1 Friday, 2 August 2002

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 8.35 a.m.

5 JUDGE ORIE: For the last time before the recess, I wish good

6 morning to everyone in and around this courtroom and I would like to thank

7 all those who support us for the flexibility to enable to us start at

8 8.30. Madam Registrar, would you please call the case?

9 THE REGISTRAR: Case number IT-98-29-T, the Prosecutor versus

10 Stanislav Galic.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you

12 indicated that you'd like to address the Chamber at 8.30. Please proceed.

13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, thank you

14 very much for having reminded me. What we wanted to point out to you

15 involved two things. Two things and perhaps there will be a third matter

16 later on. But two matters in any event. We wanted to start a 8.30 to

17 allow the Prosecution to develop its position, it might be able to do it.

18 The first point concerns the photograph, the 360-degree photograph,

19 according to the Prosecution's position, according to which something

20 hadn't been calibrated as it should have been, in the so-called GPS

21 procedure, and the statement according to which erroneous figures had been

22 inserted in the device or on occasion were not inserted, as a result we

23 can't rely on the -- we can't consider these photographs to be authentic.

24 And we want to raise this matter. You might modify your decision with

25 regard to each 360-degree photograph because today the Prosecution has

1 provided evidence that the figures are not correct, and as a result, the

2 GPS location is not 100 per cent sure. That's the first matter I wanted

3 to raise.

4 The second matter, Mr. President, is that the Defence knows you

5 have to take many decisions and you have a lot of work. We would simply

6 like to remind you of one matter as far as the second testimony of

7 Dr. Kovacs is concerned, the artillery expert. We have requested that you

8 grant us a delay to present the reasons for which we believe that we could

9 conclude certificate of appeal and could you also provide us with motives

10 which justified the decision to call back Dr. Kovacs, given that we think

11 that the article 94 was violated.

12 JUDGE ORIE: The argument of the Defence is quite clear, a mixed

13 decision, that means a decision both explaining the reasons why we allowed

14 the Prosecution to recall the witness and a decision on the admission into

15 evidence of his report, I think it will be delivered today.

16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. It's only for the

17 sake of the time that we would like to know this, which means,

18 Mr. President, that the seven-day time period would start running as of

19 today, or afterwards?

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 JUDGE ORIE: We will consider that during the first part.

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. There

23 are no other matters, thank you.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, if you wanted to address the Court in

25 respect of Mr. Hinchliffe, I would like to indicate that the Chamber has a

1 few more questions for him and then an opportunity will be given to you

2 not on all issues but on a limited number of issues, you may choose

3 yourself, to put additional questions just in order to give the Chamber an

4 impression of what kind of responses we can expect on such type of issues.

5 We don't have to go through the whole report but if you take -- you're

6 perfectly aware, I think of the issues that are of some concern for the

7 Chamber and if you would I would say by a few examples give us an

8 impression on what would be the result of your further examination and we

9 will then perhaps see how this develops. I would think that it should not

10 be -- should not take more than 20 minutes, half an hour perhaps, just by

11 way of example and then we will decide whether we can proceed or not.

12 MR. IERACE: I understand, Mr. President. Mr. President, just one

13 other matter before we begin the day as proceedings proper, the

14 Prosecution has to consider its position in relation to Zoran Lesic. The

15 situation, as it stands, is that he was always on the witness list, he was

16 always to be recalled, that was made clear at the time that I called him

17 initially.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

19 MR. IERACE: Given that the Trial Chamber has rejected the 92 bis

20 statement, the consequence is that we now are obliged to call him to give

21 evidence. Naturally, we will take into account the reasons when we

22 receive them for the decision. I simply point out the obvious that it's

23 the morning of the last day.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

25 MR. IERACE: The statement was rejected late yesterday and we

1 clearly have a -- the timetable difficulty. Thank you, Mr. President.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm aware of that. I will inform you in more

3 detail about Mr. Lesic this morning, and as soon as possible. Yes,

4 Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I apologise but

6 it's one of the things that I was to say at 8.30. We spoke to the

7 representative of the SLO, what we call the SLO, with regard to technical

8 questions. We were asked to inform you of our desires regarding the

9 length of the demand for acquittal. We have a technical problem which

10 I'll present to you very briefly. The Prosecution has structured its

11 dossier, it's taken, for example, 24 cases of sniping and 50 [Realtime

12 transcript read in error "350"] cases of sniping. The Defence's attitude,

13 in order to be logical and consistent with the system that the Prosecution

14 wants, our attitude will be to take each element and to see what may have

15 been proven and what may not, what has not been proven. We can't carry

16 out this exercise with regard to these cases, we can carry it out on ten

17 pages and we have considered with regard to these factual elements that we

18 require about 75 pages, which corresponds, more or less, to 3 pages per

19 incident. If we group them. This is a minimum.

20 Since there will be a certain legal part, and we don't think we

21 can -- we have to do that much work. So our plan will be 75 pages. I see

22 that you have written the figure down. I wanted to indicate it to you,

23 and I thank you for that. There is a mistake in the transcript. But it's

24 not important. Everyone knows that we're talking about 27 cases and five

25 cases and not 350 cases of sniping. Naturally.

1 JUDGE ORIE: We will inform you today. I can tell you that the

2 number of pages which is ten in the -- in the directions, directives, will

3 give you a larger number of pages, but I'll indicate exactly how many

4 pages later this morning. We have considered the matter already to some

5 extent and of course the new aspect is that we now hear you asking for 75

6 pages.

7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin [sic], before we ask the usher to

9 bring in the expert witness, Mr. Hinchliffe, I have one question for you.

10 Has the witness -- have the transcripts of the trial been presented to

11 the -- to Mr. Hinchliffe in respect of the sniping incidents?

12 MR. IERACE: For the transcript, Mr. President, you addressed me

13 as Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm sorry, I really need some vacation, just as

15 you all do, yes.

16 MR. IERACE: It's early in the morning on the last day. We

17 provided him with the transcript of the evidence of Ifeta Sahic which

18 relates to incident number 9. That's one of the incidents that on which

19 he made no comment in his report.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

21 MR. IERACE: And he will say that he was not take to that

22 incidents. The background is that at that stage we did not have a witness

23 to call. And,.

24 Consequently she gave evidence.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

1 MR. IERACE: He's also received two short portions of evidence,

2 one from the evidence of General Karavelic, in respect to the sizes of

3 bullets used by Serbian snipers. And secondly a segment of evidence From

4 Colonel Fraser in relation to shooting of telegraph poles. I should add

5 he was give and number of statements or at least he was given some

6 statements to read on the premises in December, I think.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Has he -- have statements been given to him of

8 witnesses that finally were not called?

9 MR. IERACE: I've been unable to determine exactly what statements

10 he was given in December. He's made clear to me, as he did yesterday to

11 the Trial Chamber, that all he relied upon for his report were the short

12 accounts given to him by the investigators at each site, a very simple

13 outline of the Prosecution case as to the evidence.

14 JUDGE ORIE: In written form available?

15 MR. IERACE: No, just oral.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Just oral.

17 MR. IERACE: I should stress, as I understand it, it was very

18 brief, and that has been added to by showing him the videos and 360 degree

19 photographs for each incidents. Mr. President, I can also tell you that

20 in proofing him, I have given him again some additional information in

21 relation to each incident, not each incident but some incidents which I

22 will bring out in chief. The evidence of this witness is essentially

23 confined to the technical aspects, in other words, whether the Prosecution

24 case is consistent or inconsistent with his expertise as a sniper.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

1 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, can I just add one other thing that

2 might assist you?

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

4 MR. IERACE: Mr. Hinchliffe is not a professional expert witness.

5 JUDGE ORIE: I only know expert witnesses and witnesses,

6 Mr. Ierace.

7 MR. IERACE: The only point I seek to make is that I think that

8 the benefit the Trial Chamber will ultimately derive from his evidence is

9 very much that of someone who is an expert in his field and he -- I

10 appreciate your concern about the methodology. At least the way in which

11 that is expressed in his report. I also appreciate it has obvious

12 shortcomings. I think the value of his evidence will become apparent once

13 he goes to the substance of his topic.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

15 MR. IERACE: Thank you.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Madam usher, could you please escort Mr. Hinchliffe

17 into the courtroom?

18 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, I must

20 admit that I haven't really understood what Mr. Ierace was saying, not

21 very well. And in particular, on page 6, line 2, of the transcript, which

22 for me remains to say the least confusing. I don't know what type of --

23 [The witness entered court].

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hinchliffe, please be seated may I remind you

25 that you're still bound by the solemn declaration you made yesterday? I

1 have a few additional questions for you before your further examination by

2 the Prosecution.

3 WITNESS: JONATHAN PAUL HINCHLIFFE [Resumed]

4 Questioned by the Court:

5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hinchliffe, the Chamber is informed that you have

6 read on the premises of the Tribunal some witness statements. Did you

7 make note of which statements you exactly read? Do you have names or

8 dates of these statements? Have you -- did you write them down so that we

9 know exactly what you have read?

10 A. No, I did not. However, I do recognise what I read.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand. Then a few more questions on

12 your report, under 12 reads that the "population had been hunting for

13 centuries, this automatically gave most households, prior to the war, a

14 hunting rifle with telescopic sights and ammunition." Can you tell us

15 what is exactly the source of this observation? And I'm not that much

16 interested in hunting for centuries but especially on the households

17 having hunting rifles with telescopic sights?

18 A. This is from my experiences when I was working with the UN in 1993

19 in the region. My experiences with the local population, and my

20 background in intelligence for -- I went there, I conducted an area

21 study.

22 JUDGE ORIE: On what sources?

23 A. Sources, general background of the country.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but what sources? Any books, any historical

25 interviews of people or?

1 A. Just the public books about the actual country, the former

2 Yugoslavia itself. The study was done prior to me deploying in 1993 and

3 assumed I remember and then had experiences later.

4 JUDGE ORIE: But you couldn't give us a list of books you

5 consulted?

6 A. No.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Then I go further. On serial 2, your reports reads

8 the subunits were clearly ordered to occupy the position. Ordered by whom

9 and on what basis did you make this statement?

10 A. I make the statement on the basis having looked at the area and

11 seen the military organised positions there, heights, observations posts

12 and firing positions. It is a standard military layout for a command

13 position with forward positions.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you for that answer. A similar question

15 in serial 6 where you write, "The commander deployed the snipers in this

16 position." I noticed that very often you do not make any mention of

17 commanders or command or whether they were on orders to occupy a certain

18 position. You here again you said, "The commander deployed the sniper in

19 this position." What is the basis of that fact?

20 A. It is a recognised tactic and technique of deploying snipers in

21 this method.

22 JUDGE ORIE: But what caused you to put this under 2 and 6 and not

23 in the --

24 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there is no

25 translation.

1 JUDGE ORIE: I have to change channels in order to understand what

2 you said, Ms. Pilipovic.

3 THE INTERPRETER: The mike is on. Sorry, the mike is on.

4 JUDGE ORIE: So there's either no translation or there is no

5 sound. I see everyone nodding happily so -- perhaps, Mr. Hinchliffe,

6 it's good that the Chamber provides you with a copy of your statement

7 again from the registry. My question is what caused you to write down

8 something about deploying or the commander deployed the snipers in this

9 position on 2 and 6 and not on the other serials?

10 A. Incident 2 and 6, I felt I could comfortably, in my opinion,

11 assess the situation and give that answer. With others it was less

12 organised and less distinctive, to be a position deployed as.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but you have no specific knowledge of a

14 commander --

15 A. No, it's just the technique.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's clear.

17 In serial 20, your report reads, "Very well trained snipers who

18 had been issued precious equipment to engage at will." I'm especially

19 interested in the last part of this sentence. What caused you to write

20 down "to engage at will"?

21 A. The precious issuing of equipment for the time and date that this

22 incident happened, being dark hours, the only way that a sniper could see

23 the light source at that distance was to have an image-intensifying night

24 sight.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you write down that they had been issued. By

1 whom? Was it already in the possession days before, month before, of the

2 firer?

3 A. All I am aware is that they had that equipment within their

4 orbits. However, it was quite a specialist piece of equipment.

5 JUDGE ORIE: And then you write "to engage at will." These last

6 few words, what's the basis of this?

7 A. To engage at will, it was my opinion that for a firer, a sniper to

8 release a shot at night at a likely light source would mean that his rules

9 of engagement were open and therefore if he felt it was a legitimate

10 target or not he could engage.

11 JUDGE ORIE: You deduced that from the course of events?

12 A. Yes.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.

14 Serial 24, you said that the sniper clearly tracked the tram and

15 chose their own ideal firing position well. What caused you to write down

16 that and not, for example, that they were so lucky that the place they

17 were ordered to go gave an excellent sight or that -- you write down that

18 they have chosen their position well.

19 A. The reason why I wrote that was the position gave a good field of

20 view of a certain killing area. That's a military area for the best area

21 which you can open fire. The tram had been tracked and it was engaged

22 exactly in the centre of the killing area. Therefore, I assessed it to be

23 a very good position to engage.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In serial 25, your report reads that "the firer

25 easily identified the victim, however, because the firer was inexperienced

1 and used an iron sight assault rifle," what is the basis of both the

2 observation that he was inexperienced and that he used an iron sight

3 assault rifle?

4 A. Distance of 200 metres, with any weapon system in the hands of an

5 experienced sniper would result in an instant kill. The distance of 200

6 metres is easily accessible. I assessed he used an iron sight for the way

7 the victim was actually hit with the rounds of ammunition and that the

8 firer had not an optical sight but an iron sight, which is much more

9 difficult to use.

10 JUDGE ORIE: What exactly then in the way the victim was hit

11 caused you to draw this conclusion?

12 A. The fact that the victim actually survived. I would expect the

13 victim would be killed.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Does that mean the place on the body where the victim

15 was hit? Is that what you mean?

16 A. Yes.

17 JUDGE ORIE: And if someone would be very inexperienced but having

18 the I would say the optimal equipment, would it be possible that a person

19 would be hit in that same body part?

20 A. If an inexperienced --

21 JUDGE ORIE: If for example, I would have done it?

22 A. If you were not trained on the equipment.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm not trained.

24 A. Then you would not -- you would probably have the same results.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Even with another rifle?

1 A. Yes.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you. Serial 26, you write down, "The

3 sniper released a bullet and hit the target having negotiated a small

4 flight path between two buildings and ricocheted from an internal wall

5 into the victim, the sniper was well trained." How do you have to

6 understand this, that well trained snipers can hit someone by a ricochet

7 bullet or -- and would a well-trained sniper be dependent on hitting his

8 target by a ricochet or would you expect him to hit the target directly?

9 A. I would expect a sniper to hit a target directly. The reason why

10 I said a well-trained sniper was the flight path of the bullet had to go

11 through a very small gap in between two apartment blocks. And that was

12 the meaning from the well-trained sniper.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but at the same time you say that the

14 well-trained sniper would not -- would hit the target directly and not by

15 a ricochet?

16 A. Yes.

17 JUDGE ORIE: So one part of the flight of the bullet would make

18 him a well-trained sniper but the actual impact on the location would make

19 him not a trained sniper? Because you say a trained sniper would hit the

20 target directly?

21 A. I assisted at the target end where the victim was that the sniper

22 actually fired into a light source and not the person, so it was somewhat

23 of an opportune engagement.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand your answers. I, at this

25 moment, have no further questions to you.

1 [Trial Chamber confers]

2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, since at this very stage of the

3 examination of the expert witness, the other judges and I'm stressing at

4 this stage, they have no further questions, you may proceed as I indicated

5 before in the absence of the witness, and I would say that that should

6 certainly not take longer for this first part as to 9.30.

7 MR. IERACE: Just to clarify that, Mr. President, when you say in

8 the absence of the witness, do you mean that at this stage I'm not to ask

9 any questions of the witness.

