080903ED

Page 7812

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll then hear from the parties other than

2 the Cermak Defence after the first break.

3 Ms. Higgins, are you ready to continue your cross-examination.

4 MS. HIGGINS: I am, Your Honour, thank you.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed.

6 WITNESS: PHILIP ROY BERIKOFF [Resumed]

7 Cross-examination by Ms. Higgins: [Continued]

8 Q. Good morning, Mr. Berikoff.

9 A. Good morning, Ms. Higgins.

10 Q. Now, from my recollection, I think we were dealing with or about

11 to deal with P500.

12 MS. HIGGINS: So if that could be brought up on to the screen,

13 please.

14 Q. Now, Mr. Berikoff, just to explain this for you, we have in front

15 of us here Prosecution document. It's a Prosecution organigram showing

16 the hierarchy of the Croatian civilian police and the lines of

17 subordination from, you see at the very top, the ministry level?

18 A. Yes, I do.

19 Q. And it goes all the way down to the bottom to the police stations

20 on the ground.

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. It's fair to say that you, as we established yesterday, we were

23 not familiar with the names on the chart?

24 A. No, I was not, ma`am.

25 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers kindly pause between

Page 7813

1 question and answer. Thank you.

2 MS. HIGGINS: I'm so sorry. I will really try today. Sorry,

3 apologies.

4 Q. Just take a moment, Mr. Berikoff, please, to just cast your eye

5 over the names on that chart. It's right, isn't it, that from the top to

6 the bottom, concerning control and command, that is illustrated in that

7 chart, there is no mention of the name Juric. Correct?

8 A. That is correct.

9 Q. And there is no mention of the name Cermak. Correct?

10 A. That is also correct.

11 Q. Now, you haven't had the opportunity of seeing this before, have

12 you?

13 A. No, I have not, ma`am.

14 Q. And we know that post Operation Storm, if we calculate it from

15 that time, you were only in the region for four weeks, in fact,

16 approximately?

17 A. That's correct, ma`am.

18 Q. Right to say that you weren't familiar with the complexities of

19 the structure in Croatia as regards to the Ministry of Interior and the

20 civilian police.

21 A. That is also correct, ma`am.

22 Q. To use your words, and to put this into a context, given the

23 limited time you were there, you made assumptions about the way things

24 worked in Croatia.

25 A. Not in all of Croatia, ma`am. However, in the area that I was

Page 7814

1 operating in, the answer to that is yes, ma'am.

2 Q. Thank you. I accept that. Thank you.

3 Now, given that I have limited time this morning, what I'd like

4 to do is make one point clear and deal with an example.

5 Going back to your diagram now, please, which is P745.

6 MS. HIGGINS: If that could be put up onto the screen.

7 Q. I think I made it very clear yesterday that there isn't one point

8 of this diagram that is accepted by the Defence but what I'd like to do,

9 Mr. Berikoff, is take an example. Do you understand?

10 A. I understand.

11 Q. And the example I'd like to take is the name that appears on that

12 chart. Let's take the individual you've named, Major Juric.

13 Now, you told me yesterday that you didn't know who appointed

14 Mr. Juric. Is that right?

15 A. That's correct, ma`am.

16 Q. Have you heard the name Mate Lausic, the chief of police

17 administration?

18 A. No, I have not, ma`am.

19 Q. Had you heard about the 72nd and the 73rd Military Police

20 battalions operating in Sector South?

21 A. No, I have not, ma`am.

22 Q. Is it right that you haven't been shown any military police

23 documents by the Prosecution, to support this notion of subordination of

24 Juric to Cermak?

25 A. That statement is correct, ma`am.

Page 7815

1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Berikoff.

2 MS. HIGGINS: Now, if I could, please, have on the screen D267,

3 please.

4 Q. To put this into context for you, Mr. Berikoff, I'm going to take

5 you through the document. I'm presuming that you have never seen this

6 document or been shown it by the Prosecution on the front page, as you

7 see it?

8 A. I have never seen this document, ma`am.

9 Q. It's a document dated, as you can see, the 2nd of August, and you

10 will see, as we go through it, that it is from Major-General Mate Lausic

11 and you can see the addressees there on the right-hand side of the page.

12 Can you see those?

13 A. Yes, ma'am.

14 Q. And you will note that the garrison is nowhere to be seen.

15 Correct?

16 A. That's correct.

17 Q. Now, if I could move, please, to page 4 of that document, four of

18 six. Sorry, just to make the point clearly I should have been more

19 precise and said the Knin garrison was not on that front sheet.

20 A. I understood what you meant, ma`am.

21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Berikoff.

22 Paragraph 10, if you look at the second part of that, the second

23 paragraph of paragraph 10, you can see there from this contemporaneous

24 document and I will take you to the end so you can see Mate Lausic's

25 name: I appoint major Ivan Juric, and if you look through you can see

Page 7816

1 that it refers to him assisting in commanding and organizing the

2 activities of the 72nd Military Police Battalion and the 73rd Split

3 Military Police Battalion and that the commanders of those two battalions

4 shall be subordinated to Major Ivan Juric.

5 Do you see that?

6 A. Yes, yes, I do.

7 Q. If I could follow through by taking you to the next page of that

8 document, please. Because one point that we have looked at is the

9 context of reporting, so it may be important to establish who, in fact,

10 Mr. Juric was supposed to be reporting to. Do you understand?

11 A. I understand.

12 Q. If we look on this page, the paragraph that begins: "Every day

13 at 2000 hours," and you just read that through to yourself, Mr. Berikoff.

14 To put it in a nutshell, the commanders of the 72nd and the 73rd

15 were to report to Mr. -- Major Ivan Juric who shall then report to the

16 military police administration, the chief of which was Major-General Mate

17 Lausic.

18 Do you see that context?

19 A. Yes, I see that, ma`am.

20 Q. One more document, I'd like, please, on the screen -- sorry,

21 before I leave that.

22 Again, if you look at the bottom of that screen you'll note again

23 the delivered to, there is no mention of the Knin garrison. Correct?

24 A. That is it correct, ma`am.

25 MS. HIGGINS: Could I have please have on the screen D268.

Page 7817

1 Q. Just while it is coming on to the screen, this is a document

2 dated the 2nd August 1995. It's, again a document from Major-General

3 Mate Lausic to various units of the military police administration. You

4 can see the front page there and the addressees, VP, General police, UVP?

5 Can you see that at the bottom of the page?

6 A. Yes, I do.

7 Q. Now, I'd like, please, to turn to page 3 of that document.

8 This document illustrates the expansion of Mate -- sorry, of

9 Juric's tasks and you can see there in that second paragraph it refers to

10 the cooperation and coordination and who he was to do that with.

