that I would prefer to
9 have all three versions put on record. The original, which was tendered
10 for identification, will remain in the record as P365. The next set,
11 which was submitted in replacement of the first one, without the name
12 plates and without indications, will be 365.1. And this new set will be
14 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
15 JUDGE AGIUS: No. I take it from what Ms. Richardson said, that
16 these do not contain comments.
17 MS. RICHARDSON: That's right, Your Honour. Those have no
18 captions. We do have an additional exhibit which contains the captions as
19 well as the maps.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So that can now replace the original
21 365. That can replace the original 365, because it's more complete in
22 the sense that it contains more photos than what you had originally
23 tendered for identification purposes, I take it. I see the case manager
25 MS. RICHARDSON: I just have one clarification that I need to
1 seek, and that is, I know we introduced certain photographs with certain
2 witnesses and those were without the captions. And so I just want to make
3 sure that we keep that record straight with respect to the photographs
4 that were used with certain witnesses, and now we have -- so I guess, in
5 essence, what we will have is exhibits which are in full, a full copy with
6 the captions, a foul copy without the captions, and then exhibits that
7 were used with specific witnesses. I don't know if that, sort of --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: No, then I will keep everything on record. I think
9 it's --
10 MS. RICHARDSON: I'm not sure if I'm making it more complicated.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no, we are not going -- but I don't agree with
12 having a system whereby documents come in the record and then disappear
13 and are substituted. They may be substituted, but they should also remain
14 in the records. So what we will have is the original set tendered for
15 identification which will remain marked as P365. We will have the
16 first -- the set that was tendered subsequently, without the captions,
17 which will be 365.1; right? Then we have this new set that you are
18 tendering now with the captions but with additional photos, and that will
19 be 366. Why not have it 366, as a new -- because the first two would have
20 been the first two batches. Now these are absolutely new. This is the
21 clean sheet that we have. So we'll give it a different number. The
22 "replacement" of 365 would be 366, and the replacement of 365.1 will be
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, it can't be 366 because --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: It's already taken by something else.
1 THE REGISTRAR: -- the numbers --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Okay. So then that batch will be 365.2,
3 and this, the one they gave us a few minutes ago, will be 365.3.
4 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I'm sorry, that's fine with me, and
5 I think my case manager --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Today you are tendering two sets.
7 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: One is a replication of the first set that you had
9 tendered for identification but with the addition of new photos.
10 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. That is going to be 365.2.
12 MS. RICHARDSON: Okay.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: All right? Already we have on the record 365 and
15 MS. RICHARDSON: All right.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: These are old sets that you tendered months ago, or
17 weeks ago. Now we are going to have two sets today. That is one, the
18 first one. That will be 365.2.
19 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: With comments, with captions.
21 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: With captions. And the one without captions will be
23 365.3. And please do say that that contains six CDs.
24 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
25 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I think we inadvertently gave you an
1 extra copy.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: I see, I see, I see. We'll take one each, and I
3 give you four, and you give me one of the others -- three of the others.
4 These need to be marked straightaway. This is three.
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Anything else?
7 MS. RICHARDSON: No, Your Honour. That completes my examination.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, I thank you. I know that this was not
9 easy, but at the same time we tried to take a practical -- as much of a
10 practical approach as possible. It's never easy.
11 MS. RICHARDSON: I appreciate that, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
13 So we will adjourn for today, because I have to start with an
14 initial appearance very soon.
15 Mr. Jankovic, we have to stop here today, and you will return
16 tomorrow. And it should be over within a relatively short time. Then you
17 can return back to your country. I thank you so much.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.29
20 p.m., to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 8th day of
21 February, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.