10 JUDGE ORIE: No, as I indicated in the absence of the witness the

11 way we would proceed this morning. Before the witness entered the

12 courtroom, I said that --

13 MR. IERACE: I see.

14 JUDGE ORIE: -- The Court would have additional questions and then

15 you would have an opportunity on selected matters.

16 MR. IERACE: Yes. Mr. President, just to indicate my intention at

17 this stage, I will ask a few questions in relation to some of the issues

18 that you raised yesterday and today, just a few, and then perhaps select

19 randomly one or two incidents to show the way I intend to approach it.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes

21 Examined by Mr. Ierace: [Continued]

22 Q. Sir you've been asked some questions yesterday afternoon and then

23 again this morning about incidents number 26. Do you understand from the

24 evidence, as it's been explained to you, that the -- first of all, I think

25 you told us you went to the apartment?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. All right. And did you observe that the wall at the apartment

3 through which the bullet entered, at this stage, is glass?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Do you now understand that the glass wall, whether it was the door

6 section or the window section, was covered to a certain height by wood

7 panelling and above that by some blankets?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You say in your report, the sniper was well-trained and possibly

10 armed with an image intensifier to observe for targets. If the person

11 responsible for firing the shot indeed had an image intensifier, and given

12 the evidence that the television was on, it was a large screen, and it was

13 facing towards that wall, what would you expect the shooter to see through

14 the image intensifier in relation to any breaks in the cover, for instance

15 between the blankets and the walls?

16 A. The image intensifier would illuminate the window compared to the

17 rest. Say an apartment next hadn't had the same light source, through the

18 image intensifier the window would be illuminated, shining quite brightly

19 especially at that distance.

20 Q. Can you assist us as to what type of image one sees through the

21 intensifier?

22 A. The image given is a black and green image. And light is shown in

23 a light green, kind of white image, and it's almost like a torch.

24 Q. You were also asked questions as to the possibility that the

25 intended target was, for example, next door. Do you understand the

1 evidence to be that the victim and witnesses did not hear any shots

2 preceding the wounding of the victim, nor shots after it?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Does that assist you at all in determining whether this shot was

5 intentional?

6 A. Yes, it does. It clearly stays in my mind that the bullet was

7 fired and hit where it was supposed to.

8 Q. I'll take you now to a different incident, about which you have

9 been asked some questions, that is incident 23. The woman aged 44 years,

10 was shot and wounded in her right hand while walking with her

11 father-in-law and they are the words which appear in the schedule to the

12 indictment. Is that correct?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Essentially, you were asked how you could eliminate the

15 possibility that the intention of the shooter was only to wound her and

16 not kill her. In your answer, you stated your understanding that snipers

17 are trained to kill and not to wound, essentially I think you said that.

18 Do you understand the evidence also to be that following the wounding, the

19 victim and her father-in-law heard a volley of shots and ran across the

20 adjacent field in order to seek cover?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. The fact that the shooting continued and they were forced to take

23 cover, according to the evidence, does that assist you in determining

24 whether the intention was to wound or to kill?

25 A. It does, it clearly states to my mind that they were after killing

1 the individuals.

2 Q. All right. I will now take you to one of the incidents that

3 you --

4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I apologise but the version

6 eight is giving me some trouble, Mr. President, could we please have

7 assistance of a technician, please?

8 JUDGE ORIE: Could we get some assistance for Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

9 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

10 MR. IERACE:

11 Q. Perhaps number 2, Mr. President, will do.

12 I take you to your report in relation to number 2 and were you

13 asked some questions about this this morning as well.

14 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, might the witness be given a copy

15 of -- rather might the witness be given an exhibit tendered through

16 General Karavelic being the sniping maps? I'll just check the exhibit

17 number. It's P3728. In particular, the map for incident 2.

18 Yes, please. I'll be grateful if that could be placed on the

19 ELMO.

20 Q. Did you go to the place as marked with yellow paint, where you

21 were told the victim was shot?

22 A. Yes, I did.

23 Q. And can you describe briefly, just in a sentence or two, the

24 appearance of that site?

25 A. The site had appeared to be a well constructed and --

1 Q. Let me stop you there. I mean where the victim was shot?

2 A. Right. Where the victim was shot was a housing area, an urban

3 area, and quite a close housing area as well.

4 Q. All right. And?

5 THE INTERPRETER: Can they make breaks between questions and

6 answers? Thank you.

7 MR. IERACE: I will.

8 Q. Can you tell us, as you remember it, the extent of visibility of

9 Serb-held territory from the position where the victim was shot?

10 A. Outside the house.

11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I object, Mr. President. I

12 object because this question of visibility has no meaning if it is not

13 placed in a context. If we are talking about a foggy day, one cannot see

14 anything, and I believe this way it was phrased, it's a leading question.

15 Thank you.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, the witness is testifying on what

17 he saw. Of course, that should be compared with the evidence on whether

18 what he saw on a prior bright day, I take it at least it was a bright day,

19 otherwise you couldn't have seen 895 metres far, of course that can be

20 compared, but the testimony now is about what he saw. Please proceed,

21 Mr. Ierace.

22 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.

23 Q. Could you answer that question?

24 A. On both occasions, I actually went to the site, from outside the

25 house you can see clearly the area that was held by the Serbian forces.

1 Q. All right. And did it occupy half of your view or a small portion

2 of your view? Can you give us some idea about that?

3 A. The field of view that -- from the house was very good. It was

4 quite a large area, you could see quite a large area.

5 Q. What was the -- what was the nature of that territory? Was it a

6 plain or a mountain or a ridge or what?

7 A. From the house you could see a very well exposed ridge line which

8 is somewhat wooded and also rocky.

9 Q. Did you go to that ridge on either of your visits to Sarajevo for

10 this report?

11 A. Yes, I went twice.

12 Q. Firstly, did you take a reading with your laser equipment from the

13 area approximately where the victim was shot, as you understood it, to

14 the --

15 A. Yes, I did.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The question, there are two

18 issues, I'd like to you please make breaks because I cannot follow

19 otherwise technically speaking. This is a leading question because we

20 clearly are asking the witness to confirm the presence of an object.

21 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, leading questions --

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace?

23 MR. IERACE: Leading questions in this context are surely

24 permissible. The witness has given evidence yesterday that he took

25 readings, the readings are in his report. It is extraordinary that one

1 could object to a leading question in those circumstances. Mr. President,

2 I hope this is not a foretaste of the rest of the day. When the

3 Prosecution has one case, one day, left to finish its case.

4 JUDGE ORIE: You may proceed, Mr. Ierace.

5 MR. IERACE:

6 Q. Did you measure the distance from the approximate area where

7 the -- I'll withdraw that. Was this a case where you could measure the

8 distance from exactly where the victim was shot or had there been some

9 building work which made that impossible?

10 A. No. The area where the victim was shot, there had been no further

11 building work to -- in the line of sight of where the Serbian forces were.

12 Q. All right. Therefore, were you able to measure the distance from

13 where she was shot, as you understood it, to the Serb-held territory?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And having regard to your report, was that 895 metres?

16 A. Yes, it was.

17 Q. Did you travel to that portion of territory?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Tell us what you saw when you got there?

20 A. As we arrived to the area where were indicated from the victim's

21 house, with a quick determination of the area, I found positions, built-up

22 positions, of a military nature. For example, an observation post, a

23 sniper hide, and three firing positions with sandbags and empty

24 cartridges.

25 Q. All right. Let me take you back through that last answer. You

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 told us that you observed --

2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I really

3 apologise, but last night we did not have time to make observations on the

4 transcript. I have asked courteously to slow down, please.

5 JUDGE ORIE: I apologise. First of all to the interpreters but

6 also for those who have to follow the words in English. These proceed,

7 Mr. Ierace.

8 MR. IERACE:

9 Q. Can you tell us what you saw that you describe as an observation

10 post?

11 A. An observation post is a -- is a built -- is a manmade feature.

12 You basically dig a hole, waterproof it, hide it, and then live inside it.

13 It is a -- you are given a field of view to cover from this position.

14 Q. What was the waterproofing?

15 A. The waterproofing was a thick plastic sheeting which was laid on

16 top of logs, cut logs, and on top of that was turf and soil.

17 Q. What was the significance of the waterproofing?

18 A. The waterproofing would enable the persons inside the hide or

19 observation post to sustain themselves for a long period of time.

20 Q. All right. You told us that you also saw a sniper hide. What

21 exactly did you see?

22 A. A sniper hide is the same as observation post. However, it has an

23 opening to the front which enables not only the person inside to see but

24 also to fire from, and that is the only difference. And that is what I

25 saw in that case.

1 Q. You said a few minutes ago that you also saw three firing

2 positions with sandbags and empty cartridges. What do you mean by three

3 firing positions?

4 A. The firing positions which I saw were dug holes, manmade dug holes

5 built upwards with sandbags, sandbags to stop any return fire, and

6 prepositioned so they mutually supported each other and covered the

7 ground.

8 Q. From any of those firing positions, were you able to see the place

9 where the victim was shot?

10 A. You could see the place where the victim was shot in all the

11 firing positions.

12 Q. Did you notice the calibre of the empty cartridges?

13 A. The empty cartridges were somewhat rusted and old, however I

14 assessed them to be of a 7.62 millimetre.

15 Q. In your report, you say the sniper used a Dragonov sniper rifle.

16 How good was the Dragonov?

17 A. The Dragonov was, and still is, an excellent sniper rifle.

18 Q. What size, that is, what calibre ammunition did it use?

19 A. It uses variants of the 7.62 millimetre.

20 Q. You go on to say, and I'll start again at the beginning of the

21 sentence, "It is assessed the sniper used a Dragonov sniper rifle from a

22 well-sighted, company defended location." Why do you say "well-sighted

23 company defended location?"

24 A. First of all, the well-sighted was the firing positions, the

25 height, were all placed in locations where they covered the ground in

1 front exceptionally well. I would have placed them in the same place

2 myself. So I presumed that they were well-sighted. A "company defended

3 location" when you dig in and actually surround yourself with area

4 defences that means that you are in a defensive static posture, and a

5 company location was due to the amount of firing positions which were

6 there.

7 Q. Why could it not have been a platoon, for instance?

8 A. A platoon position would usually be two or three locations.

9 However, from the area, there were more than three locations which we were

10 not be able to go into for mine reasons.

11 Q. Whether you say mine reasons, was there tape indicating uncleared

12 mine fields?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Further on in your comments on that incident, you say, "It is

15 assessed the sniper was acting on orders from his commander and engaged

16 the non-combatant." Why do you say that you believe or think that the

17 sniper was acting on orders from his commander?

18 A. For the sniper to be placed in such a position, the commander,

19 whoever he or she may be, would have to deploy the forces there under

20 orders and give reasons why and what to do in eventualities of all

21 actions.

22 MR. IERACE: All right. Mr. President, I think that will do to

23 give an idea of the approach.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Ierace.

25 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, perhaps one other thing just to

1 assist.

2 Q. Would you look at the map on the ELMO? What is the significance

3 of the red circle?

4 A. The red circle was the area in which I found the fire positions

5 and sniper hides.

6 Q. All right. And perhaps also we see number 11, that is the

7 relevant site indicated on this map for number 11. Does the red circle

8 have any relevance to your conclusions and observations in respect of

9 incident number 11 as well?

10 A. I assess that incident number 11 was also engaged from the same

11 position, upon getting into the sniper hide at the defended location, you

12 could clearly see both incident 11 and incident 2.

13 Q. Therefore, does it follow that the evidence you've given about the

14 suspected source of fire in respect of incident 2 applies to incident 11

15 as well?

16 A. Yes.

17 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Ierace.

19 [Trial Chamber confers]

20 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will take a short time to deliberate on

21 the present procedural situation.

22 MR. IERACE: Would it be at least ten minutes, Mr. President?

23 JUDGE ORIE: I think it will take approximately ten minutes, yes.

24 MR. IERACE: Thank you.

25 --- Break taken at 9.26 a.m.

1 --- On resuming at 9.43 a.m.

2 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber has considered how to proceed at this

3 very moment. First, an opportunity will be given to the Defence for five

4 minutes to comment on the present procedural situation. Ms. Pilipovic or

5 Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, what you mean

7 is just to use this as a base regarding the credibility of the expert

8 witness?

9 JUDGE ORIE: Tell us about the report and testimony until now, so

10 what in your view should be done by the Chamber in respect of this witness

11 and his report.

12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. Gladly. Well,

13 Mr. President.

14 JUDGE ORIE: We all make mistakes today.

15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I wasn't trying to be

16 impolite. I'm sorry. Thank you for giving me the floor for five minutes.

17 This is just whether we can apply the rule on false testimony and my

18 observation would be the following. I believe that here, this is a

19 dangerous exercise by the Prosecution, which is in a way something that's

20 been miscalculated, since this expert witness just followed step by step

21 the traces of the Prosecution, not only to completely espouse them but to

22 actually adopt the entirety of the position of the deductions of the

23 Prosecution, I was even going to say the feelings of the Prosecution.

24 Specifically, Mr. President, as I am reading this expert report, quote

25 unquote, I find strange words. How can this witness know, for instance,

1 that some incidents, doesn't matter the number of the incident, on one

2 hand, such and such a sniper would have received orders from his commander

3 to engage non-combatants. Was he there? Did he hear that? Did he find

4 out from the commander? Did he see any written documents, et cetera? And

5 on the other hand, that he had done it, with the objective of killing

6 civilian population.

7 The only thing that's missing here is the word "campaign," but we

8 can see that this expert is the kind of expert that I have called the DSS,

9 so deliberate sniper shot because in all of these cases this is deliberate

10 sniper shot and he goes so far that even when he says there are cases when

11 a machine-gun, light machine-gun or medium machine-gun is used, which is

12 not recognised as being a sniper rifle, it still saying that this is a

13 sniper rifle. So as to the conclusion, I dare not even quote him here.

14 They are as clear as a pike staff, so I find some other very troubling

15 facts. I see that for the last incident, 27, we find surprising terms,

16 not only it is here an issue -- a question of the DSS although it's a

17 machine-gun, but furthermore, we are told, and this is a kind of shelling

18 syndrome which comes in the guise of sniping, is that this was done in a

19 discriminate manner which I suppose was supposed to terrorise the

20 population.

21 Mr. President, this is just a copy of the Prosecution case and the

22 Defence would like to demonstrate this by a series of very specific exact

23 questions to this witness, particularly in terms of his alleged knowledge

24 of weapons and of the alleged intentions of the sharpshooters, and this

25 person goes so far occasionally that there were two of them, that there

1 was some kind of joint shooting, and he obviously couldn't know anything

2 about it, because he was never there at the time when these things

3 happened. So my God, how could we find out whether there was one person

4 or two people? Anyway, all of this is rather fantastic and I believe that

5 the Defence has said enough on what we think of the quality of this

6 witness that we should call an expert witness, but also about his

7 morality.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

9 [Trial Chamber confers]

10 JUDGE ORIE: Having observed carefully what happened during the

11 testimony of Mr. Hinchliffe, having heard the observations of the

12 Prosecution and having heard the observations of the Defence, the Chamber

13 has decided not to admit the report in evidence. We reject this report

14 not because the Chamber is of the opinion that this witness should have no

15 specific experience but mainly because this report, as it is, does not

16 assist the Chamber in making its determinations. Sources are very often

17 unclear, methodology on many, many conclusions is totally unclear. And

18 apart from that, the report enters very often in a domain which is

19 exclusively the domain of this Chamber, that is to draw conclusions from

20 the evidence presented until now.

21 On the other hand, the Chamber is aware that there might be some

22 factual information that the Prosecution, losing this report, would like

23 to make the subject of questions. The Chamber allows the Prosecution to

24 examine Mr. Hinchliffe, not as an expert witness but as a witness, and as

25 we experienced now and then, even if someone is a normal witness, his

1 expertise could assist him in focusing on certain issues, if I just give

2 an example, I can imagine that from the positions Mr. Hinchliffe might

3 have visited, that he observed that from the presumed firing position, but

4 let's just say from the position he visited, whether it was the firing

5 position or not, that he observed that there was a straight line between

6 one place of an incident, number 2, and another place of an incident, 11.