11 Do you see that?

12 A. Yes, I do, ma'am.

13 Q. And if you look through the names, again, the Knin garrison is

14 not a name that we find there. Correct?

15 A. That's correct, ma`am.

16 MS. HIGGINS: Now, Your Honour, there are four other documents in

17 a series which show the reporting that continues between Mate Lausic and

18 Juric on the 9th, the 10th, the 11th and the 12th of August. I don't

19 intend to take this witness through them but I've discussed it with my

20 learned friend, Mr. Russo there are 65 ter documents and he accepts that

21 they can be admitted into evidence and I would seek their admission

22 before the Chamber. I can give the document references to put this

23 question into a context.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, even without asking you, I take it that

25 Ms. Higgins has informed the Chamber accurately on your consent, so if I

Page 7818

1 do not hear from you, that's how I always expect the parties to behave.

2 Then, could you please give the 65 ter numbers, and we have seen

3 now two documents --

4 MS. HIGGINS: Yes.

5 JUDGE ORIE: -- so they need a number to be assigned to them.

6 MS. HIGGINS: They're already D exhibits, Your Honour.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Oh yes, yes, I remember that you referred to them as

8 D exhibits.

9 Then the 65 ter numbers of the other documents are.

10 MS. HIGGINS: The first document is 3225, 65 ter.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.

12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes exhibit number D732.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Next one, Ms. Higgins.

14 MS. HIGGINS: 2300.

15 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number D733, Your Honours.

16 JUDGE ORIE: And the last one, Ms. Higgins.

17 MS. HIGGINS: The next one is 543, 65 ter.

18 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number D734, Your Honours.

19 MS. HIGGINS: And, in fact, Your Honour is right, because the

20 last document I would seek to tender is in fact D211, just for the

21 Chamber's note. That forms the last document in that series. So there

22 is no need for another number.

23 JUDGE ORIE: D732, D733, and D734 are admitted into evidence.

24 MS. HIGGINS: I'm grateful, Your Honour.

25 Q. From the contemporaneous documents that have been shown to you

Page 7819

1 this morning, Mr. Berikoff, you would agree with me, I presume that there

2 is no evidence there to show a line of subordination or control and

3 command between Major Juric and Ivan Cermak.

4 Do you agree?

5 A. Ms. Higgins, I was not privy to any of these documents that you

6 have shown me this morning. However, I would agree to the contents of

7 them but on the ground what I saw was a different situation at the time,

8 in my own personal assessment. But the documents, I had not seen them.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Higgins, the witness has not had an opportunity

10 to fully check that, but of course you would not have asked that question

11 if there was any link in there and the Chamber of course itself can check

12 the content of the documents and see whether the Chamber doesn't find

13 anything in there, but especially since three documents have not even

14 been shown to the witness, he couldn't expound on that --

15 MS. HIGGINS: No.

16 JUDGE ORIE: -- but from what he has seen he agrees with you.

17 MS. HIGGINS: Yes, I take that point, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ORIE: That documentation. Please proceed.

19 MS. HIGGINS:

20 Q. Just dealing with one brief reference that you made there,

21 Mr. Berikoff, please take it from me, I'm only trying to show you

22 information that I know you weren't privy to at the time but you see why

23 I'm doing what I'm doing?

24 A. Yes, I understand exactly what you're doing, ma`am. No problem.

25 Thank you.

Page 7820

1 Q. And the other point is this. That you said that in your last

2 response: What I saw was a different situation on the ground in my

3 personal assessment.

4 A. Yes, ma'am.

5 Q. Just to remind you of yesterday, you did agree, however, that you

6 had never seen or heard an order given by Mr. Cermak to Major Juric.

7 Correct?

8 A. That's correct, ma`am.

9 Q. Thank you very much.

10 And it's right that you are not able - and I wouldn't expect you

11 to be able - to produce any documents to show a contrary picture in terms

12 of the documentation, Mr. Berikoff. Correct?

13 A. That's correct, ma`am.

14 Q. Now, I don't want to pull back up on to the screen your diagram.

15 I think we're all very familiar it by now and I know you have a copy in

16 front of you. But just to deal very briefly with your reference there to

17 the 7th Guards Brigade and the 3rd Guards Brigade, just to -- so I'm

18 clear, Mr. Berikoff, you have no documents to support that. Correct?

19 A. No, I have not, ma`am. It's just what I saw on the ground of

20 when the 7th came in and that the 3rd replaced.

21 Q. That is it very different, isn't it, from saying that they

22 were --

23 A. Yes, it is, ma'am.

24 Q. -- subordinated to Mr. Cermak ?

25 A. Yes, it is.

Page 7821

1 Q. So my point is no document to show that line of subordination,

2 correct?

3 A. No, I do not, no, I don't, ma`am.

4 Q. Neither, Mr. Berikoff, have you been shown any document since you

5 made your first statement in 1996 to support that by the Prosecution. Is

6 that right?

7 A. That's correct, ma`am.

8 Q. Did you know or were you ever informed of the fact of a military

9 structure operating in Sector South completely outside the role and

10 function of General Cermak as garrison commander?

11 A. No, I was not aware of, ma`am.

12 Q. Now, considering yesterday's evidence and today, and you

13 understand that I understand your limited time in that area, considering

14 that, could it perhaps be that you have made a rash judgement about the

15 actual true role and capabilities of Mr. Cermak, Mr. Berikoff?

16 A. I -- I can't answer that question, ma`am.

17 Q. Okay. Now, as an information officer, did you know that in the

18 early days of the formation of the Croatian state even leading political

19 figures were given military ranks, regardless of their military function

20 and experience? Did you come to know about that?

21 A. Yes, I did, ma`am.

22 Q. Let me just finish by asking you this, Mr. Berikoff. Would this

23 be fair and accurate to say that the indicators of authority that you

24 relied on in relation to Mr. Cermak boiled down to the following.

25 Firstly, he wore a military uniform?

Page 7822

1 A. That's correct.

2 Q. Secondly, you knew he had a rank.

3 A. That's also correct.

4 Q. And those were two factors you relied on?

5 A. Yes, they were two of the factors, yes, ma'am.

6 Q. There was also the letter which we discussed which, to be fair,

7 you had described as a joke. But there was the letter. Correct?

8 A. Yes, ma'am.

9 Q. And there was the title which you have now seen from

10 contemporaneous documents was incorrect. Yes?

11 A. I would agree with you, ma`am.

12 Q. And it amounts -- that would be a fair summary. Would that be

13 right, Mr. Berikoff?

14 A. It would be a fair summary, ma`am. However, you have to take

15 into consideration that General Forand dealt constantly with General

16 Cermak, Colonel Tymchuk dealt with General Cermak I believe, so it was

17 the people involved with their dealings with General Cermak that also led

18 me to my assessment, ma`am?