7 So that would be a factual observation rather than expertise, although I

8 can imagine that especially an expert would see more than a normal person

9 does.

10 So Mr. Ierace, you'll have an opportunity, and we also have to

11 deal with other issues, so I think you have to be very careful how to use

12 your precious time, to see whether you can present factual information

13 from this witness, but the rejection of the report makes it quite clear, I

14 think, that you really should take care that you stay far away from the

15 type of conclusions and the conclusions as we find them in the report.

16 That is how we will proceed. I suggest that we continue, if this

17 is technically possible, keeping in mind that we had a short break of ten

18 minutes, until quarter past 10 to start with, and then have a break.

19 Mr. Ierace.

20 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, a couple of matters. Firstly, I seek

21 your guidance in relation to the application of that finding, to give an

22 example, I had intended to show the witness a segment of the opening video

23 which appears under the title sheet, I think it's "sniping positions" or

24 "sniping from Mount Trebevic," specifically to ask him to identify two

25 types of weapons which appear in that segment. I would be grateful, for

1 instance, if that is now permissible. And no doubt there will be other

2 issues that will arise of a similar nature during my examination-in-chief

3 of him.

4 Secondly, could you give me some indication as to when you will

5 let me know the essence of the reasons for the rejection of the 92 bis

6 statement for Zoran Lesic.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I can imagine that you have specific reasons now

8 to know that.

9 [Trial Chamber confers]

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, the main reason for the rejection of

11 Mr. Lesic's testimony is that the Chamber thinks that the probative value

12 is such that we do not need to receive that information. That has

13 different backgrounds, for example, some portions of the video that was

14 shown in the opening statement, have been admitted into evidence at a

15 later stage. One of the maps, for example, -- one of the photographs was

16 used by another witness and was admitted into evidence. But of course

17 there are remaining photographs, but the Chamber thinks that these do not

18 add to the evidence in such a way that we should hear this evidence or to

19 have this evidence presented at this moment. So the -- I would say the

20 adding to the already-existing probative value of other evidence would be

21 so minimal that, for that reason, we will not use -- that we would use our

22 discretion in such a way that we can do without it.

23 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.

24 In that case, I suppose we should proceed with Mr. Hinchliffe.

25 [Trial Chamber confers]

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, the example you gave, you wanted some

2 guidance on that, that would be a question that the Chamber would allow.

3 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President. Might I also be advised of

4 the time of the next court break so that I can arrange some meetings

5 during it?

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I think I said that we would have the next break

7 in a quarter of an hour, quarter past 10.00.

8 MR. IERACE: Thank you.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Madam usher, could you please escort the witness into

10 the courtroom?

11 [The witness entered court].

12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hinchliffe, in your absence, the Court has given

13 a decision. That decision is that the report you've written will not be

14 admitted into evidence but that the parties can examine you as a witness,

15 and I do understand that Mr. Ierace wants to continue your examination as

16 a witness.

17 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.

18 Q. Sir, do you still have in front of you the maps or just one?

19 A. Just one.

20 Q. All right.

21 MR. IERACE: Might the witness be given the balance of that

22 exhibit? And might map number 1 be placed on the ELMO?

23 Q. Sir, during your visits to Sarajevo, did you go to a spot which is

24 indicated with the number 1 on this map?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Did you take a laser distance reading of the building which is

2 within the red circle on the same map?

3 A. Yes, I did.

4 Q. What was that distance?

5 MR. IERACE: And Mr. President, might the witness consult his

6 notes or the report for the purposes of giving the distance?

7 JUDGE ORIE: This is factual information? Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, this is a

9 factual observation, but usually we don't authorise the witness to use his

10 notes.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Let me tell you something, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, about

12 Belgian criminal procedure. If a pathologist would appear in a Belgian

13 court, he would have to learn by heart all the measurements of the dead

14 body. That's not a practical way to proceed. The witness may consult his

15 report just to find the -- to find the measurements. And the Chamber

16 would not mind, Mr. Ierace, if you would like to do this for all the maps,

17 to ask one question and then go accelerated through the maps, if it's just

18 a matter of visiting the spot of the red dot, visiting and measuring and

19 whether the witness could indicate if he visited one or both of these

20 spots.

21 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President, for that assistance.

22 Q. What is the distance?

23 A. Distance was 362 metres.

24 Q. Did you visit the building which appears within the red circle?

25 A. We did not visit it, no.

1 Q. All right. Was there any obstruction to your line of sight

2 between the red dot and the building in the red circle?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Did you take some steps to overcome that obstacle in obtaining

5 your measurement?

6 A. Yes, I did.

7 Q. All right. Move now, please, to map number 3. Did you go to the

8 site indicated by the red dot with a number 3 indicated?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Did you go to the area indicated by the red circle?

11 A. No, I did not.

12 Q. Were you able to see the area indicated by the red circle from a

13 position alongside a yellow mark at site number 3?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. What was the distance from that position to the area indicated by

16 the red circle?

17 A. The distance was 1.111 metres.

18 Q. All right. And can you tell us something of the nature of the

19 territory within the red circle?

20 A. The red circle had within it an obvious front line position.

21 Q. No. I ask you simply to indicate whether it was, for instance, a

22 mountaintop, a valley, a ridge or something of that nature?

23 A. It was a ridge line.

24 Q. All right. Would you please now go to -- I'll ask you another

25 question but pause before you answer it.

1 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, perhaps I would seek some guidance in

2 relation to the ruling, am I permitted to ask questions of the witness as

3 to his general expertise as a sniper? In other words, not relating to the

4 incidents directly before the Court? Perhaps I would ask the question and

5 then you could indicate --

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.

7 MR. IERACE:

8 Q. Mr. Hinchliffe, firstly are there books in general circulation

9 which indicate the technical details and capabilities of rifles used by

10 various militaries for sniping purposes?

11 A. Yes, there are.

12 Q. Do those -- is Jane's an example of one such publishing company?

13 A. Yes, it is.

14 Q. Is that a book which

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I apologise but for those who

17 can -- who are listening to the Serb and namely our expert, I would be

18 grateful if a pause could be made between the question and the answer.

19 MR. IERACE: I will, Mr. President.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.

21 MR. IERACE:

22 Q. Are those books, to your knowledge, held in high regard?

23 A. Yes, they are.

24 Q. Do those books indicate a maximum range for various types of

25 rifles used by various militaries?

1 A. It does.

2 Q. In your experience, how reliable are those maximum ranges when the

3 rifles are used by experienced snipers?

4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I object

5 because so long as the question doesn't relate to a particular weapon,

6 this question doesn't have any precise sense, and there is no point in

7 asking a question about a weapon which is very useful but was never used

8 in the zone in question. So it is necessary in my opinion to rephrase

9 this question.

10 MR. IERACE: I'm happy to do so, Mr. President.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.

12 MR. IERACE:

13 Q. Have you consulted the entry in Jane's for the Dragonov?

14 A. Yes, I have.

15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I apologise,

16 this is not the way to proceed, since the written testimony or the expert

17 report of this witness, will not be admitted. As a result, it is

18 necessary first to ask whether or not there were Dragonovs, I think that

19 it's an essential question.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, would you please first clarify, in your

22 question a weapon appears of which the Chamber does not know whether that

23 that is any relevance. Could you please first clarify that and then ask

24 your question.

25 MR. IERACE: Clarify to the Chamber, Mr. President?

1 JUDGE ORIE: No, perhaps we want to hear from the witness

2 perhaps -- I can imagine you can ask him what kind of weapons were used in

3 certain armies or whether he knows something about that, or he learned

4 that from books or --

5 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, does that mean that the questions and

6 answers asked of this witness before the ruling have been struck from the

7 evidence? Because the witness has already given evidence about Dragonov

8 rifle.

9 [Trial Chamber confers]

10 JUDGE ORIE: As far as the questions and answers given related to

11 facts, they still stand. As far as they refer to conclusions, they do not

12 stand.

13 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President --

15 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

16 MR. IERACE: I'll withdraw the question. Might I also have the --

17 JUDGE ORIE: Is that about the question or the question has been

18 withdrawn.

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, no, it

20 relates to your response, Mr. President. May I? For example, you asked a

21 question and you asked what allows you to know whether it was a rifle, a

22 hunting rifle or a steel rifle, et cetera. This type of question is a

23 purely factual question but we have seen that -- we have seen what

24 difficulties there are.

25 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Basis of the

1 conclusion drawn by Mr. Hinchliffe. That was the substance of the

2 questions and I think it's up to the parties, what are --

3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.

4 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... It's not easy.

5 I know that as a lawyer for many years what are facts and what are not

6 facts, but please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: Thank you very much.

8 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President. Might I have the

9 assistance of a technician in relation to LiveNote while I continue? The

10 LiveNote has just stopped working on the laptop.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

12 MR. IERACE: Would you please go to map number 4 and might that be

13 placed on the ELMO

14 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps I may give you some further guidance as well,

15 Mr. Ierace. If you're talking about distances sometimes it's not

16 essential whether it was 406 or 398 metres. The evidence presented until

17 now contained a large number of maps with clear scales so if the positions

18 are clear as such, the Chamber is in a position to assess what is a

19 distance between a certain place indicated and another one. But of

20 course, when it comes to details, the Chamber would not be able to do so.

21 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the problem with that is unfortunately

22 the different scales, at least the projections of the electronic maps but

23 I think I can do it quickly.

24 Q. Now, did you go to the spot --

25 JUDGE ORIE: May I add to that we also have lines on that that

1 would not allow us to -- for example, if on map number 4, there is the

2 distance between the circle and spot number 4, related to the lining on

3 the map.

4 MR. IERACE: Yes.

5 JUDGE ORIE: -- Would to a certain degree allow --

6 MR. IERACE: Quite right.

7 MR. IERACE: The angle then changes but I take your point,

8 Mr. President.

9 Q. Did you measure the distance between the dot and the circle?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And what was that distance?

12 A. 940 metres.

13 Q. All right. And in this case --

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I would be grateful if

17 Mr. Ierace could be more precise in his questions because there are three

18 points.

19 JUDGE ORIE: [Microphone not activated] Across from the number.

20 Yes, please proceed.

21 MR. IERACE:

22 Q. What was the nature of the object of which you took the reading?

23 In other words was it a rock, a car, or what?

24 A. It was a building.

25 Q. Do you know the name of that group of buildings?

1 A. No.

2 Q. All right.

3 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I will move on to another topic but in

4 the meantime could I have access to -- excuse me, this might assist, the

5 360- degree CD photograph in relation to incident number 4. Would you now

6 move to map number 5?

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, with regard to

9 the 360-degree photographs, we would like to raise an objection.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Another one other than the one that was already

11 raised before?

12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, but I wanted to

13 reformulate it for the sake of the transcript.

14 MR. IERACE: To assist Madam Registrar, I think the relevant

15 exhibit is 3279A, and it may be under seal.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, perhaps I indicated we would have the break at

17 10.15. Perhaps, you could give an opportunity to the Registrar to

18 retrieve the evidence installed in the computer because that may take some

19 time. We will have a break until five minutes -- 25 minutes to 11.00, so

20 a break of 20 minutes.

21 --- Recess taken at 10.16 a.m.

22 --- On resuming at 10.42 a.m.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Before I give you the opportunity to resume,

24 Mr. Ierace, I'd like to inform the parties that the -- it's for 99 per

25 cent that the Lesic and Kovacs decisions will be filed today and the

1 Defence will have an opportunity for seven days from today to file a

2 request for a certificate. The number of pages for a motion to dismiss,

3 if the Defence would like to file that, would -- keeping in mind specific

4 circumstances of this case, considerably more than usual, it will be 35

5 pages.

6 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, just on the issue of Mr. Lesic, he is

7 on standby if required to give short evidence. The issue that most

8 concerns me and perhaps I could receive some guidance is the ability of

9 the Prosecution to tender the opening video, the photographs, that is the

10 panoramic photographs used in the opening and also evidence as to the

11 positions where certain photographs tendered into evidence were taken

12 from, having in mind the school for the blind and Ozrenska Street. If the

13 Trial Chamber anticipates any difficulty with the Prosecution tendering

14 that material from the bar table on that basis, I could call him for very

15 short evidence simply to give that basic information.

16 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand. You might have noticed that the

17 Chamber uses the breaks to deal with a lot of questions, and we will

18 consider it.

19 MR. IERACE: Thank you.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

21 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, might we go into closed session

22 briefly.

23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I apologise but

24 since you raised this issue, these procedural issues, and I must do this

25 now, Ms. Pilipovic is about to leave and I will not be able to get in

1 touch with her for seven days. Would I be authorised, because this is a

2 point of procedure that we should discuss, am I going to be possibly

3 authorised to sign in a very selfish way, this motion all by myself, since

4 I'm just a co-counsel and formally speaking I'm -- legally I have to seek

5 your authorisation.

6 JUDGE ORIE: If you show all the wisdom Ms. Pilipovic usually

7 shows in her submissions, the Chamber allows you to sign.

8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Do not ask for the impossible.

9 JUDGE ORIE: You always have to strive for the higher,

10 Mr. Piletta-Zanin. Please proceed.

11 MR. IERACE: Thank you Mr. President, might be go into closed

12 session. It will take about three minutes.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we will turn into closed session

14 [Closed session]

15 [redacted]

16 [redacted]

17 [redacted]

18 [redacted]

19 [redacted]

20 [redacted]

21 [redacted]

22 [redacted]

23 [redacted]

24 [redacted]

25 [redacted]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 [redacted]

2 [redacted]

3 [Open session]

4 MR. IERACE:

5 Q. Would you please go to map 5?

6 MR. IERACE: And might that be placed on the ELMO? Perhaps the

7 map could be lowered slightly. The map could be pulled down or the

8 machine panned back will do. Can the machine be panned back further? All

9 right. That's it, thank you.

10 Q. Did you go to the site indicated by the red dot and marked with

11 the number 5?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Did you take a reading, that is a distance reading, off the

14 building circled by the -- circled in red?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. What was that distance?

17 A. The distance was 665 metres.

18 Q. All right. Now, do you know the -- and please pause before you

19 answer this question -- the distance of danger, if I can put it that way,

20 from a ricocheting bullet and by that I mean a bullet that hits a hard

21 surface?

22 A. The distance the British army uses is 50 metres.

23 Q. All right. Please now go to map number 6. Did you go to the

24 position indicated by red dot and with the number 6 on it?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Might the map be moved sideways so we can see a red circle? All

2 right. Now, firstly, the red circle has along side it the word "towers."

3 Is that description consistent or inconsistent with what you observed to

4 be in the position of the red circle?

5 A. Inconsistent.

6 Q. What did you observe in that position?

7 A. A church.

8 Q. Did you take a reading from dot number 6 to the church?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. What was the distance?

11 A. Distance was 1107 metres.

12 Q. All right. Now, I want to ask you some questions about the

13 procedure, in your experience, applied by snipers, and when I use that

14 term in the context of this question, I mean the use of high-powered

15 specialist sniping rifles. When a sniper takes up a position and prepares

16 him or herself for their task, are there any exercises they engage in in

17 order to range their weapon or to use a different description, to prepare

18 it for shooting in a certain target area?

19 A. Yes. The sniper will try to -- will fire a number of bullets to

20 estimate ranges and the effect the surroundings have on those bullets.

21 Q. What does the sniper do, if anything, with the information that he

22 receives as a result of that exercise?

23 A. The sniper will fire the bullets, he will measure what he sees to

24 be the distance and also the effects of wind and other weather conditions.

25 He will store this within his own notebook as data.

1 Q. What adjustments, if any, does the sniper then make to his

2 equipment?