19 Q. And this Court has heard evidence from General Forand and

20 obviously what we're interested in is the basis and remit of your

21 knowledge. You understand?

22 A. I understand.

23 Q. And we discussed that remit yesterday?

24 A. Yes, we did.

25 Q. Mr. Berikoff, have you heard of the phrase don't shoot the

Page 7823

1 messenger?

2 A. Yes, I have, ma`am.

3 Q. I have no further questions. Thank you very much, Mr. Berikoff.

4 A. Thank you, ma`am.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, you're on your feet, and in light of

6 what we heard last week, I take it that you'll cross-examine

7 Mr. Berikoff.

8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: That's correct, Your Honour. Thank you.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Berikoff, you will now be cross-examined by

10 Mr. Kuzmanovic who is counsel for Mr. Markac.

11 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.

12 Cross-examination by Mr. Kuzmanovic:

13 Q. Good morning, Mr. Berikoff.

14 A. Good morning, Mr. Kuzmanovic.

15 Q. I wanted to follow up along the lines with Ms. Higgins with

16 respect to exhibits D267 and D268 as well as the newly marked exhibits

17 that you had not seen.

18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Let's put up first D267, please.

19 Q. And while that is coming up, Mr. Berikoff, your job was that of

20 an intelligence information officer in Sector South. Correct?

21 A. That's correct, sir.

22 Q. And is it fair to state that people were relying upon you for

23 information upon which to describe the situation on the ground or to make

24 assessments on things that have happened during -- before and during

25 Operation Storm?

Page 7824

1 A. To the extent that I was able to get that information, yes, sir.

2 Q. Okay. And would you agree with me if that information was

3 incorrect --

4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, for you, pauses as well.

5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE ORIE: And, Mr. Berikoff, to the extent that you could

7 assist Mr. Kuzmanovic in creating the quiet atmosphere for interpreters

8 and transcribers, it would be highly appreciated.

9 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.

10 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour, I lost myself there.

11 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I think I'm looking back at the transcript so I can

12 repeat my question.

13 It is fair to state that the people, your superiors in many

14 instances who were relying upon you for information, if the information

15 was wrong that information ended up getting spread to the outside world.

16 Correct?

17 A. That is correct. In the early stages I was one of the few people

18 that was able to get -- make my way throughout the sector.

19 Q. Nonetheless, if the information that you had received about, for

20 example, certain units and certain locations was incorrect then that

21 information would get spread not just to members of Sector South but to

22 the media and to the outside world. Correct?

23 A. That is quite possible. I agree with you.

24 Q. 267, which is up on the screen, is a military police document and

25 if we can go on the first page, you see that nowhere in this particular

Page 7825

1 document is the Ministry of Interior special police mentioned in any

2 shape or form. Correct?

3 A. That's correct.

4 Q. Have you ever seen any documents provided to you by the Office of

5 the Prosecutor that describe the role, the location, the outfitting and

6 the function of the Ministry of Interior special police?

7 A. No, I have not, sir.

8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: If we go to the last page of this document,

9 please.

10 Why don't we go to the second-last page where it shows the cc's,

11 to whom the document was copied.

12 Q. If we see to whom the document was delivered, there is no

13 notation of any Ministry of Interior special police, either commander or

14 officer, or member that received a copy -- or that was delivered a copy

15 of this document?

16 A. That's correct, sir.

17 Q. And without going through all of the other documents, I -- I

18 presume, Mr. Russo would agree with me that D268, as well as D732, D733,

19 D734, and D211, none of those documents indicate any copying in or

20 reference to the Ministry of Interior special police that you're aware

21 of, Mr. Berikoff. Correct?

22 A. I have not seen the documents, so therefore, I would have to yes,

23 I agree with you, sir.

24 Q. Okay. Now, the diagram that you were shown -- or that you drew

25 which was P745 that we've seen -- and for your benefit I'd ask that it be

Page 7826

1 put back up on the screen, so if you want to refer to it, you can.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, in view of the authorities to

3 which -- to which this letter was cc'ed I must admit that I do not have

4 on my mind all the abbreviations we find in that document.

5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I would ask, Your Honour, if it is all right

6 to -- and I did not have a chance to speak with Mr. Russo about this the

7 way Ms. Higgins did but I mean if he would agree that known of those

8 documents refer to or have anything to do with the Ministry of Interior

9 special police then we can move on.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I would have no problems. Perhaps if you,

11 together with Mr. Russo, could prepare just a short list of what UVP

12 exactly meant, et cetera I don't have it on my mind at this moment.

13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Sure.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Because it's not only what it doesn't mean, but

15 also --

16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: What it does mean, understood, Your Honour. VP

17 means military police.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that is one of the few that I --

19 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Okay.

20 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... police, yes.

21 MR. KUZMANOVIC: We will do that, Your Honour.

22 Q. Okay. We've got your diagram up, Mr. Berikoff. This is a

23 diagram that you put together. Correct?

24 A. Yes, it was, sir.

25 Q. Okay. When did you put that together?

Page 7827

1 A. I believe it was during the interview with Mr. Elfgren during one

2 of the interviews, and it was done quickly as Ms. Higgins had suggested.

3 Basically like on a scrap of paper, to the best of my recollection, sir.

4 Q. And you have seen at least two of the documents now D267 and

5 D268, where you have Major Ivan Juric, special police. Can you explain

6 to me, please, what facts led you to believe that Major Ivan Juric had

7 anything to do with the special police? I'm just liking for facts.

8 A. One of the factors I took into consideration when I placed Major

9 Ivan Juric was part of the special police was the fact that he was

10 wearing grey coveralls. Now, this may seem silly on the surface.

11 However, I was informed by headquarters in Zagreb that members of the

12 special police wore grey coveralls. I don't recall who told me, but it

13 was through the intelligence section in headquarters UNCRO.

14 Q. So the sole basis for you to come to the conclusion that Major

15 Ivan Juric had anything to do with the special police had to do with grey

16 coveralls?

17 A. As silly as it sounds, that's correct, sir, because people in

18 grey coveralls responded to him and he also wore them as well, and from

19 the information I received from Zagreb, yes, that is what I base my

20 assessment on, sir.

21 Q. Okay. And was your basis that these were special police who were

22 from the Ministry of Interior special police or some other kind of

23 special police or do you not know?

24 A. I do not know, sir.

25 Q. So fair to state that the only basis for you to conclude that

Page 7828

1 Major Ivan Juric had anything to do what you term to be special police

2 were grey coveralls?

3 A. That's correct, sir.

4 Q. And that was something that was told to you verbally by HQ in

5 Zagreb?

6 A. Yes, it is, sir.

7 Q. As an information intelligence officer did you attempt in any way

8 to find out from the Croatian authorities what the hierarchy or structure

9 was of the Ministry of Interior special police?