3 A. The sniper would see the fall of shot, by that I mean where the

4 bullet lands, in respect to where he's aiming and then he would adjust his

5 sight to ensure where he aims, he hits.

6 Q. If the distance between the sniper and the target area is large,

7 what assistance would you expect a sniper to have in order to acquaint

8 himself with the actual site where the bullets landed during that process?

9 A. The sniper will usually use a number 2 person. The number 2 is

10 called the spotter. His job is to ensure he locates where the bullets

11 land and therefore tells the sniper, the shooter, the corrections needed

12 to his sight.

13 Q. What aids, if any, does the number 2 use?

14 A. He would use binoculars, laser range finders or a spotting scope.

15 Q. All right. Would you now, please, move to number 7?

16 JUDGE ORIE: 360-degrees seems to be ready, Mr. Ierace.

17 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President, perhaps we could now move

18 into closed session.

19 [Closed session]

20 [redacted]

21 [redacted]

22 [redacted]

23 [redacted]

24 [redacted]

25 [redacted]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 Page 12972 – redacted – closed session

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 Page 12973 – redacted – closed session

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 [redacted]

2 [Open session]

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The description, Mr. Ierace, is such that I

4 would say that it's the brightest white spot almost in the centre of the

5 picture and slightly left from a higher tree that I would say

6 approximately one/8th of the width of the picture left from a tree that

7 comes above the ridge of the hills far away.

8 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.

9 Q. Now, do you have in front of you map number 7?

10 A. No.

11 Q. All right. Might the witness be given map number 7? And might

12 the witness also be given -- I think it's P3271, which are two

13 photographs? I'll just repeat that for the benefit of Madam Registrar,

14 might the witness be given two photographs which are P3271 and perhaps the

15 usher could adjust the position of the map and also could we have panning

16 back of the ELMO so that we could see more of the map?

17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, in the

18 meantime, I'm sorry I'm doing it now but I'm doing it because I'm worried

19 about the time that is passing. As Mr. Ierace is going to examine for a

20 long time, and since in relation to the report and what you said, will

21 also be valid for the facts, we do not want to end up having less time

22 than the Prosecution, and I think that should be taken into consideration

23 since there are other technical questions and procedural questions that

24 are to be examined. Thank you.

25 JUDGE ORIE: We have considered that. Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

1 MR. IERACE:

2 Q. Did you go to the red spot indicated by the number 7?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. All right. Would you please now look at the photographs which are

5 about to be placed on the ELMO? Might one of those photographs be placed

6 on the ELMO? Sorry, they are the wrong photographs. Excuse me.

7 Perhaps -- my apologies, perhaps it's P300?

8 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Mr. Ierace, we have two red circles there on

9 [redacted]

10 [redacted]

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 [redacted]

14 [redacted]

15 [redacted]

16 [redacted]

17 [redacted]

18 [redacted]

19 [redacted]

20 [redacted]

21 [redacted]

22 [redacted]

23 [redacted]

24 [redacted]

25 [redacted]

1 [redacted]

2 [redacted]

3 [redacted]

4 [redacted]

5 [redacted]

6 [redacted]

7 [redacted]

8 [redacted]

9 [redacted]

10 [redacted]

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 [redacted]

14 [Closed session]

15 [redacted]

16 [redacted]

17 [redacted]

18 [redacted]

19 [redacted]

20 [redacted]

21 [redacted]

22 [redacted]

23 [redacted]

24 [redacted]

25 [redacted]

1 [redacted]

2 [redacted]

3 [redacted]

4 [redacted]

5 [redacted]

6 [redacted]

7 [redacted]

8 [redacted]

9 [redacted]

10 [redacted]

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 [redacted]

14 [redacted]

15 [redacted]

16 [Open session]

17 THE REGISTRAR: Which map, please, Mr. Ierace?

18 MR. IERACE: Number 7.

19 JUDGE ORIE: We are not yet in open session? Yes we are in open

20 session again.

21 MR. IERACE:

22 Q. Mr. Hinchliffe, you have indicated certain buildings on certain

23 photographs. Would you look at the red circles which appear on the map?

24 Do either of those circles depict any of those three buildings that you've

25 indicated?

1 A. No.

2 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, would it be of assistance to the Trial

3 Chamber if the witness was to place a cross through both of those circles?

4 I might indicate there will be no further evidence as to the relevance of

5 those circles.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but these are perhaps already marked by another

7 witness.

8 MR. IERACE: Yes, General Karavelic.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

10 MR. IERACE: Otherwise, the transcript will cover it.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I think it's covered by the transcript and let's

12 not move away from the general rule that we are not marking exhibits

13 already admitted.

14 MR. IERACE:

15 Q. Please now go to map number 8? Did you go to the spot indicated

16 as number 8?

17 A. Yes, I did.

18 Q. And did you take a distance reading from that site?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Can you tell us on the map where that site was, the distance of

21 which you measured?

22 A. The map shows the red circle, that is the area which I measured,

23 and it was at a distance of 901 metres.

24 Q. Would you now please go to map number 10? I'm sorry, map number

25 9, I should say. Did you go to the red dot indicated by the number 9?

1 A. No.

2 Q. Would you now please go to map number 10? Before I ask you any

3 questions about map number 10, in relation to number 9, did you read the

4 evidence of a witness in this trial by the name of Ifeta Sahic?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Did you also see a 360-degree photograph which you were told was

7 taken from the site where a certain person was killed in relation to --

8 was shot in relation to that incident?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. All right. Map number 10, did you go to the red dot indicated by

11 the number 10?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And did you take any measurements from that spot?

14 A. Yes, I did.

15 Q. By reference to the map, what area did you measure?

16 A. From the red dot labelled number 10, a south direction towards the

17 red circle.

18 Q. When you say towards the red circle, was the distance you

19 mentioned short of the red circle?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Can you describe -- first of all, can you point --

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Again, again, again, we now

23 have a terrible difficulty following the diabolical rhythm of Mr. Ierace.

24 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Between going

25 quickly and at the same time make it possible for others to follow?

1 MR. IERACE: I will try much harder, Mr. President.

2 Q. Now, you said that you measured a distance from the red dot in the

3 direction of the red circle. Can you point to the area of the map, being

4 the area you measured?

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Ms. Pilipovic?

6 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, but we are talking

7 about incident number 10, and we are mentioning the name of

8 Ms. Ifeta Sahic, if I have understood correctly. That is incident number

9 9.

10 MR. IERACE: It is incident number 9, and I said as much.

11 Q. Sir, could you please point to the part of the map where you

12 measured the distance?

13 A. [Indicates]

14 Q. For the benefit of the transcript the witness indicates a position

15 along a road which on the map appears to be the name Tavlovska or,

16 Tagolavska, T-A-G-O-L-A-V-S-K-A. At a point along that road where there

17 is what is sometimes called colloquially a dogleg, that is two sharp

18 changes of direction, either side of the two changes being approximately

19 parallel. Was there any reason as to -- withdraw that. Did you travel to

20 that area?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. What did you see?

23 A. Upon travelling to that area, and inspecting it, I found trenches

24 in that area.

25 Q. All right. And --

1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No. I'm sorry, it's going far

2 too fast. I'm trying to understand. I cannot find the name Tavlovska on

3 the map. I'm not even sure that we are talking about the same map. There

4 is a name on the -- that appears on the transcript, Tavlovska and I cannot

5 locate it.

6 MR. IERACE: I have another way of overcoming the problem.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Everyone sees that it's in the middle of the map.

8 It's written vertically it's approximately just above the red circle.

9 Please proceed.

10 MR. IERACE: Mr. President -- I have a sticker with an arrow on

11 it. Perhaps the witness could place the arrow on the site.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

13 MR. IERACE: Thank you.

14 Q. Now -- all right. So you've told us you saw trenches there and

15 told us you measured the distance from the red dot to those trenches. Are

16 you able to tell us the distance from the red dot to the dark green line,

17 that is that portion of the dark green line in the vicinity of the red

18 circle?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. What is that distance?

21 A. 700 metres.

22 Q. Would you now please go to map number 11? Did you go to the site

23 indicated by the red dot marked 11?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Did you take a distance reading from that site?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Whereabouts was that on the map, distance to what?

3 A. The marked red circle.

4 Q. Did you travel to the area of the red circle?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And have you already given evidence earlier this morning about

7 what you saw?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. What is the distance?

10 A. 460 metres.

11 Q. Please now go to map 12. Did you go to the position indicated by

12 the dot marked number 12?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Effectively, were you told that it was not known precisely, that

15 is, with precision, in that street where the victim was shot dead?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Did you take any measurement from that site?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Now, please go to map 13. Did you go to dot 13?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Did you take a measurement?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Of what?

24 A. Of the red circle.

25 Q. What within that red circle?

1 A. A building.

2 Q. What was the distance?

3 A. The distance was 440 metres.

4 Q. Did you go to that building in the red circle?

5 A. No, we did not.

6 Q. Did you go to any buildings in the vicinity of that red circle?

7 A. Yes. We went -- we travelled along the road and stopped outside

8 the building.

9 Q. I see.

10 A. But we did not go into it.

11 Q. Can you tell us, if you know it, the nature of the building?

12 A. It was expressed to me by the investigator that it was called the

13 Institute for the Blind.

14 Q. What was its appearance, that is, how many storeys?

15 A. It appeared to have at least two storeys, possibly an attic area.

16 Q. Can you tell us if there were any windows or other openings on the

17 side or sides of the building, facing the direction of red dot 13?

18 A. Yes, there were.

19 Q. Would you now please go to map number 14? Did you go to red dot

20 14?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Did you take any distance measurement?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Earlier in relation to incident number 4, you gave some evidence

25 in respect of a group of buildings from which you took a measurement. Do

1 you see that same group of buildings on this map?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Can you point to that group of buildings? And perhaps the map

4 could be panned back, the ELMO camera, rather. Thank you. Do you point

5 to some dark dots in a red circle?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. That's the only red circle on the map?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Can you tell us the approximate distance between those buildings

10 and red dot 14? And if you need to use the grid references on the map,

11 please do so.

12 A. Approximately 1100 metres.

13 Q. All right.

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I apologise.

15 But I'm really worried about the time that is passing. I would have

16 wanted to have the time calculated accurately so that later on, otherwise

17 we won't have the possibility to extend, and we will really be placed at

18 risk in some way. Thank you.

19 [Trial Chamber confers]

20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, do you think you could finish by 11.30

21 approximately? Would that be --

22 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, could I put it another way? If my

23 learned colleagues don't mind me leading on the distances, I will do my

24 best, perhaps there could be a degree of cooperation. I think I can sense

25 what line I should not cross and we can accelerate the procedure.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I'm not sure that I have

3 understood what Mr. Ierace has just said.

4 JUDGE ORIE: He said that if you are objecting against measuring

5 of distances, and objecting about what is known to everyone here is in a

6 report that was rejected but not for that reason, that it would save time.

7 For example, if you would say all the measurements that would be in the

8 report could be extracted and perhaps provided would be acceptable and any

9 objections against the measurements.

10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, this is one of

11 the issues that we have, technically speaking, and it's an interesting

12 point because when we take just one measure, generally speaking, it's

13 technically erroneous.

14 MR. IERACE: I'll do my best, Mr. President.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Let's see how far we come.

16 MR. IERACE: A word of forewarning, might we have access to P3279V

17 it's an under seal CD. In the meantime.

18 JUDGE ORIE: We will then turn into closed session.

19 MR. IERACE: Before we do that, Mr. President, just while it's

20 being set up to save time, we have map number 14, I think we have dealt

21 with that.

22 Q. Would you please go to map 15? Did you go to red dot 15?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. What measurements did you take from that site and in your answer,

25 indicate to us where they were to?

1 A. When I visited this site I made two measurements, 490 metres,

2 which was approximately here.

3 Q. Do you point to a building on the bottom right-hand corner of a

4 U-shaped object within which is written the number 217?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And the second measurement? You indicate a building immediately

7 to the right of the base of the triangle, that is the red triangle?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Please go to map 16. Did you go to the red dot indicated with the

10 number 16 and 17?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. What measurements did you take?

13 A. I measured from the red dot 16 and 17 to the red circle in the

14 bottom left corner.

15 Q. When you say the red circle, was there any particular object?

16 A. Yes, there was a small surrounding of buildings.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President, this

19 is one of the examples we are pace faced with. This witness just said he

20 made two measurements and, in fact, he only provided one measurement, 490

21 metres and the second one wasn't given but if we want to do that I think

22 he should provide us with the second figure too, since he mentioned the

23 two measurements in advance.

24 MR. IERACE: I'm grateful to my friend.

25 Q. What was the seconds measurement?

1 A. 901 metres.

2 Q. What object did you take the reading from, in respect of map 16

3 and 17?

4 A. A light-coloured building.

5 Q. Could you please look at your screen?

6 MR. IERACE: Might that be switched to computer evidence? This is

7 not under seal, Mr. President?

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I notice that.

9 MR. IERACE:

10 Q. Do you recognise this scene, as relating to incident 16, 17, that

11 is map 16, 17?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. As we rotate the photograph --

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin? Please proceed.

15 MR. IERACE:

16 Q. Please tell us when to stop when you see the relevant object.

17 A. Stop.

18 Q. All right. And can you direct the cursor?

19 A. If the cursor can come slightly left a little bit right, right,

20 right, keep going right. Stop. And then downwards. Stop.

21 Q. All right. Is that the site?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. What was it?

24 A. It was a group of small buildings, lightly coloured.

25 Q. For the benefit of the transcript, the building or buildings

1 indicated are at the bottom of the road, that is beneath the fall of

2 the -- above the fall of the road, as one looks at the image. If we could

3 move the cursor slightly it appears in the image to be a bright white dot,

4 beneath the transmission lines and approximately halfway between the

5 tarmac road level and the base of the mountains in the distance. Thank

6 you. Might you please to go to the --

7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, in order for --

8 to be clear in the transcript, it's necessary that with regard to these

9 questions, which concern these documents, it's necessary to maintain the

10 standing objection. I wanted to state that for the benefit of the

11 transcript. Thank you.

12 MR. IERACE:

13 Q. Map number 18. Might the witness's video be moved back to video

14 evidence? Thank you. Did you go to red dot 18?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. What distances did you measure and to what?

17 A. I measured from the red dot 18 to the block of flats indicated by

18 a red circle. The measurement was 477 metres.

19 Q. I think on this map there are two red circles. Is the second red

20 circle what you earlier identified as the church? Is that correct?

21 A. Yes.

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Once more, Mr. President, this

23 is a question.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, some of your objections, not

25 saying all, but at least some of them, are frivolous. The Chamber might

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 decide, if necessary, to grant one extra day in September to the

2 Prosecution. Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

3 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.

4 Q. Did you -- would you please go to map 19? Did you go to red dot

5 19?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. What measurement or measurements did you take and of what?

8 A. From red dot indicated as 19 I measured -- I noticed on the ground

9 at red dot 18 a cone of fire which would indicate the direction of the

10 likely fire.

11 Q. What do you mean by a cone of fire?

12 A. A cone of fire is the -- is where a group of bullets land from a

13 machine-gun.

14 Q. All right. And what actually appeared on the ground that you saw?

15 A. On the ground was a perfect line approximately 7 metres long, of

16 bullet impact spaces.

17 Q. All right. What did you sight in order to take your distance

18 measurement?

19 A. From this cone of fire, it gave me the line of sight. From that

20 line of sight, I just carried ongoing along the line of sight to the far

21 distance.

22 Q. What, in the far distance, did you sight?

23 A. In the far distance was a hillside with various buildings.

24 Q. Are you able to point to that area that you sighted on the map,

25 approximately?

1 A. The area is -- covers a wide area, I can indicate it as such. The

2 line of sight would indicate in this direction.

3 Q. All right. For the benefit of the transcript, the witness lays

4 the pointer on the map. Perhaps the ELMO lens could pan back, please?