10 A. As I explained yesterday, I'd just been in country a short time

11 and didn't have an opportunity yet to do that. Had I stayed on, that

12 would have been part of my duty, sir.

13 Q. Would you agree with me that during the course of Operation Storm

14 and the aftermath of Operation Storm it would be fairly important to

15 accurately identify who you saw conducting activities on the ground?

16 A. I have to agree with you. However, at the time I was travelling

17 throughout the sector to try and get as much raw information as possible.

18 Q. Could it have been something as simple as calling the -- either

19 the Ministry of Interior or the Chief of Staff of the Croatian military

20 through your office in Zagreb to determine what units were where and what

21 they were wearing and what kind of weapons they were --

22 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers kindly pause between

23 question and answer again. Thank you.

24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Apologies.

25 THE WITNESS: In response to that question, sir, I had informed

Page 7829

1 Zagreb, both at the Canadian intelligence cell, the G2 cell, as well as

2 the intelligence cell in UNCRO headquarters of my findings. It was not

3 my responsibility to contact the Croatians with regard to the Ministry of

4 Defence. That was at a higher level than myself, sir. I would have

5 expected the headquarters in Zagreb to have done that, sir.

6 MR. KUZMANOVIC:

7 Q. Did anyone from the Office of the Prosecutor ever tell you that

8 your identification of these units in various areas, such as Cetina,

9 Civljane, Kistanje, and other places were not in fact Ministry of

10 Interior special police?

11 A. I was never told anything by the OTP regarding this, sir.

12 Q. Who was the person that you spoke with at G2 intelligence who

13 told you the grey coverall ID in Zagreb?

14 A. I don't recall, sir. That's 13 years ago.

15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I apologise, and I apologise to the

16 interpreters for my speed. I will do my best to calm down.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. ...

18 Mr. Kuzmanovic, if I give a sign to calm down, if you start

19 apologising, then that has to be translated as well.

20 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood. I'm sorry, Your Honour. I'm

21 looking at the witness, and it is difficult for me to see and I will --

22 you, so I will do my best.

23 Q. Now, Mr. Berikoff, you gave several statements to the Office of

24 the Prosecutor in this case, the most recent statement being 30

25 August 2008?

Page 7831

1 [Defence counsel confer]

2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: It's supposed to be up, but I don't know why it

3 isn't. Oh, here we go. All right. Thank you.

4 If we could go to page 2 of that document, please. Fifth

5 paragraph from the bottom.

6 Q. Mr. Berikoff, the paragraph that I'm referring to for my next

7 series of questions starts with: "Mr. Berikoff stated that his

8 understanding of the 'special police' was that they were part of the HV

9 and that they sometimes wore grey coverall-style uniforms."

10 Now, you said that the sole reason that you came to that

11 conclusion was a verbal that you got from someone at G2 in Zagreb?

12 A. That's correct, sir.

13 Q. Your understanding was that the special police of the Ministry of

14 the Interior was attached to the Croatian military?

15 A. At the time, I was not aware that the special police were part of

16 the ministry.

17 Q. Okay. So at least as of -- when did you come to the conclusion

18 that the special police were not a part of the Croatian military?

19 A. I probably came to that -- or I did come to that conclusion when

20 I was dealing with other cases while I worked in the OTP.

21 Q. Okay. So essentially until 2008, as of -- that correction was

22 not made in your supplemental information sheet dated 30 August 2008.

23 Correct?

24 A. That's correct, sir.

25 Q. When did you become aware that the special police of the Ministry

Page 7832

1 of Interior was not a part of the Croatian military? What year?

2 A. I never studied the Croatian forces in detail, so even to, right

3 now, I cannot answer that question probably accurately. My assessments

4 are from dealing with both the Bosnian side and the Serb side. I had

5 no -- no dealings once I came to the OTP with the Croatian organisation

6 chart, sir.

7 Q. Okay. Would you agree with me, Mr. Berikoff, that as a military

8 intelligence information officer that it would be rather important and,

9 particularly when it comes to a criminal matter, crucial to know who was

10 subordinated to whom and what the order of battle was?

11 A. It would be, sir, but once I came to the OTP I was basically

12 requested to stay totally away from any of the Croatian cases, which I

13 did, sir.

14 Q. And I understand that, Mr. Berikoff, but you didn't even change

15 your knowledge of the background and structure of the special police of

16 the Ministry of Interior in your 30 August 2008 supplemental information

17 sheet?

18 A. No I didn't, sir, based on the -- or my reasoning being that this

19 was information at that time, not what I had learned after working in the

20 OTP for seven years, sir.

21 Q. Would you agree with me that the HV special police and the

22 special police, as you refer to in that paragraph, are not part of the

23 Croatian military?

24 A. From what I have learned today, I would have to agree with you.

25 Q. You also, on the following paragraph, talk about --

Page 7833

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, could the witness please explain

2 what he learned which led him to the conclusion he just gave.

3 Because, Mr. Berikoff, in your -- one of your previous answers -

4 and let me take you back to them - Mr. Kuzmanovic asked you the

5 following: "When did you become aware that the special police of the

6 Ministry of Interior was not a part of the Croatian military? What

7 year?"

8 So the question was about when.

9 And then your answer was: "I never studied the Croatian forces

10 in detail, so even to, right now, can I not answer that question probably

11 accurately. My assessments are from dealing with both the Bosnian side

12 and the Serb side. I had no dealings once I came to the OTP with the

13 Croatian organisation chart."

14 Now, that is a long answer, which does not directly deal with

15 when you learned something. I understood, but, please, correct me when

16 I'm wrong, I understood the answer to tell us that whether they were a

17 part of the military organisation or not, that you had no good knowledge

18 at the time to know and that has not really changed.

19 Is that correctly understood?

20 THE WITNESS: That's correctly understood, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE ORIE: And Mr. Kuzmanovic, of course I had this question

22 already on my mind but in relation to your last question from what the

23 witness learned today, well, what the witness learned today has seen some

24 documents which, as far as I can see, shed some light on some matters but

25 not necessarily give a conclusive answer on some questions that might be

Page 7834

1 on our mind.

2 And apart from that, we learned from what the witness told us, so

3 I would like to know what exactly you learned today, which now allows you

4 to - and let me check the question again - what did you learn today

5 which tell you that the HV special police and the special police, as you

6 refer to in that paragraph, are not part of the Croatian military.

7 So both HV special police and the special police, as you refer

8 to, in the paragraph just mentioned.

9 THE WITNESS: Your Honour --

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

11 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, in looking at the various documents

12 that I was shown this morning by Ms. Higgins, the address groups of the

13 Ministry of Interior Major Ivan Juric or the special police was not

14 present --

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

16 THE WITNESS: -- in any of the documents. So based on that, I

17 would have to agree that they were not in the chain of command, Your

18 Honour.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's your conclusion and then for two HV

20 special police and for other special police.

21 THE WITNESS: That's correct Your Honour.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Whereas in the beginning of your testimony you said

23 that they were all the same to you, isn't it?

24 THE WITNESS: My initial assessment was, yes, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE ORIE: So that is the basis for agreeing with

Page 7835

1 Mr. Kuzmanovic.

2 THE WITNESS: Yes, it is.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

4 Please proceed.

5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

6 Q. Mr. Berikoff, do you know whether the Ministry of Interior

7 special police -- I'll change the question.

8 Do you know whether there were two sets of special police, one in

9 the Ministry of Interior and one from the military police?

10 A. I am not aware if there was or not, sir.

11 Q. Your statements, Mr. Berikoff, and we can go through them in

12 detail if it's necessary, mention the special police in many different

13 occasions, in many different locations as either conducting looting,

14 manning check-points, or conducting burning.

15 Now, is it fair to state that your -- you assumed that these were

16 Ministry of Interior special police?

17 A. I assume they were special police. I did not assume that they

18 were part of the Ministry of Interior, sir. But I assume they were

19 special police.

20 Q. Okay. And specifically in your supplemental statement you

21 have -- in the paragraph below the one that we referred to previously.

22 It says: "Mr. Berikoff stated that in his statements and exhibits he

23 incorrectly attributed the burning and looting he witnessed in Kistanje

24 on 9 August 1995 to both HV and special police on that day, he only saw

25 the HV camouflaged soldiers going house to house, looting and burning in

Page 7836

1 Kistanje. He attributed this to the special police as well, because when

2 he met Ivan Juric outside of Kistanje on that day, Ivan Juric was wearing

3 the grey uniform of the special police, and he believes that Ivan Juric

4 was directing the activity in Kistanje."

5 Now, a correct -- I mean, I read that statement, portion of your

6 supplementary statement to mean that the special police was not involved

7 in any way in Kistanje, correct, and the only reason you thought they

8 were was because you assumed that Juric had something to do with the

9 special police?

10 A. That's correct, sir.

11 Q. Do you know, Mr. Berikoff, where the Ministry of Interior special

12 police, where their battle sites were and from where and to where they

13 went during Operation Storm?

14 A. No, I don't, sir.

15 Q. Again, in your supplemental statement you note in the

16 paragraph below the one I just read, "... that the special police grey

17 uniforms were not involved in the looting and burning he witnessed along

18 the road from Knin to Drnis on 8 August 1995, as stated in his second

19 statement at paragraph 2 (o). It was only the HV (camouflage) and the

20 Croatian civilian police."

21 So that's, Mr. Berikoff, a second area where you were that you

22 mistakenly thought the Ministry of Interior special police were involved

23 in looting and burning. Correct?

24 A. That's correct. Once again it was an assumption on my part.

25 Q. And from the time that you gave your statements through and

Page 7837

1 including -- up until the time that you give the supplemental statement

2 in 2008, just a few days ago, on August 30th, what made you change your

3 recollection? Was it Office of the Prosecutor speaking to you about

4 this? Could you explain that?

5 A. I can't explain it. I think it was just -- it was not the Office

6 of the Prosecutor that led me to this assessment. I think it was my own

7 recollection of the number of incidents that happened and trying to

8 remember everything. I could not recall with certainty whether it was

9 special police, in my opinion, or not, sir.

10 Q. So it would be a guess?

11 A. Yes, sir.

12 Q. Again, the following paragraph to the one that I just read:

13 "Mr. Berikoff -- "

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, what does that mean "so it's just a

15 guess"?

16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I can follow up on that, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand the witness says I cannot say

18 with certainty affirm what I earlier said was the case, which is not, in

19 my view, a guess, but of course, you have to put some questions to the

20 witness if on the basis of what the witness observed, what he observed,

21 what he saw, as you rightly stated -- well, you -- we see that on the

22 basis of what he observed, what he saw, that he could not reach certain

23 conclusions he included in his earlier assessments. That is a fair

24 statement of what he tells us. And in all your question -- in most of

25 your questions you add something to that and you say for example, on the

Page 7838

1 basis of your observations you could say that unit A, B, or C was

2 involved because the way in which the witness has identified those units

3 is -- is -- is not reliable. Uniforms, whatever. But then to say, Did

4 you actually mean to say they were not involved requires a totally

5 different kind of knowledge which is an oversight of everything.

6 So let's try to focus on what the witness saw, what conclusions

7 he earlier has drawn from those observations, and then to see to what

8 extent these conclusions are corrected, are perhaps taken out, but not --

9 unless you specifically address the issue of whether he had a total

10 overview, whether some units he may not have seen were involved or not in

11 certain actions.

12 You see my point?

13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood, Your Honour, I will try to clear

14 that up with my next question.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.

16 MR. KUZMANOVIC:

17 Q. Mr. Berikoff, in your statements and in your supplemental

18 statement specifically, you mention special police on many, many

19 occasions.

20 Is it fair to state that the sole factor for you to state that

21 the special police were or were not involved in certain activities that

22 you witnessed was based on the fact that they wore grey coverall-style

23 uniforms?

24 A. That is correct, as well as a linking them with Major Juric who

25 also wear grey coveralls and gave me the same assumption, sir.

Page 7839

1 Q. Okay. And we know now that Major Juric was not in any way with

2 the Ministry of Interior special police. Correct?

3 A. Based on the documents I saw this morning, sir.

4 Q. So my statement is correct?

5 A. As far as --

6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, the witness clearly says, he

7 testified that he did not know who appointed Major Juric and that his

8 charge where he puts him in a certain position is based on information

9 which is apparently not very reliable.

10 Now, whether he was involved in any way with that, it is a totally

11 different question.

12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood.

13 JUDGE ORIE: And if the witness then says, On the basis of what I

14 have seen he limits the source of his knowledge for the conclusion, and

15 then to say, So you do agree with me, where you did not limit your

16 question to that, is not what I expect to be done.

17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: All right. Thank you, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

19 MR. KUZMANOVIC:

20 Q. Mr. Berikoff, you also state in your supplemental statement the

21 second-last paragraph on this particular page: "That the special

22 police," and again you identify them in grey uniforms, "were not

23 observing or directing traffic around the looting he witnessed between

24 Knin and Drnis on 10 August. This was the Croatian civilian police."

25 Now, again, your assumption that the special police were involved

Page 7840

1 in directing traffic and/or involved in -- strike that.