5 All right. Please lay the pointer on the map again in the appropriate

6 position. That is the pointer is straight and he lays it on the map from

7 red dot 19 at one extremity to one of the red circles, in particular the

8 red circle immediately along side number 90, printed in blue.

9 Thank you. Please go to map 20. Did you go to red dot 20?

10 A. Red dot 20, I went to the base of that building.

11 Q. Did you take any measurements?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And what of?

14 A. From the base of that building, I took measurements to the red

15 circle, if I may indicate.

16 Q. Please do.

17 A. [Indicates]

18 Q. Of the three red circles, is it the one in the middle?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. What is the distance?

21 A. The distance was 760 metres.

22 Q. Please go to map 21. Did you go to red dot 21?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. What measurements did you take and of what?

25 A. Red dot 21, I went to that spot and took a laser reading to the

1 building along the line of sight, if I may indicate.

2 Q. Please do.

3 A. [Indicates]

4 Q. What was the object within the red circle that you sighted for

5 that purpose?

6 A. The institute of the blind.

7 Q. All right. While we are on this map, did you see reference to

8 number -- I'll withdraw that. Please go to map 22? Sorry, did you give

9 us the measurement?

10 A. No.

11 Q. What was the measurement?

12 A. The measurement was 440 metres.

13 Q. All right. Did you go to red dot 22?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Did you take any measurements?

16 A. 22 was difficult, and I did not take any measurements.

17 Q. Did you travel to any part of the area which appears in the top

18 left-hand quarter of this map?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. One sees a road running approximately north-east -- sorry,

21 northwest, southeast, and crossing the two green lines, and passing

22 through the red circle closest to the centre of the map, do you see that

23 road?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Would you please point to it?

1 A. Along this road.

2 Q. All right. Are you familiar with that road?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Did you travel along it?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Can you tell us the nature of the buildings, if any, between that

7 same red circle and the green lines in the vicinities of that road?

8 A. Yes, the buildings to the left and right of that road are somewhat

9 destroyed, with impact marks from both shelling and bullets.

10 Q. All right. Can you give us an approximate distance from that same

11 red circle to red dot 22?

12 A. Approximately 800 metres.

13 Q. Please go to map 23. Did you go to red dot 23?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Did you take any distance measurements and if so, of what?

16 A. Yes, I took a distance measurement from the red dot 23 to an area,

17 if I may indicate?

18 Q. You point to an area immediately to the left of the dark green

19 line?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. What was the distance?

22 A. Distance was 560 metres.

23 Q. Please go to map 24. Did you go to red dot 24?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Did you take any measurements and if so, of what?

1 A. From red dot 24, I took a measurement to a building below, to the

2 north of the cemetery and down the hill, indicated with, inside the red

3 circle.

4 MR. IERACE: The cemetery indicated correctly on that the map by

5 that word?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Can you please point to the building that you sighted for that

8 purpose? Do you point to the red circle?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. What was the distance?

11 A. Distance of 460 metres.

12 Q. Please go to map 25. Did you go to red dot 25?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. What measurements did you take and of what?

15 A. From red dot 25, I measured from the position to the institute of

16 the blind, a distance of 200 metres.

17 Q. Thank you. Please go to 26. Did you go to red dot 26?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. You told us about a gap between two buildings. Would you point to

20 that gap?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Did you take any measurements from the relevant apartment?

23 A. Yes, I did.

24 Q. What part of the apartment did you take those measurements from?

25 A. From the actual incident scene.

1 Q. On what side of the glass wall, that is the balcony side or the

2 interior side?

3 A. The interior.

4 Q. All right. Approximately how far from the glass wall?

5 A. It was alongside the glass wall.

6 Q. Can you point to the area that you sighted for that purpose?

7 A. The area from the original --

8 Q. The area that you looked at through your laser range finder.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. You point to the red circle?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. What was the distance?

13 A. The distance from point 26 was 352 metres.

14 Q. Finally go to map 27. Did you go to red dot 27?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And what measurements did you take and of what, from red dot 27?

17 A. From 27, I did not take any measurements. However, I observed the

18 ridge line, which overshadows in the south on the map.

19 Q. Can you estimate the distance from red dot 27 to the red circle

20 which appears in the -- that is, the left red circle, the one on the far

21 left, of the group of four?

22 A. 1200 metres.

23 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President, that completes

24 examination-in-chief.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Ierace. Looking at the clock, we have

1 a little bit more than two hours, but we need another break.

2 [Trial Chamber confers]

3 JUDGE ORIE: We have a little bit less than two hours left. The

4 Chamber has considered how much time should be granted for

5 cross-examination. Keeping in mind that part of the time was used by the

6 Prosecution also for -- concerning the expertise of the witness and was

7 not dedicated to the establishment of facts, the Chamber has also noted

8 that part of the examination-in-chief also has been, as to say, of a

9 rather administrative character rather than exploring certain important

10 facts, taken all together, the Chamber has decided that one hour for

11 cross-examination would be fair. So please proceed, Ms. Pilipovic or

12 Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. We

14 are going to make our calculations again but thank you, in any event.

15 Cross-examined by Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

16 Q. Witness, can you hear me?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Good afternoon.

19 A. Good afternoon.

20 Q. Can you answer my questions by saying yes or no each time that

21 this is possible?

22 A. Yes.

23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, before I start

24 putting my questions to the witness, and I didn't say this in order to --

25 not to interrupt the Prosecution, we have objections to raise regarding

1 the methodology used concerning the maps and we will talk about this at

2 the end of the hearing.

3 Q. Good afternoon, Witness. Are you a ballistics expert, yes or no?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Are you an engineer by formation, by training?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Are you a chemist by training?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, if carrying out an investigation of

10 a ballistics type or criminal type, it's necessary to have at least the

11 following elements. First of all, at least two points in order to trace a

12 line in space; is that correct, yes or no?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Thank you. Secondly, if possible, the minimum material indicia

15 that would be to see the projectile, to see the body, and to see the

16 wound, isn't that the case, yes or no? I'm talking about the principle.

17 A. No.

18 Q. Witness, can you affirm that it is possible to draw a ballistics

19 conclusion without having seen the projectile, for example? Is that

20 correct?

21 A. A ballistics conclusion would need -- you would need to see the

22 bullet, the projectile, yes.

23 Q. Very well. And it is not necessary to see the body?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Witness, let's imagine -- well, I'll rephrase that. Have you ever

1 seen a furrow, within the technical sense of the term, that's the first

2 thing, and have you ever participated in the opening of a furrow?

3 A. Sir, I did do not understand the name "furrow".

4 Q. I'll rephrase that question. Do you know what a furrow is, what

5 technically speaking is called a furrow?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Very well, witness, how do you term, in your technical terms, the

8 penetration of a body, if there is an entrance wound and an exit wound?

9 What term do you apply to this?

10 A. We simply say entrance wound and exit wound.

11 Q. Yes. That's the entrance and the exit but there is something

12 between the two points. What do you call the part between the entrance

13 and the exit?

14 A. We do not -- I have not investigated that.

15 Q. Very well. In technical terms, that's called a furrow, have you

16 seen a furrow or a canal and have you ever helped with opening up such a

17 furrow or canal?

18 A. No.

19 Q. So, you don't know how such -- how such a canal appears, then,

20 what the appearance of such a canal is?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Thank you very much. And as a result, you don't know, for

23 example, whether, if you take a certain victim, the canal could be from

24 the upper side to from the bottom or from the bottom up, yes or no?

25 A. No.

1 Q. Very well. Witness, have you ever seen a photograph, and I'm only

2 talking about photographs, of wounds that allegedly were inflicted on all

3 the persons who were involved in the 26 incidents that we mentioned a

4 while ago, yes or no?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Of the 27 incidents. Witness, have you ever asked to see these

7 photographs, if they existed?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. What was the response?

10 A. They were not available, or did not exist.

11 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, would you agree with me in

12 considering that as a result, given what you have told me, it is

13 absolutely impossible to exclude, given what you have just indicated, the

14 possibility of a ricochet, since, for example, if a canal goes from the

15 bottom up, this would mean that a bullet could have ricocheted from the

16 asphalt --

17 MR. IERACE: I object on the basis of relevance given the decision

18 of the Trial Chamber in relation to the report, and therefore, the actual

19 evidence of this witness has given. And secondly on the basis that the

20 witness responded to the very first of this series of questions by

21 agreeing that he was not a ballistics expert. Thank you.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, this

24 witness has a lot of technical experience, of firearms and sniper arms, he

25 says. He was willing to respond to certain questions put by the

1 Prosecution and I think that it is important that we know that it is

2 possible that a canal can indicate the trajectory of a projectile. If

3 this witness can confirm that in principle, this would be a matter of

4 importance for the Defence.

5 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... All the answers

6 indicate that the witness has got no knowledge whatsoever about that. So

7 what is the use of continuing to question?

8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I'll rephrase that, willingly.

9 Q. Witness, is it correct to say that as a result, you are not in a

10 position to indicate, for one of these 27 cases, if we have canals from

11 the bottom up, or if we have canals which are directed from upper side

12 downwards; is that correct?

13 A. I could not comment on what happened to any of the bodies at all.

14 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, I'm going to move on to another

15 subject.

16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I have to do it, Mr. President

17 for reasons of credibility.

18 Q. You compiled your report, this report hasn't been accepted.

19 Nevertheless, I have to put certain questions to you. Before writing this

20 report, did you provide the Prosecution with a preliminary report, yes or

21 no?

22 A. No.

23 Q. You never addressed any kind of preliminary document to the

24 Prosecution?

25 A. Upon writing this report, I sent the report to the Prosecution,

1 and then received comment on it. It was not as a draft. It was as the

2 report.

3 Q. Did you modify certain elements in your report, following some

4 comments that were made by the Prosecution?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Hypothetically speaking, would you have been asked to underline

7 the deliberate nature of certain acts, yes or no?

8 A. No.

9 Q. What were the comments that you were given? Could you tell us?

10 And that made you modify certain elements in your report?

11 A. The comments refer to factual inaccuracies by myself upon the

12 definition of sniping, according to the pre-trial brief and also ways in

13 which I was not clear in what I meant.

14 Q. I am going to stop you, I understand that you are not clear in

15 what you said but you're saying that the Prosecution asked you to go

16 closer to their definition of sniping, is that it?

17 A. No. I wrote in the report the definition from the pre-trial brief

18 incorrectly. This was pointed out. And then I amended it.

19 Q. What was the definition that was incorrect?

20 A. From my recollection, definition of sniping being, if I may refer

21 to my notes?

22 Q. Please do.

23 A. Fire from a small calibre weapon, including mortar fire. That was

24 the incorrect line, which I amended to fire from a small calibre weapon,

25 which is, in fact, what I investigated.

1 Q. Very well. Before you compiled your report, sir, did you speak

2 about the methodology with the Prosecution, yes or no?

3 A. The methodology of how I would look at the investigations?

4 Q. That's right.

5 A. No. That was left to me in how I would conduct my own

6 investigation.

7 Q. Very well. Did the Prosecution -- I withdraw that. For these

8 cases, were you told by the Prosecution such and such cases or such and

9 such incidents seem to be -- seem to be deliberate firing?

10 A. No. The investigator explained what the witness had already said

11 in statements, and then I made my own opinion of that.

12 Q. Very well. Witness, for each of these cases that we had looked

13 at, did you have two -- from the investigators, the following information,

14 and if you can answer with an a yes or no we would be grateful. First of

15 all, the weather conditions at the time of the incident in question, yes

16 or no?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Each time, you were given a weather report; is that correct?

19 A. Not a formal weather report, but an indication of the weather at

20 that time.

21 Q. Very well. Could you please tell me what was the weather like for

22 the Taric incident, for instance, which is number 10? Perhaps without

23 consulting the notes but --

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I withdraw that?

1 A. Sorry.

2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation].

3 Q. Please do. Could you tell us what was the weather like, for

4 incident number 10, please?

5 A. I can only tell you what the weather was like from looking at the

6 date on the incident serial number. I was given a verbal brief in

7 December in my first visit, and I do not remember after 27 briefings.

8 Q. Very well. But for this incident, you are unable to tell us at

9 the time of the firing what was the weather at that time?

10 A. Yes, I have not stated it.

11 Q. Okay. Thank you. Now, Witness, if I ask you the question now for

12 other incidents, is that the case that you will give me a similar answer,

13 in principle?

14 A. Yes, I was given a verbal briefing on the ground of each incident.

15 Q. Very well. But if I ask you -- I don't want to do it in order not

16 to waste time but if I ask you the question in relation to each of the

17 other incidents you would not be able to tell me what the weather was like

18 for each of them; is that correct?

19 A. That's correct.

20 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, same type of questions, now, did

21 the Prosecution give you detailed information and then I will ask you

22 specific questions, on combat activities at the time of the incident we

23 are talking about? For incident 1, which combat, incidents 2, which

24 combat so yes or no, did you seek that information?

25 MR. IERACE: I object on the basis of relevance, the fact that the

1 Defence has an hour does not mean they have to use an hour and there is

2 clearly no, in my respectful submission, no relevance on the basis of the

3 questions to this witness, given what his ultimate evidence has been.

4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the question is

5 obvious. If, one day, we have fierce fighting in the city and this

6 information was not given to the witness, since this witness said that

7 many things also in the first part of his examination-in-chief --

8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, it must be quite clear to you that

9 whatever conclusions have been drawn, that's out. We are talking now

10 about where has he been, what measures has he made, did he see trenches or

11 not, but it's especially in the field of conclusions that the Chamber has

12 rejected the report. So, it's of no use to establish that the facts

13 available to the witness were not such that would allow to draw

14 conclusions.

15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

16 Q. Witness, is it correct that if we examine a bullet and if you

17 know, it would be possible to ascertain whether it had ricocheted; yes or

18 no?

19 A. I would not be able to comment upon that.

20 Q. What you're saying is that this is outside your competence; is

21 that correct?

22 A. I am not qualified to state. So no.

23 Q. Very well. Witness, did you ask to see, in order to compile -- or

24 rather did you ask to see photographs of the state of the sites, the way

25 that they appeared at the time of these different problems?

1 A. Yes. I requested any visual evidence of the estimated fire

2 positions and the weather types, none was forthcoming, because it was not

3 available.

4 Q. Very well. So, you were not in a position to know what were

5 potential obstacles on certain line of fire, that you would be able to

6 establish; is that right, at the time?

7 A. At the time, yes.

8 Q. Thank you.

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, just so that I

10 know about the questions, when do we think the next break will be.

11 JUDGE ORIE: I'm just trying to figure out that, if we would

12 finish by 13.45, I take it we will have a break approximately between

13 12.30 and 12.45. If you would be able, if this would be possible, for the

14 it technicians as well, because I know that there are limits. If you

15 would be able to finish by approximately 12.30 that would be highly

16 appreciated. That would be just a couple of minutes less than one hour.

17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you. We

18 continue.

19 Q. I'd like us to look at the projectiles, the technical aspect.

20 Could you confirm, Witness, if you are able to, that a bullet, and I'm

21 talking about a projectile here, so the mobile part, of a -- from a sniper

22 weapon, cannot be distinguished, technically speaking, from a bullet which

23 has been fired with a different weapon but of identical calibre, of

24 course?

25 A. I do not have the qualifications to assess that question.

1 Q. You're a professional sharpshooter, right?

2 A. I am, however my qualifications and expertise are in the

3 application, the practical application, not in the ballistics.

4 Q. Very well. Witness, would you be able to tell us whether, in your

5 opinion, and according to your knowledge of a professional sniper, a

6 bullet would be fragmented from an impact in a body much more easily after

7 it has already ricocheted, yes or no, if you know this?

8 A. If you specify in more detail, the question, please.

9 Q. Yes.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, for technical reasons we have to

11 break a bit early. So, in a quarter of an hour and then you can complete

12 after the break.

13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Do you want the break to be

14 taken now?

15 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues]... Which is in 15

16 minutes from now.

17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you. I will make my

20 question more specific, sir.

21 Q. Do you know if, yes or no, a bullet, which had ricocheted and

22 which then hits a body of a person, would then fragment much more easily

23 than another bullet which goes directly to its target?

24 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I make the same objection. My learned

25 colleague persists in asking questions which should be addressed it a

1 ballistics expert which this witness is not.

2 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether fragmentation is a matter of

3 ballistics, but Mr. Piletta-Zanin --

4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President, perhaps may

5 I respond? This man is a professional sniper, professional sharpshooter.

6 In his report, you could see that he was speaking about formidable hits by

7 ricochet and so on. He certainly know knows about ricochets and the

8 reason why what I want to say about this is that if the answer was yes,

9 then we could conclude certain things from there. If bodies were

10 examined.

11 JUDGE ORIE: I do not understand. This is rather a matter of

12 forensic pathology or the expertise of a -- of someone who does a post

13 mortem than anything else. Do you know anything about the way bullets

14 impact on bodies and because you told us something about this before, do

15 you have any specific knowledge on that?

16 THE WITNESS: I have no specific knowledge on the way a ricochet

17 has an effect on a body.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, in general, any knowledge on the effect of

19 bullets on bodies, such as we talked before, about the canals?

20 A. No.

21 JUDGE ORIE: But similar subjects?

22 A. No.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

25 Q. Sir, I'm going to come back to some other elements.

1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, here I'm going

2 to have to make a distinction, sometimes not so clear, between fact and

3 conclusion in relation to this, and I would be grateful in advance if you

4 have any guidance for me, that you think might be useful. Thank you.

5 Q. Sir, you stated at least on two occasions, I believe, that you

6 knew that it was an established fact that such and such a sniper had

7 received an order from his commander to attack or to fire at targets that

8 were, in your terminology, the way you put it, non-combatant targets?

9 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, if my friend persists in asking these

10 questions and is permitted to do so, then, as has happened in the past, if

11 he opens the door to the report being tendered, I will take that

12 opportunity. Thank you.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I think that it has become

14 quite clear from the questions from the Bench as well, whatever --

15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well.

16 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... And of course,

17 if you do not know about the orders, then you cannot -- it's -- that is

18 exactly the area where the Chamber has decided that an expert witness

19 cannot enter into the domain which is exclusively for the Chamber. So,

20 the witness has no direct knowledge of that and we will have to determine

21 on the basis of the evidence, and to the extent necessary, whether victims

22 were civilians or not or combatants on the way home or eating soup in

23 their kitchen. So that's exactly the area which the Chamber not accepted

24 to be within the domain of this witness on the basis of his expertise.

25 Please proceed.

1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much for this

2 clarification.

3 Q. Now, Witness, on the basis of what, and I believe that this

4 question is outside of this area, on the basis of what could you, as a

5 general rule, exclude or rule out the possibility of a stray bullet

6 and -- what?

7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, there is an English saying that

8 something goes without saying. You have already, for a month, asked

9 people to exclude for 100 per cent certainty whatever a witness would

10 answer to that question. It would be quite clear, independent of what the

11 answer is, that something you cannot exclude such thing for a full 100 per

12 cent.

13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] This is clear for the Chamber,

14 then?

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What one can exclude for certain is usually in

16 very specific circumstances is clear for the Chamber.

17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

18 Q. We are going to show some documents later on to this witness, but

19 I'd like to ask technical questions no, Witness. Did you examine the

20 structure of Dobrinja -- screens, Dobrinja screens?

21 A. I don't understand the question.

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Previous translation continues]... [In

23 English] For the translation. Thank you very much.

24 THE INTERPRETER: Thank you, counsel.

25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 Q. Did you examine the structure of the embankments in Dobrinja?

2 A. Can you provide further assistance into how you mean to look at

3 the structures? How do you mean?

4 Q. Did you have a look what this structure was made of? Was this a

5 concrete canal or was this made of soil?

6 A. Can I ask you, does this regard to incident number 6? I'm

7 clearing my head on which area you mean.

8 Q. I'm talking about the river, the Dobrinja river. There is an

9 incident which occurred on the Dobrinja river. Did you examine this

10 embankment in Dobrinja?

11 A. The area about incident 6, I did look and examine the impact area,

12 yes.

13 Q. Did you examine these embankments?

14 A. Only where it was indicated the victim was shot.

15 Q. You were not curious to look up a bit, what this canal looked

16 like?

17 A. I specified on the incident locations only.

18 Q. So that your answer, that means no?

19 A. I did observe the canal area but only where the incident happened.

20 Q. Very well. Very well. Therefore, no, you did not look higher up,

21 what the embankment or the river bank was made of, right?

22 A. Correct.

23 Q. Thank you. Witness, did you go to the famous tower, the clock

24 tower of what we know as the church?

25 A. No.

1 Q. Witness, so you did not go to the top of the tower and look at the

2 view?

3 A. No.

4 Q. Witness, so you were not able to examine, from the top of the bell

5 tower, if there was, yes or no, a probable firing angle on a location that

6 you were shown?

7 A. I did not go to the church or the bell tower.

8 Q. Thank you. Witness, you were told, you were asked to speak of

9 earlier about an incident in relation to which you went near a window, and

10 you would have seen buildings opposite the window. Do you remember that?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Thank you. Witness, were you given any kind of information, at

13 the time that you went there, on what was happening at the time of the

14 incident, on the site, on the location, of the buildings that we can see

15 in the perspective, in the view from that window?

16 A. The information I was given was where the front lines were at that

17 point in time, and which side of the -- both forces were.

18 Q. But no information regarding possible combat at the time?

19 A. No, no specific indications.

20 Q. Thank you. Witness, I'm also referring to the answer that you

21 gave in relation to this scene from a window which was illuminated by a

22 television screen. Do you see that image in your mind?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Thank you. And you stated that it was not possible to hit

25 anything else but that, because this was the window which was lit?

1 MR. IERACE: Mr. President.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

3 MR. IERACE: I withdraw the objection. I don't make any

4 objection.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation].

7 Q. Do you remember that?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Very well. How could you know that at that time, hypothetically,

10 there were not other viewers watching TV in other rooms, or someone who

11 had something else on which would make something else light up?

12 A. I obviously can't state what was happening at the time since I was

13 not there.

14 Q. So you would agree with me that your conclusions are mistaken in a

15 sense that you don't know whether there were other sources of light?

16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, we are talking about the facts on

17 which the witness testified. Please proceed.

18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you. Mr. President, if

19 I dare ask you, very frequently I don't hear what you're saying because I

20 think you start before I finish in some way.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I should not do that but sometimes I have to

22 intervene but next time, I will ask you first to stop, then make a short

23 break, and then say whatever I have to say. Please --

24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Speaking of a break, perhaps

25 this would be an ideal time to have a break.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We will adjourn for 15 minutes and we will

2 resume at 12.30.

3 --- Recess taken at 12.15 p.m.

4 --- On resuming at 12.33 p.m.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I thank you, Mr. President. I

7 don't want to lose too much time. How much time remains for us, more or

8 less?

9 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Not any more

10 than until ten minutes to 1.00.

11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could the usher

12 assist us and Madam Registrar so that very soon we can provide a document

13 to the witness?

14 THE REGISTRAR: D172.

15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

16 Q. In the interval, the Prosecution showed you 26 or 27 maps, I

17 think. You saw that a minute ago, and I would like you to answer these

18 questions. When you were shown these maps, Witness, were there no

19 indications on it, yes or no? Was it unmarked?

20 A. Which maps are you referring to.

21 Q. I'm referring to the 26 or 27 maps that we saw a minute ago.

22 A. Maps in which I used, yes, they are the ones, yes, the only

23 indications were the incident numbers, the red circles and the lines of

24 confrontation.

25 Q. When you said, "Red circles," do you mean that you put the dots

1 there yourself or they were already there?

2 A. Dots were already there.

3 Q. And the linear indications were they already that map?

4 A. Which indications?

5 Q. The linear indications, for example, the firing, the possible

6 firing zones, et cetera, et cetera, such as these linear indications here.

7 Were they on the map already?

8 A. [No audible response]

9 Q. Thank you very much.

10 And the legend was that on the map, too?

11 A. Yes, that was on the map.

12 Q. Witness, would we agree that this map was presented to you, and

13 when it was presented to you, had been preprepared, it had already been

14 prepared?

15 A. It had been prepared, yes.

16 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, did you climb the towers, the high

17 buildings, the towers, such as the buildings that can -- that were

18 mentioned in incident 5?

19 A. No, I did not.

20 Q. So you were never in a position to observe possible shots, the

21 alleged possible shots, from these positions?

22 A. I visited a number of incidents where I went inside an apartment

23 block, in the apartment where the alleged incident happened.

24 Q. No. My question was the point of fire, the place from which fire

25 was opened.

1 A. No.

2 Q. Thank you. Witness, with regard to incident 5, which took place

3 near the Tito barracks, I think, did you receive any indication of

4 fighting in that area, yes or no?

5 A. I was give an indication by the investigator about fighting and an

6 indication from the investigator, from what the witness had said, where

7 the forces were on the ground.

8 Q. No. My question wasn't the establishment of the forces but the

9 existence of fighting at the time of the incident, of the alleged

10 incident, yes or no?

11 A. Yes, yes, I was given that information.

12 Q. So, what fighting was going on?

13 A. I was told of known positions and fighting was in and around the

14 area, it was very generalistic information given.

15 Q. What position?

16 A. In and around the towers and the subsequent area and the use of

17 towers, as indicated by local knowledge.

18 Q. Yes. But now you're talking about sniping. Very well. I am

19 talking about fighting, about other combat, which allegedly took place in

20 the area. But this is something to be distinguished from sniping.

21 A. I was not given that information.

22 Q. Thank you very much. Do you know if, by some extraordinary

23 circumstances, there is any testimony according to which the fire, the

24 shot, was fired from the second floor, allegedly, yes or no?

25 A. Do I understand the question to be: Was the building indicated in

1 a statement?

2 Q. Were you ever told, with regard to this tower block, that the shot

3 may have been fired from the second floor, yes or no?

4 A. No floor was identified to me, and the positioning of the firing

5 point, as assessed by myself was after my own investigation.

6 Q. Thank you very much. Did you ever see anyone in Sarajevo, who

7 might have been able to confirm personally the existence of this technique

8 which concerns the removable brick?

9 A. Within Sarajevo, when I visited, no.

10 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, have you been through the streets

11 of Sedrenik, are you familiar with these streets?

12 A. I am not familiar.

13 Q. Have you walked down these streets?

14 A. I have no recollection of which area you're referring to, without

15 showing it on the map.

16 Q. So you can't know specifically whether from such and such a street

17 in Sedrenik it might be possible to see certain positions from where fire

18 was allegedly opened? You can't confirm that?

19 A. I can't confirm, I don't know the area which you --

20 Q. Thank you very much?

21 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand you that the word Sedrenik does not

22 say anything to you?

23 A. It does not, whilst I visited I was taken to the various incident

24 spots. I do not have a knowledge of each street name and is so on.

25 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand you. You might have been to Sedrenik

1 without knowing what Sedrenik is?

2 A. Yes.

3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation].

4 Q. Could we take the document that you have in front of you? Can you

5 show me the document that you have? That's not the document I wanted to

6 give you. Put that document aside. Don't go through the pages. Thank

7 you. Thank you. Witness, you now have in front of you?

8 THE REGISTRAR: Is this 173 or 17 --

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It is 173, that's correct.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Could we get a copy for Mr. Ierace as well?

11 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I object.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

13 MR. IERACE: Not for the first time, the Defence has conspicuously

14 failed to abide by its obligations under Rule 67(C), the Prosecution has

15 not previously received either of these documents by way of reciprocal

16 disclosure and to - I should say - deliberately leave the showing of these

17 documents to the witness to the last five minutes of his

18 cross-examination, and then seek to question him on them, is in my

19 respectful submission, a flagrant breach of their responsibilities and I

20 object to the witness being asked any questions about such documents.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, did you disclose these

22 documents to the --

23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I apologise, Mr. President,

24 could you repeat that, please?

25 JUDGE ORIE: Did you disclose these documents to the --

1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, but we won't produce them.

2 That will be a lot simpler, thank you.

3 Q. Witness, you affirmed the existence of Dragonovs; is that correct?

4 A. Do I take the question to be, do I understand Dragonov rifles

5 exist?

6 Q. That they exist in the Sarajevo universe?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Very well. Did you ever see a single Dragonov in Sarajevo?

9 A. Do you ask the question as to whether I was there with this

10 organisation?

11 Q. Yes, quite.

12 A. No.

13 Q. Were you ever shown by any authority a Dragonov rifle?

14 A. Do you mean in my experience as a whole?

15 Q. In Sarajevo.

16 A. In Sarajevo, no.

17 Q. Very well. Do you know who manufactures the Dragonov rifles?

18 A. Principally from data, then, yes, I do.

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, the transcript isn't

20 clear.

21 Q. Who is the manufacturer, who produces this weapon?

22 A. The weapon is produced by various nations, they all come from the

23 family of Kalashnikov rifles, AK range and were to the best of my

24 knowledge originated from the Soviet Union.

25 Q. According to what factual elements -- on the basis of what factual

1 elements can you claim that some of the weapons from which fire was opened

2 were Dragonov rifles and I'm referring to your personal experience and not

3 what you have heard or learned from other sources?

4 A. I, on being deployed to Bosnia in 1993, I attended a pretraining

5 package which focused on mines, equipment, weaponry, known in the area.

6 Intelligence briefings from given to me regarding the Dragonov.

7 Q. If I said that there were never any Dragonovs in the -- among the

8 former weapons of the so-called JNA army, what would your reaction be?

9 A. That would -- that would contradict what I had previously been

10 told by my organisations, prior to my deployment in 1993.

11 Q. Might it be possible that certain individuals obtained such

12 weapons?

13 A. The weapons, the AK range as a whole, is used by various armies,

14 factions, countries throughout the world, yes.

15 Q. I'm not talking about armies. I'm talking about individuals.

16 Could it be possible that individuals might have obtained such arms, me,

17 for example, others, Mr. Ierace?

18 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, Mr. Piletta-Zanin appears to be

19 putting to the witness that the accused's subordinates did not have

20 Dragonovs. If that is what he's putting to the witness, he has not put it

21 previously to a number of witnesses in the Prosecution case who have given

22 evidence to that effect. On that basis, in my respectful submission, the

23 questions should be disallowed.

24 JUDGE ORIE: But may I ask you, Mr. Ierace, was it ever put into

25 evidence that Dragonovs were sniper rifles used by subordinates?

1 MR. IERACE: Yes. For example, one example is through General

2 Karavelic.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I haven't got that clearly in my mind but I

4 think that there are two different issues at this very moment, Mr. Ierace.

5 I think one is the one you mention but the other is whether private

6 individuals could obtain such weapons.

7 MR. IERACE: And Mr. President, that's why I used the word appears

8 with some emphasis because when one looks at the questions as a group,

9 that appears to be what he's putting obliquely to the witness.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so perhaps the -- ask that to the witness. Do

11 you know whether private individuals could obtain, buy or whatever way,

12 Dragonov rifles, sniping rifles?

13 A. I have no idea.

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you. Another two

15 questions. Thank you.

16 Q. Witness, if you never saw the rifle or the rifles from which fire

17 was opened, would you agree with me that any consideration, any

18 consideration with regard to the range, is purely speculative, it's just a

19 hypothesis, if you don't know which weapon was used? Would you agree with

20 that? Would you come to the same conclusion?

21 A. I would agree that my findings are based on detailed accounts of

22 weapons used from such publications as Jane's and so on. But I do not

23 know which weapon, for sure, was used in each incident.

24 Q. Very well, thank you. And that means that if you didn't know

25 which weapons were allegedly used, nothing can be deduced as to the range

1 of the weapon; is that correct?