2 Your assumption is that it was the special police again because

3 they wore grey uniforms?

4 A. That's correct, sir.

5 Q. Now, can you tell me any facts that you have which would support

6 the conclusion that the Ministry of Interior special police were involved

7 in manning check-points?

8 A. No, I cannot, sir.

9 Q. Can you give us any facts to back up your conclusion in certain

10 instances that you have not changed in your supplemental statement that

11 demonstrate the Ministry of Interior special police were involved in

12 looting?

13 A. No, I cannot, sir.

14 Q. Similarly can you give us any facts upon which you can base the

15 conclusion that the Ministry of Interior special police were involved in

16 burning?

17 A. No, I cannot, sir.

18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: If we could please call up ERN -- we might have

19 a D number for this, I'm sorry.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, supplemental statements.

21 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Oh, Your Honour, I'd lake to move that

22 supplemental statement, I'm sorry. Thank you.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Can I hear from the parties whether they consider

24 supplemental statements to be 92 ter statements. These are written

25 statements.

Page 7841

1 Mr. Russo.

2 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I think in a very strict sense I don't

3 think we can consider them 92 ter statements unless the witness is taken

4 through the formalities of the rule.

5 JUDGE ORIE: That is of course what I was hinting at, whether

6 statements taken for the specific purposes of the proceedings before this

7 Tribunal, whether we would need to meet the requirements of 92 ter. I

8 don't want to be overformalistic on the matter.

9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE ORIE: But just for my information, how you consider this

11 statement compared to the other statements which are 92 ter statements.

12 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, from our perspective the statements are

13 clearly written by the Prosecutor's office. They're not written in the

14 first person as would a statement of the witness. Nevertheless, I do

15 think the witness's review, acknowledgment on the actual document and

16 again acknowledgment here in Court would suffice for us to have no

17 problem with its admission to be included as consideration along with the

18 92 ter statements.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

20 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I would agree with that, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Let's, again, I just wanted to know from a

22 procedural point of view what exactly the status is of the supplemental

23 fact sheets. It's a kind of information on the basis of -- of the

24 information given by the witness.

25 Mr. Russo, I take it that I, because I see them now for the first

Page 7842

1 time as well -- let me just check how they end. Yes, they are -- this is

2 an -- this is a witness acknowledgment at the bottom of the supplemental

3 sheet.

4 Now, Mr. Berikoff, I make take it that what you -- the

5 information you gave and which you confirmed in the witness

6 acknowledgment under the supplemental information sheet that you gave

7 this information to the best of your recollection, as being truthful,

8 that if you were asked the same questions that you would have given the

9 same questions -- same answers and that you would -- that you also

10 acknowledge the accuracy of the way in which it was put on paper.

11 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, could you please assign a number to

13 it.

14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes exhibit number D735,

15 under seal.

16 JUDGE ORIE: D735 is admitted under seal.

17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour, and I know we've run

18 into this issue before with the supplementals and I think probably that

19 methodology of going through the 92 ter procedure should be done and I

20 will remember that --

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And we could do it if the witness is there and

22 if the parties have no doubt as to whether this is really the -- the last

23 information given by the witness even if it doesn't take the form of a

24 statement in the proper sense. This is what I saw, et cetera --

25 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I think, Your Honour --

Page 7843

1 JUDGE ORIE: -- if you do that quickly.

2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I think, Your Honour, what -- I mean the

3 Prosecutor didn't move this document as part of its 92 ter submission

4 obviously probably because of timing issues but there were substantial

5 changes especially with regard to the special police so I would have

6 thought they would have gone through that in direct.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Therefore, if these documents get the same status I

8 think that would be appropriate, because it is a correction to or it is

9 an addition to another 92 ter statement.

10 Mr. Russo.

11 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, with regard to Mr. Kuzmanovic' last

12 comment the Court can check the transcript, I did go through all of the

13 corrections which are contained on the supplemental information sheet

14 with the witness prior to submitting his statements as 92 ter. He made

15 the corrections, he made the clarifications which are contained in that

16 document and that's the procedure by which the OTP has chosen to deal

17 with the supplemental information sheets. We certainly have no problem

18 with them being admitted along with that. I just believe it is a

19 difference of procedure.

20 JUDGE ORIE: But, Mr. Russo, of course the Chamber is lost under

21 those circumstances. Why, because you go through some corrections, but

22 we haven't seen the supplemental information sheet. Therefore, we cannot

23 see whether everything which is contained in the supplemental information

24 sheet has been covered by you. So, it may well be true what you say, but

25 at the time you are doing it we cannot verify whether that's the case yes

Page 7844

1 or no.

2 Now, if, of course, you have gone through all the details of

3 everything that was corrected or what was added, then of course there

4 would be no need for Mr. Kuzmanovic to, again, get this admitted into

5 evidence, because then it is already part of your examination-in-chief.

6 I can't verify it now. I would have to read the supplemental information

7 sheet in full detail in order to know whether everything has been covered

8 in your examination-in-chief.

9 Let's not spend too much time on it. It certainly doesn't hurt

10 if, in addition to the examination-in-chief the supplemental information

11 sheet is now admitted into evidence.

12 Please proceed, Mr. Kuzmanovic.

13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I will call 3D00-1871, please.

15 Mr. Berikoff, this was an article written by Garth Pritchard that

16 you had provided to the Office of the Prosecutor and they had provided to

17 the Defence and which you brought with you to your proofing session?

18 A. That's correct, sir.

19 Q. Okay. And Mr. Pritchard was someone you spoke to at the time of

20 the events in Knin, after Operation Storm?

21 A. Yes, it is, sir.

22 Q. And the article, in the first page, toward the bottom, says,

23 talking about Knin and I'll read from the line that says: "This time."

24 "This time Knin is back in the Croatian fold, so to speak, but is

25 a devastated, ravaged, broken town scene of massive looting, reprisals

Page 7845

1 killing not by the triumphant Croatian blitzkrieg that recaptured the

2 whole of Krajina in early August but by those who followed the

3 disciplined, controlled Croatian army."

4 Were you the source of information for the section in this

5 article that discusses the controlled -- disciplined controlled Croatian

6 army?

7 A. No, I was not, sir.

8 Q. Do you know who was?

9 A. No, I don't.

10 Q. Then on the second page of this particular article.

11 MR. KUZMANOVIC: If we could go to the top of the second page,

12 please. Actually, the bottom of this page, please.

13 Q. You had made a correction in your supplemental statement at the

14 bottom of the page. There's a discussion that begins: "Then there's

15 captain Phil Berikoff of the Vandoos." You were not a member of the

16 Vandoos, correct?

17 A. No, I was not.

18 Q. And it discusses the things that you had done, including, at the

19 bottom, he, meaning Berikoff, tells of finding a woman on a corner just

20 after the Croatian army swept through.