2 A. No, that's not correct.

3 Q. You can deduce the range of a shot without knowing what weapon was

4 used to fire the shot?

5 A. No. We have an indication from a witness as to where the shot

6 heard -- I was therefore give and range and the range indicates the type

7 of weaponry, in fact in some cases the ammunition used.

8 Q. Very well, and my very last question. It's the last one.

9 Witness, do you know how many joules [Realtime transcript read in error

10 "jules"] You need to penetrate a body?

11 A. I'm not a ballistics expert. I can't tell you how many joules it

12 takes to penetrate a body.

13 JUDGE ORIE: That's the last question, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, very well,

15 because the transcript says "jules," but we were referring to "joules".

16 MR. IERACE: One question in re-examination, Mr. President.

17 Re-examined by Mr. Ierace:

18 Q. A minute or so ago you said in response to a question regarding

19 your knowledge of the range of rifles that you relied upon publications

20 such as Jane's. In your experience, how reliable is the maximum effective

21 range of rifles as indicated in Jane's and similar publications?

22 A. With regard to experienced firers, then it is unreliable.

23 Q. Is that unreliability upwards or downwards, in other words is the

24 effective range, in your experience, higher or lower than indicated in

25 those publications with experienced riflemen?

1 A. Experienced snipers will undoubtedly outshoot what is stated in

2 these publications. If I may give an example, the L96 British sniper

3 rifle is indicated by Jane's as to being 900 metres accurate fire.

4 Whereas myself, and the people who I train, can hit a target actually over

5 1.000 metres with the same equipment. It's experience of the individual

6 and the firer, which breaks these barriers put before us.

7 MR. IERACE: Nothing further, Mr. President.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Nieto-Navia has one question for you.

9 Questioned by the Court:

10 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Just one question. Which is the average

11 velocity, speed, of a bullet, of a rifle, sniper rifle bullet?

12 A. Without referring to data, I could not give you an accurate answer

13 off the top of my head. I'd have to refer to manuals.

14 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: I was thinking in a sniper firing from a more

15 than one kilometre away, how can he calculate the target, moving target,

16 for example?

17 A. There are two methods of shooting a moving target. There is the

18 tracking method where you follow the individual or object, placing the

19 cross-hairs in front of the person or object. There is the shocker

20 method, where you give yourself a killing area, an area in which you want

21 to engage the target and allow the person or individual to progress into

22 that area and then you open fire. When you decide which method to use,

23 you have to understand how far away you are and guess where you need to

24 aim. For instance, if you're closer to the target, then the shocker

25 method would be better, i.e., the person -- you can keep your point of aim

1 on the person as such. If you're further away then it's a real guess, as

2 you fire the rifle, you cannot guess the speed and how long it will hit

3 the person in front. You just use your data from experience from training

4 as to what you need to place in the cross-hairs and then you fire.

5 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: No further questions.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Judge El Mahdi has one question for you.

7 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [In English] Thank you, Mr. President.

8 [Interpretation] This is just a clarification, please. You said in

9 relation to an aid for vision or for sight, you called it, you said a

10 sighting scope, that that was one of the methods in order to have a

11 sharper view of things. You said that spotting scopes were used. Could

12 you please explain what did you mean by that, by the spotting scope?

13 A. A spotting scope is used by the second person within the pair.

14 The way most armies throughout the world deploy snipers is as a two-person

15 formation, so you have a firer and a spotter, two people. The firer

16 obviously fires the weapon system, the spotter observes and corrects the

17 firer. The spotter will use either a pair of binos, binoculars, or a

18 spotting scope. In the case of a spotting scope, what the observer sees

19 through the spotting scope is exactly the same what the firer sees so they

20 will have the same sight pattern so the same cross-hairs. And what he

21 will do is he will see where the bullet lands, if possible, on the person

22 or around the area, and then deduct, by using the sight picture, where he

23 needs to aim or how he needs to adjust his sight to bring on line the

24 rifle to the target.

25 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] If I understand you correctly,

1 you said these are two people, two snipers, two sharpshooters who are

2 not -- who are next to each other and give each other information on two

3 positions or would it be in one single position next to each other?

4 A. It would generally be in one position. A rule of thumb, which the

5 British army uses, is to fire one sniper round it takes two people.

6 However, in some instances, a firer can shoot by himself if he's confident

7 in his own ability. And if he feels he can see where his bullets are

8 actually landing.

9 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Then, in the event that there is

10 only one bullet that was fired, so you with rule out that these would be

11 non-professionals and if you say that the norm is that there should be two

12 of them, and there has only been one single bullet, we can then presume

13 that this was someone who did not belong to a hierarchy, a specific

14 hierarchy, or would you rule out this possibility?

15 A. That is not correct, no. One round would be fired. However, --

16 so one person would fire but two people would evaluate the factors in

17 firing the rifle. If, that is correct.

18 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hinchliffe, it will not surprise you that I have

20 put already so many questions to you that I have no further questions for

21 you. That means that this concludes your evidence in this Court.

22 I'd like to thank you very much for having come and having

23 answered during yesterday and today the questions of both parties and of

24 the bench. Thank you for that. And I hope you have a safe trip home

25 again.

1 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Madam usher, could you please escort Mr. Hinchliffe

3 out of the courtroom?

4 [The witness withdrew]

5 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Ierace?

6 MR. IERACE: The next matter, Mr. President, is the tender of the

7 17 items from the bar table, by letter dated the 23rd of July, 2002, I

8 informed the Defence and the Trial Chamber of each of those items. I

9 think they are 16 documents and one videotape.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

11 MR. IERACE: Normally, the way we tender material is to provide

12 multiple copies of each item. I imagine that if we did that in relation

13 to these items it would consume much of the remaining time. I wonder if I

14 could respectfully suggest an alternative, that since the Defence has been

15 provided in advance by the Prosecution with copies of each of these

16 documents and the video, and a transcript of the video, that perhaps they

17 could indicate if they have any objection to any of the items.

18 JUDGE ORIE: That's, as a matter of fact, what I was intending to

19 ask them. So we have in front of us at this very moment the list attached

20 to the letter of the 26th of July, 2002, concerning tendering, from the

21 bar table, the documents mentioned.

22 MR. IERACE: Minor correction, Mr. President, 23rd of July.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do agree, but on the 26th of July, you did

24 send another list of the same documents.

25 May I ask -- perhaps first, Ms. Pilipovic, I think your expert's

1 presence in this courtroom is not necessary anymore. May I indicate, this

2 is a public hearing so whenever you want to follow what happens in this

3 courtroom from the public gallery, you're quite welcome to do so but, yes,

4 unless you'd like him to be present when we are dealing with the

5 documents?

6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I don't know

7 whether we are going to need, we will probably need that in relation to

8 documents so perhaps.

9 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... If you need him

10 for that perhaps that should have been a better order to do but since we

11 started with the other issue and since it's all public I think that the

12 expert could just stay in the courtroom. May I hear from the Defence --

13 okay. I've taken a wrong order, as a matter of fact. I think it would be

14 better to first deal with the documents tendered during the testimony of

15 Mr. Hinchliffe. Madam Registrar, there are no, as far as I'm aware of; is

16 that correct?

17 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

18 JUDGE ORIE: Since there was only the report, I took the wrong

19 order but it doesn't change anything because there are no documents

20 tendered, since the Defence withdrew the two documents that were already

21 on our table. Yes?

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I understood

23 well that the maps, as such, will not be tendered.

24 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Evidence. As

25 you might have noticed, the maps shown to the witness were those who were

1 corrected, I think, by General Karavelic but --

2 MR. IERACE: That's so, Mr. President and at that stage, you

3 indicated that the markings on the map which would be tendered into

4 evidence.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Would be ignored.

6 MR. IERACE: I should say formally that I seek to tender the red

7 dots and the red circles.

8 JUDGE ORIE: That's something on which the Defence could express

9 its opinion. Because until now we accepted the maps but we ignored the

10 red part of it through this witness we would then, since his testimony is

11 about the red dots and the red circles we would pay attention to that as

12 well. So if there is any objection.

13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. That was the reason why

14 I allowed myself to stand up. There is a categorical objection here to,

15 shall we say, the transfer of these maps into the area of testimony of

16 Mr. Hinchliffe, for the following reason. This witness himself,

17 personally, he did not know anything about confrontation lines, about

18 combat areas, about firing positions, possible firing positions, or about

19 the injured and the casualties. So, that is really in opposition to all

20 the other people, like, for instance, the general who recorrected the map,

21 because he himself had a personal knowledge of certain facts, professional

22 knowledge, like combat lines, confrontation lines and so on. Now, we

23 believe that in this case of Witness Hinchliffe to have slipped him a map

24 where he had nothing else to do except to say, "yes there is a red dot,

25 yes this is the incident, the circle and so on," that is not the right way

1 to proceed. That is precisely the written version in colour, which is

2 forbidden in oral testimony. So that's the reason why this is a

3 leading -- and it's not acceptable.

4 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... While tendering,

5 I would say, the red part of the maps, do you seek to tender that in order

6 to show to the Chamber the places indicated to the witness, Hinchliffe,

7 when he visited the area and also assisting the Chamber to know exactly

8 what places were visited by Mr. Hinchliffe? Is that it or by giving us

9 maps with red dots would that be in your view evidence that could

10 establish where the witness was, became a victim, or where the fires were

11 shot from? Sometimes we have --

12 MR. IERACE: Certainly not, Mr. President. The extent of the

13 evidence of this witness is as you have expressed, and of course, that

14 then becomes -- that then ties in with evidence of other witnesses in

15 order to arrive at those ultimate conclusions.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That is clear. We will give a decision on

17 that.

18 We have no other exhibits in respect of Witness Hinchliffe. Yes,

19 Mr. Piletta-Zanin??

20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, as the formulation was a

21 little too precious, at least as far as I'm concerned, it is clear that

22 for the Prosecution, as far as the Prosecution is concerned, they don't

23 want to prove anything in relation to the existence of victims and the --

24 where the firing was coming from and all that. This is how I should

25 understand it?

1 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that what is expressed on that map is what

2 the Prosecutor thinks that would be a correct reflection of the evidence

3 available and since you can't ask a witness or an expert witness to say,

4 "Well, just look around Sarajevo and see whether you can find any spot

5 where someone might have been injured or killed," that they used this map

6 in order to bring Mr. Hinchliffe, who doesn't know anything from his own

7 knowledge of what happened at that time, to bring to that places and see

8 what he, as an experienced sniper, would observe. I think that's the

9 position. Of course, if that contradicts other evidence, the Chamber then

10 perhaps, if it would be admitted in evidence, would say, "well, this is

11 not correct because it really contradicts what is in evidence given by

12 other witnesses." And if it combines, then of course, the Chamber might

13 think that the dots on the basis of the evidence available were at least

14 not put in the wrong places. Let me put it that way.

15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.

16 JUDGE ORIE: We will give a decision on that. Then we return to

17 the issue we used before. But perhaps, Mr. Ierace, since that might

18 assist you --

19 [Trial Chamber confers]

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then, at this moment, I think that since we've

21 dealt with the document, that is, your expert is -- I take it is excused

22 by you and could leave the courtroom and is of course welcome to follow

23 what happens in this Court.

24 Perhaps, Mr. Ierace, I read a part of the decision presumably be

25 filed in respect of -- the Chamber in respect of Mr. Lesic. Considering

1 however that the date when various photographs were tendered -- various

2 photographs tendered were taken.

3 THE INTERPRETER: Could you please slow down, Mr. President.

4 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... If any, no

5 objection was raised by the Defence.

6 THE INTERPRETER: Please, Mr. President.

7 JUDGE ORIE: I'm making the same mistakes, and I sincerely

8 apologise, as everyone else has done before.

9 I restart. However, that the date when various photographs

10 tendered were taken is of very limited value, if any, as no objection was

11 raised on this basis by the Defence, that the document marked MFI3 is

12 already in evidence, that the photograph marked MFI2 does not go to the

13 proof of any specific facts and constitutes at most an useful tool to

14 understand the geography of Sarajevo, an aspect for which much evidence

15 was already adduced, that the collage video presented during the opening

16 statement does not tend to prove any specific incident, but rather tries

17 to convey the general atmosphere that prevailed in Sarajevo during part of

18 the period covered in the indictment, I add to that that of course parts

19 of the video were admitted into evidence and were then more specifically

20 discussed, this would be I think the most important part of the decision

21 on Mr. Lesic that you can expect to be filed later today.

22 Let me then turn to the exhibits to be tendered from the bar table

23 and ask the Defence whether there are any objections and what the

24 objections would be.

25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. This may

1 surprise you, but at the time the Defence does not know this yet, and why

2 we don't know it is because we would have wanted, on an important issue,

3 we would like to hear what the Prosecution has to say on the way this

4 cassette was made. I don't know whether you're able to examine it. We

5 were able to do it together, Ms. Pilipovic and myself, but this is a

6 montage of several elements, apparently, we don't have the date.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Are you referring to number --

8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] 2347. That is the only

9 cassette, and Mr. President, the problem is the compilation of sources.

10 We don't know where these pieces of information, video information, come

11 from. We don't know whether this is just an excerpt from a longer passage

12 or this has been put together, and what's been made is some kind of

13 patchwork, and we were very frequently not able to see the dates of the

14 interventions. So, perhaps Sherlock Holmes would be able to make

15 something out of it but I'm afraid I don't really have his stature. So

16 first of all I want to know from the Prosecution, this piece from this

17 source, this origin and so on and so on. Thank you.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace. First of all, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, did you

19 ask such information, not to Sherlock Holmes but to the Prosecution?

20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the problem is

21 that we really had not much time this week, and we did it as a -- on a

22 nightly seance, if you'll allow me to say, that but we see things as we

23 are discovering them.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, could you respond to this not yet

25 objection but.

1 MR. IERACE: Yes, I will. No. First of all the tape was

2 disclosed to the Defence on the 26th of November, 2001. I don't know

3 whether Your Honours have seen the tape. I imagine not.

4 JUDGE ORIE: No, we have not received it. We have not seen it.

5 MR. IERACE: The tape consists entirely of interviews of General

6 Galic, with the exception of the first segment which is a press conference

7 where the speaker is primarily General Abdel-Razek and General Galic is

8 seated alongside him.

9 Mr. President, an even more obvious source of information than the

10 Prosecution as to what the -- what date the interviews relate to was the

11 accused himself. As to the source of the material, it's public-source

12 material. It comes from a variety of sources, one would think, in the

13 form of televised interviews, interviews with General Galic, carried, it

14 would seem, on local Serbian TV. As to specific information as to where

15 each segment came from, I cannot assist but the first issue is, surely, is

16 it relevant and, if it is, does the accused deny that it is, indeed,

17 himself speaking the words and appearing in the video? Thank you.

18 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask you, to your knowledge, has there -- been

19 any cutting or pasting or if you're talking about an interview, would that

20 be parts of an interview or the interview as being broadcasted?

21 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I viewed the video with the benefit of

22 the transcript, and it seems to be a series of videos -- I'm sorry a

23 series of interviews, short interviews, or statements made by

24 General Galic without any apparent editing other than the editing one

25 would expect on the segment that went to air. Certainly no abrupt cuts on

1 that sort of thing.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Can you tell us if it has been televised? Someone

3 should have recorded it and having brought it to the attention of the

4 Prosecutor's Office, do you know who did so or --

5 MR. IERACE: I don't, Mr. President. I don't know how it came

6 into -- how the various segments came into our possession. I could

7 certainly make some inquiries over the break and inform the Defence of the

8 results of those inquiries.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, there is not a lot of break. I understand.

10 MR. IERACE: I simply make the point that it's simply

11 General Galic being interviewed and making statements.

12 Thank you.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, this brings ME

15 to complete my initial intervention. This is about General Galic, yes,

16 but we don't know when, we don't know in which conditions this was filmed,

17 this was produced. And even the Prosecution says they don't know what

18 this is about. Now, in these circumstances, --

19 JUDGE ORIE: Let me ask you, it's not -- you say it is

20 General Galic?

21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I didn't say that that's what

22 the Prosecution says.