21 If we could scroll to the top of the page because that is where I

22 had read to and if we could move the document to the left. Not all of it

23 had been included in the scan but most of it has.

24 "She was hysterical and wailing and surrounded by her family,

25 husband and eight children all dead. I tried to persuade her to come to

Page 7846

1 the camp but she wouldn't leave her familiar. He finally got body-bags,

2 put the dead in them and had them pulled off to the side of the road to

3 be picked up later. The woman still wouldn't leave. When Berikoff

4 returned the next day, the woman was gone and tire tracks of trucks led

5 off the road and over the body-bags which had been ripped open and bodies

6 mutilated, just another day in the Balkans."

7 Now, Mr. Berikoff, that's really not what happened, was it?

8 A. That's not at all what happened, sir, and that is why I brought

9 the article to the proofing session because it is totally erroneous

10 information. The facts are not accurate in that paragraph at all, sir.

11 Q. Now, do you deny telling Mr. Pritchard this particular story?

12 A. Not the story about the mortar shell that hit the intersection

13 nor about the woman wailing as she sat beside her husband. There were in

14 fact no children involved at all. The number eight is definitely is

15 wrong. The track trucks, et cetera, over the body-bags is also wrong.

16 There was only the one body-bag that was -- to the best of my

17 recollection that was run over by a tank and riddled with bullets.

18 So the whole paragraph is filled with erroneous information, sir.

19 Q. Do you have any idea where Mr. Pritchard got that erroneous

20 information?

21 A. No, I do not, sir.

22 Q. Was not from you?

23 A. Not from me. Bits and pieces were. I took him out to the

24 intersection. However, I did not give those figures at all, because they

25 are not accurate in the least.

Page 7847

1 Q. So would you agree with me that this article, at least parts of

2 this article and the part I reflected on where we discussed it was

3 incorrect information that was spread out to the world about what

4 happened during Operation Storm?

5 A. That's correct, sir, and that's why I brought the article to the

6 Prosecutor.

7 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I would like to tender this

8 document, please.

9 MR. RUSSO: No objection, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE ORIE: No objection.

11 Mr. Registrar.

12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes exhibit number D736.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Before we decide on admission --

14 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, there's no --

15 JUDGE ORIE: -- What is the probative value apart from that

16 nothing is right in this article?

17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Well, Your Honour, I think it goes to describe

18 that Mr. Berikoff is purported to be quoted in this article or the

19 information is purported to be given from him in this article and I'm

20 demonstrating that based on information that was erroneous, many things

21 in this article are incorrect just like the assumption that the special

22 police were involved in various areas has been incorrect, just like the

23 fact that there were eight children dead, which is incorrect. You know,

24 just an example of how information --

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

Page 7848

1 MR. KUZMANOVIC: -- gets twisted and distorted.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I hope, Mr. Kuzmanovic, that this Chamber

3 will not have to look at all the incorrect information about what

4 happened even it is an attributed to a witness that takes distance of it.

5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood, Your Honour. Just an example.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And therefore the --

7 [Trial Chamber confers]

8 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber admits the document into evidence, and

9 just to avoid whatever confusion, it is D736. What I said, you'll

10 understand is of some guidance. We have still some pending issues about

11 publications being admitted into evidence.

12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE ORIE: One could even think of it as a notorious fact that

14 a lot of wrong information is published especially about war

15 circumstances.

16 Again, it is admitted and the Chamber accepts your explanation.

17 At the same time, as guidance for the parties, let's try not to include

18 in the evidence everything that was written by whomever at whatever time

19 on whatever information, because the trial might take another six months.

20 Please proceed.

21 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood, Your Honour. It was simply an

22 example, and I --

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it is accepted.

24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you.

25 Q. Mr. Berikoff, the Ministry of Interior special police -- and you

Page 7849

1 had said earlier the Prosecutor did not bring to your attention where

2 they were and what kind of activities they were involved in. Correct?

3 A. Not -- not that I recall, sir, no, they did not.

4 Q. Were you aware aside from the Office of the Prosecutor that the

5 Ministry of Interior special police were involved in front line military

6 activities?

7 A. No, I was not, sir.

8 Q. Were you aware that when you were in Donji Lapac that the

9 Ministry of Interior special police were already out of Donji Lapac?

10 A. No, I was not.

11 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry. If we could just have a clarification on

12 that, I think the witness's evidence is that he was in Donji Lapac on two

13 separate days. If that questions includes both days, I believe it is the

14 11th and 12.

15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes. And that question does include both days.

16 Q. Were you aware that on 11th and 12th August of 1995 the Ministry

17 of Interior special police were already out of Donji Lapac?

18 A. No, I was not aware of that. I did not know that the Ministry of

19 Interior was involved. I assumed -- my assumption was because of the

20 mixture of grey coveralls and camouflage uniforms, sir.

21 Q. So your sole basis for determining that the Ministry of Interior

22 special police were in Donji Lapac when you were there at the same time?

23 on the 11th and 12th of August of 1995 was the grey coveralls?

24 A. That was my assessment throughout the whole sector, sir.

25 Q. Were you aware of the significance of the battle that went on in

Page 7850

1 Donji Lapac, in terms of artillery?

2 A. No, I wasn't, sir. I know there was heavier than usual fighting

3 up in the Donji Lapac area, but I was not aware of the significance at

4 that time.

5 Q. Were you aware that when ... thank you, Your Honour.

6 Were you aware that when the Ministry of Interior special police

7 took Donji Lapac that they came under friendly fire, artillery fire?

8 A. I was not aware of that, but as I say, I knew there was heavier

9 than usual fighting in the Donji Lapac area, sir.

10 Q. Did you observe or hear that the ARSK forces shelled Donji Lapac

11 after the Ministry of Interior special police had taken the town?

12 A. I'm not aware of that, but once again I will go back to my answer

13 that there was fighting, so it is logical that there would have been a

14 return of fire, sir.

15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Could we please call up P614. And page 23,

16 please.

17 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I'll represent to that you this is a Prosecution

18 tendered document dated November 26th, 2001, to the Chief of Staff of the

19 Croatian army, entitled Analysis of the progress of Operation Storm.

20 Page 23 of this document discusses the progress of day 4 of

21 Operation Storm and specifically mentions the special police of the

22 Ministry of Interior.

23 If you go to page 25 of this document, please, there's a notation

24 at 1400 hours on the 7th of August of 1995 that Donji Lapac is liberated.

25 And below that, that Donji Lapac suffered friendly fire artillery with no

Page 7851

1 casualties.