23 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues]... Dispute. Do you

24 say it's another person, a lookalike or something like that, sitting next

25 to General Abdel-Razek or perhaps General Abdel-Razek is also a lookalike?

1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Defence, as

2 we stand and speak here, we believe that General Abdel-Razek was there.

3 This cassette should have been produced before General Abdel-Razek so that

4 we were in a position to ask questions. Now, to tender at the very last

5 minute, a document which would involve General Galic without -- General

6 Abdel-Razek without giving him the possibility of saying anything

7 whatsoever is equally serious as what I tried to tender earlier which

8 provoked a very strong reaction. On the basis of this, we are not able to

9 accept this, to criticise, contest, and to look for the truth, in fact.

10 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I should say something in response to

11 one of my learned colleague's submissions. He said the cassette should

12 have been produced before General Abdel-Razek so that he would in a

13 position to ask questions. It was placed on the exhibit list. It was

14 disclosed to the Defence. Time did not permit the Prosecution to play it,

15 but the Defence had every opportunity to cross-examine General Abdel-Razek

16 about that interview.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Having heard the argument of the parties on the

18 video, let us turn to the other documents. Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. We have

20 similar difficulties here. We received a rather thick load of documents,

21 and we did not have time to examine them in detail, we just had a -- we

22 just glanced at them but this way of producing documents without leaving

23 the possibility, particularly in the last ten minutes of the trial of the

24 case, to allow the Defence to question and cross-examine this way is not

25 acceptable. There are, in here, elements which could be useful for the

1 Prosecution's case. Otherwise, they wouldn't be here. But, however, we

2 don't have the possibility, certainly not in the few minutes that we have

3 left, to go to the bottom of the case, and to furnish, if this was

4 necessary, our own counterarguments, counterdocuments, I think a lot of

5 time has been lost, without the fault of the Defence, but the Defence

6 cannot then be accused of wasting time. The way the Prosecution has done,

7 in a direct way, that Defence has just been handed, slipped under the

8 door, very thick load of documents.

9 JUDGE ORIE: We will have to consider the matter. And give you a

10 decision on the shortest notice. We might even deliberate on the issue

11 right away.

12 [Trial Chamber confers]

13 JUDGE ORIE: If we would deliver it right away, may I just ask the

14 parties whether there is anything else that -- the Chamber is aware that

15 they still have to take a decision on the admission of Exhibit P3738O.

16 Which is document, one out of a batch on a person named Maksikovic

17 [phoen]. Is there any other issue that urgently needs the attention of

18 the Chamber at this moment?

19 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I take it that you're contemplating

20 withdrawing to make a decision.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

22 MR. IERACE: Might I just say a few quick things that might be

23 appropriate at this stage? Firstly, in relation to the video, it's

24 apparent from the content of the interviews that they all relate -- they

25 were all recorded during General Galic's tenure as the corps commander,

1 and therefore, they were all recorded in the indictment period. Secondly,

2 in response to my friend's argument that these documents should have been

3 tendered through a witness, the reason they are being tendered by the bar

4 table is because none of them lend themselves to a particular witness.

5 They are public documents, nothing more than that.

6 In relation to other outstanding issues that you might wish to

7 consider in your absence, the Prosecution received, five weeks ago, a

8 large bundle of documents from the Defence by way of further reciprocal

9 disclosure. That bundle will take sometime to interpret, to translate,

10 rather, so that we can determine if we wish to tender any. Yesterday, the

11 Defence handed us an additional 94 documents by way of reciprocal

12 disclosure, the day before the Prosecution case ends, all untranslated.

13 That will require some further attention. There is a third bundle, Mr.

14 President, that you may recall, from earlier this week.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do.

16 MR. IERACE: And --

17 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. I do understand.

18 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President. My basic point is this.

19 There is a number of documents which, through no fault of the Prosecution,

20 require more time to consider, to analyse, and indeed, fundamentally to

21 translate. I, therefore, say this: That it may, and I emphasise may, not

22 will, it may be the case, assuming the Prosecution case finishes today in

23 15 minutes, that when we reconvene, the Prosecution will seek leave to

24 reopen its case, leaving aside the question of Zoran Lesic, solely for the

25 purpose of tendering documents from one of those three bundles, and I

1 emphasise may, Mr. President.

2 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand. Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, just in

4 response to the last comment made by Mr. Ierace, could the Prosecution

5 inform us who the journalists are who conducted these interviews? Yes or

6 no?

7 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the transcript sometimes identifies

8 the relevant agency. To give an example, in the transcript, in relation

9 to one of the segments, the interviewer starts off by identifying himself

10 as coming from, I think it's Republika Srpska television, and he also

11 indicates the title of General Galic in the interview, but essentially, I

12 can't go beyond what's in the transcript.

13 JUDGE ORIE: You can't give the name of the journalist, yes.

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

15 [Trial Chamber confers]

16 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will deliberate on the issues pending at

17 this moment but perhaps before doing so, I'd like to inform the parties

18 also about what, if we conclude the presentation of the Prosecution's case

19 by today, as indicated before, the Defence will have seven times after

20 the -- seven days after the recess to file its -- to file its no case to

21 answer motion, if they want to do so, so that would be seven full working

22 days available, seven full days, it should be filed by the 2nd of

23 September. The Prosecution will then have two weeks to respond. The

24 Chamber seriously considers to have a hearing held on or around the 20th

25 of September, and independent of what our decision will be, we don't know

1 the motion, we don't know the content of the motion, we do not even know

2 to sure whether it will be filed or not, although the Defence has, several

3 times, indicated that it would file such a motion, the Defence should

4 prepare, in case a motion will be filed, and not be totally granted to

5 start the presentation of its case on the 7th of October.

6 One additional aspects of a motion to dismiss, 35 pages would be

7 inclusive all attachments. So the Chamber does not expect a document of

8 35 pages with 100 other pages attached to it.

9 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President, a number of matters very

10 quickly. I think you required the Defence to file a list of witnesses and

11 exhibits today.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Today, yes.

13 MR. IERACE: Secondly, outstanding decision, Mr. Kavcic [phoen],

14 that Rule 92 bis issue.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the decision will be -- as you know the decision

16 was postponed since whether or not Witness AK would testify might have

17 been of some importance.

18 MR. IERACE: Yes.

19 JUDGE ORIE: The decision I hope can be filed today as well.

20 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President. Also Witness AK's

21 documents, I think there is an outstanding decision there. I think that's

22 it, Mr. President.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

24 MR. IERACE: Excuse me. AD, not AK. No. AK.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We have a -- we had a new translation on lists,

1 medical lists, because there were differences in translation. That was

2 P3748.1. We asked for a translation, and I think that -- did we take a

3 formal decision on that?

4 MR. STAMP: No, what had happened is we had gotten a draft

5 translation and we are trying to get a certified translation, not a draft.

6 We got a translation and we are in the process of checking it now.

7 JUDGE ORIE: We asked whether the draft will be the final

8 translation.

9 MR. STAMP: Is a draft okay?

10 JUDGE ORIE: It says "draft translation".

11 MR. STAMP: Yes, it does.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just --

13 MR. STAMP: I have regard to issues of time. I'm wondering if,

14 although P3748.1 is a draft translation, if it could be received in

15 evidence. I don't know if the Defence has any objection to any aspect of

16 the translation.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

18 MR. STAMP: It really is a list of names.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Is there a specific objection against the draft

20 translation as it has been tendered?

21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I must admit that I can't

22 remember that right now. Could I see it physically, if this is possible?

23 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Use the time

24 when we are deliberating it to see whether there is any specific objection

25 on that.

1 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, there is another matter. Given the

2 time, now ten minutes, I do formally seek leave to reopen the Prosecution

3 case, or - I'm sorry - I do formally seek leave to continue the

4 Prosecution case into part of the first day back, in order to call Zoran

5 Lesic to give short evidence in relation to a few of the photographs and

6 videos referred to in his 92 bis statement.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that would be, I take it, specifically on when

8 the videos were taken, the spot, et cetera.

9 MR. IERACE: Yes, Mr. President, that's correct.

10 JUDGE ORIE: I never had heard any specific dispute. A lot of

11 objections against whether 360 degrees photo was --

12 MR. IERACE: It won't be repetitive at all about that. It's the

13 matters that have not been introduced into evidence at all, such as the

14 scene in the opening video which the Prosecution says where the woman is

15 shot, the Prosecution says that's the same intersection which is involved

16 in incident 5 and therefore, is further evidence of that intersection

17 being a source of civilian sniping. It's that type of thing.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I ask what the response of --

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Well, --

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] When I say yes, that means no,

22 Mr. President. I can't imagine that in ten minutes, towards the end of

23 the case, that we can ask for this to be reopened for something that we've

24 had a lot of time to do. The best things have to come to an end. And

25 Defence -- the Defence can't accept reports which are very costly for the

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 international community and for the Defence as well. Our position is no.

2 JUDGE ORIE: It's not a matter of reopening. The Prosecution

3 asked extension of time and say that the presentation of its case will not

4 be concluded. That's a different thing from reopening because before you

5 can reopen something, you have to close it first. The Chamber will be

6 back. Would the interpreters at this very 2nd of August still be there if

7 you would need ten to 30 minutes and then give our decisions? I'm aware

8 that I have great admiration not only with respect to the speed the

9 speakers developed and how you dealt with it and this is not bribing you?

10 But it's a real sincere expression of the appreciation of the Chamber.

11 Would you still be there if we return in ten minutes.

12 THE INTERPRETER: Certainly, Mr. President.

13 JUDGE ORIE: To hear your answer, I have to change to either

14 channel 4 or 5.

15 THE INTERPRETER: Certainly, Mr. President.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much.

17 --- Break taken at 1.37 p.m.

18 --- On resuming at 1.57 p.m.

19 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber owes the parties a few decisions.

20 Let me first give you the decision on, if I could call that, the

21 red part of the maps, the maps on the incidents. These are 28 maps that

22 were already admitted into evidence, Madam Registrar, under number?

23 THE REGISTRAR: P3728.

24 JUDGE ORIE: The red circles and red spots are no longer excluded,

25 as it was decided before, the Chamber will pay attention to that, but only

1 to the limited sense as the Chamber understands the tendering of this

2 aspect of the map. That means only in direct relation with the testimony

3 of the witness Hinchliffe.

4 Then we owe you a decision on the list of documents and one video,

5 tendered from the bar table. The documents are admitted into evidence.

6 These are items number 5, 8, 10, 13, 58, same as 56, 82, 153, 276, 1472,

7 1591, 2073, 2293, 2324, 2465, 2858, 3150. These are the documents. If

8 the Defence, not being fully aware that these would be tendered from the

9 bar table, would have any objections as to the content, or the

10 authenticity, of these documents, an opportunity will be given, at least

11 you have the opportunity to make that objection in a latter stage but not

12 later than the 26th of August, and in writing.

13 Then we have the video, that is 2347, same as 340. We have heard

14 some objections by the Defence, in order to -- the objections were, to

15 some extent, vague, to some extent, they were less vague, where it was

16 said that the Defence was not convinced that it would not be a montage.

17 We heard the response from the Prosecution, and the Chamber thinks it

18 necessary to look at the video itself in order to decide on the

19 admissibility in evidence of that video.

20 Therefore, the video is tendered. A decision will follow.

21 Then, there was still pending a decision on document P3738O which

22 is a medical document. It is not admitted into evidence as it is now.

23 There is almost a full translation of, in the original language, illegible

24 parts of the document that might be a form, and someone might think that

25 that would have been the text, which is illegible, but that is not what a

1 translation is supposed to be. Therefore, it is not admitted into

2 evidence, but if the Prosecution would be able to present a legible copy,

3 the Chamber will then consider to accept that in evidence, and that should

4 not be later than the 26th of August.

5 Then we still -- there was a still another request from the

6 Prosecution to have a document that was admitted into evidence through

7 Witness D be returned to that witness and be replaced by a photocopy.

8 That request, having been no objections against that, at least the Chamber

9 is not aware of any objections. It was a written submission.

10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, on condition

11 that the photocopies are good, not as they have sometimes been, the

12 Defence has no objections to raise.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar will personally look after the

14 quality of the photocopies so there is no need to be worried about that.

15 Then the request is granted.

16 Then finally, I'd like to inform the -- yes. The request to call

17 Mr. Lesic or to have extra time granted is denied. That would also mean

18 that, at this moment, apart from a few pending decisions on issues that

19 have been raised, that we take it that the Prosecution now has concluded

20 its case, everything being dealt with. Yes, Mr. Ierace?

21 MR. IERACE: Yes, Mr. President, and just one other matter. In

22 relation to some submissions on the law in respect of a certain matter.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'll tell you something about that perhaps you

24 might need to turn to closed session for one second for that.

25 Then that relates to, I would say, the future development of the

1 case. I'd like to indicate to the Defence when preparing their case, it's

2 absolutely certain that not more time will be granted to the Defence to

3 examine their witnesses as has been granted to the Prosecution. That

4 means until this very moment approximately 170 hours for

5 examination-in-chief. That's the time that was used by the Prosecution.

6 So, that is a guidance for the Defence. Then we turn into closed session

7 for one second.

8 [Closed session]

9 [redacted]

10 [redacted]

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 [redacted]

14 [redacted]

15 [redacted]

16 [redacted]

17 [redacted]

18 [redacted]

19 [redacted]

20 [Open session]

21 JUDGE ORIE: We are in open session again. I do understand that

22 there are no other outstanding issues, yes, Mr. Ierace?

23 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, formally, it gives me great pleasure

24 to say that, subject to those outstanding decisions, that completes the

25 Prosecution case. And secondly, might I remind you of the requirement

1 placed on the Defence to provide a list of witnesses and exhibits?

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's been discussed, I think, several times

3 also with the representative of the Senior Legal Officer and I understood

4 that we will receive such a professional list at this very moment; is that

5 correct, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, that is quite correct,

7 you have seen that one of our assistants is present and is taking care of

8 this matter and it is a pleasure for the Defence to provide the

9 Prosecution with a new binder and we know that they will make the usual

10 good use of it.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then, being at the end of the Prosecution case,

12 and just at the beginning of the recess, I first of all would like to

13 thank, once again, because the Chamber is well aware that we did high --

14 put high pressure on both those who assist us outside the Court, but

15 perhaps also a considerable pressure on those who have to work in this

16 Court. And therefore, I wish you a very good holiday and I hope that you

17 will be able to relax and to take your time so that we can start fresh

18 at -- after the recess.

19 I'm also aware, General Galic, that wishing a nice holiday is not

20 what could be -- I could wish you. The Chamber is fully aware that being

21 in detention is a situation with -- which is hard, and especially now when

22 we leave for holidays, the Chamber is once more aware that at this moment

23 there is no holiday for you. I, nevertheless, wish that during the coming

24 three weeks you'll have an opportunity perhaps to relax, perhaps to do a

25 few more things than you usually can do even in a detention situation.

1 That's what the Chamber wishes you.

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to thank

3 you for that, and I would like to wish you a very pleasant holiday and to

4 everyone else too. And at least my family might be able to visit me and I

5 will benefit from this holiday in this way, and I will take that

6 opportunity to have a rest. And I wish everyone a very good holiday.

7 Thank you.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for your words and I'm happy at least that

9 you can receive a visit from your family and do a few things you would not

10 be able to do otherwise.

11 We will then adjourn. A scheduling order will tell us when

12 further hearings will take place. And it's expected therefore, that the

13 7th of October, the Defence, unless of course, a motion not yet been

14 filed, would be granted, should start the presentation of its case.

15 The Court adjourns.

16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at

17 2.12 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday

18 the 7th day of October, 2002, at a time to be

19 determined.

20

21

22

23

24

25