2 Now, if we go to page 31 -- actually, page 30, I'm sorry.

3 This is progress of day 6 of Operation Storm, 9 August 1995.

4 Do you know where the city or village of Kulen Vakuf was in

5 Bosnia?

6 A. Not offhand, no I do not, sir.

7 Q. Were you up among the Bosnian border near Donji Lapac?

8 A. I went to Donji Lapac, and then I was taken to one crossing

9 point. I don't recall exactly where the crossing point is, sir. The

10 Jordanian I believe it was the Deputy Commander or the Chief of Staff

11 took me to the border crossing.

12 Q. Okay. If you look at page 31 of this report, again on the 9th of

13 August, at 1900 hours, it shows that the special police staff in

14 Ostrovica village ceased work and the special police forces that had been

15 engaged there were sent to their home units with the approval of the

16 operation commander.

17 Now, you said earlier you were not aware that the Ministry of

18 Interior special police had been called to stand down as of August 9th to

19 go back to their home units. Correct?

20 A. That's correct, sir.

21 Q. Were you aware of what units or troops were in Donji Lapac when

22 you were there on the 11th and 12th of August?

23 A. No, I wasn't. The reason I went up to Donji Lapac was to follow

24 the alleged route of the evacuation of civilians and the withdrawal of

25 the ARSK up towards the Donji Lapac area.

Page 7852

1 Q. It's fair to state that you cannot state with any certainty

2 whether the Ministry of Interior --

3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --

4 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Sorry, Your Honour.

5 Thank you, Your Honour, and I apologise again to the

6 interpreters.

7 Q. It is fair to state, Mr. Berikoff, that you cannot state with any

8 certainty whether the Ministry of Interior special police were involved

9 in any way in the burning and/or looting of Donji Lapac. Correct?

10 A. That's a fair statement, sir.

11 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Could I please call D557.

12 Q. Mr. Berikoff, D557 is an order from the Chief of Staff of the

13 Croatian army, Mr. Cervenko, ordering the Ministry of Interior special

14 police to take up positions in the area of Petrova Gora. Do you know

15 where the area of Petrova Gora is?

16 A. I don't recall where the area is, sir.

17 Q. Okay. Is it in Sector North?

18 A. It is in the northern portion, from what I believe. I don't know

19 if it is actually in Sector North or not but it is in the northern

20 portion, sir.

21 Q. So at least this particular order, D557 shows that the Ministry

22 of Interior special police were in the -- ordered to go the area of

23 Petrova Gora as of 10th of August 1995. Correct?

24 A. That's what the information shows.

25 Q. You don't have any information to the contrary. Correct?

Page 7853

1 A. No, I do not, sir.

2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, in order to save time there are

3 several other documents that I would like to refer to that have been

4 marked in evidence both by the Prosecution and the Defence, I can speak

5 with Mr. Russo about them during the break, that show when and where the

6 Ministry of Interior special police were in this time-frame and that they

7 were not areas of Kistanje, Civljane, Drnis, and other places where

8 Mr. Berikoff states that he thought he saw Ministry of Interior special

9 police conducting burning and/or looting.

10 So I can speak with Mr. Russo about that rather than having to go

11 through each of the documents with Mr. Berikoff, for reference purposes.

12 JUDGE ORIE: I can imagine that you put to the witness that there

13 are documents which say that the special police were at place A where the

14 witness said they were at place B. However, the evaluation of that

15 information, whether the document is wrong, whether the recollection of

16 the witness is wrong, whether there were several units at several places

17 is of course all a matter of evaluation of the evidence.

18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Certainly.

19 JUDGE ORIE: So there is no problem in putting this to the

20 witness, but seeking from this witness, who may have limited oversight

21 over the totality of the information, seeking him to draw conclusions is

22 tasking him to some extent with what is the task of this Chamber.

23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understand.

24 JUDGE ORIE: So, therefore, the Chamber, despite perhaps the

25 wisdom and knowledge of Mr. Berikoff would take that task as its own

Page 7854

1 task.

2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood. And that was my whole purpose in

3 asking that, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you would keep that in the back of your

5 mind and if perhaps you, together with Mr. Russo, try to summarize the

6 gist of those documents so that you can put it to the witness, we have

7 documents that say, there, there, et cetera, then you can put that to the

8 witness you can put that to the witness --

9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: All right, thank you.

10 JUDGE ORIE: -- and get his response.

11 MR. KUZMANOVIC: We can do that -- I see it's break time now.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's break time.

13 Mr. Berikoff, we will have a break for 25 minutes.

14 Could you give us an indication, Mr. Kuzmanovic, on how much

15 more?

16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, can I ask how much time I have used

17 so far. I thought I said an hour and a half.

18 JUDGE ORIE: I have to rely on Mr. Registrar.

19 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Putting him under the gun here.

20 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

21 JUDGE ORIE: Net time was a little bit over half an hour.

22 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Okay. I -- I would like to -- I'm probably

23 going to use the rest of my hour, Your Honour. I said an hour and a

24 half. I might be done in less than that.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

Page 7857

1 MR. RUSSO: He's not wrong, Your Honour.

2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Here we go.

3 For the benefit of the Court, I will just read the exhibit

4 numbers in a list format.

5 P614, P621, D561, D554, D557, D552, D550, P606, and D543. And,

6 again, these documents show the locations of the Ministry of Interior

7 special police between the 4th and 9th of August, 1995, and then

8 including the order on the 10th of August for the special police to go to

9 Sector North, to Petrova Gora. That particular -- that particular order

10 of August 10th was D557.

11 We've also discussed the issue of abbreviations, Your Honour.

12 Mr. Russo and I will sit down with those two exhibits, D267 and D268 and

13 we will get that information to the Chamber.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

15 MR. KUZMANOVIC:

16 Q. Mr. Berikoff, you had answered some questions previously

17 regarding your knowledge or assumptions regarding the Ministry of

18 Interior special police. Were you aware that the -- between August 4th

19 and August 9th, the Ministry of Interior special police came down

20 August 4th from the Velebit mountain through Gracac, Mazin, Donji Lapac,

21 and ended up in Kulen-Vakuf Bosnia on the 8th of August, 1995?

22 A. I knew it was one of the axes of advance. I did not know it was

23 the special police, sir.

24 Q. You would agree with me, would you not, Mr. Berikoff, that if, in

25 fact, the documents that I had just read off, the exhibit numbers both

Page 7858

1 from the Prosecution and the Defence, show that between the 4th and 9th

2 of August of 1995 the special police of the military police -- of the

3 Ministry of Interior were not in the area of Knin, Drnis, Civljane,

4 Kistanje, Cetina and Vrlika, you would have no facts upon which to base

5 otherwise.

6 A. I have no other facts to base that on, and I would have to agree

7 with what's on the documents, if that's what the documents say, sir.

8 Q. Thank you.

9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: If we could please pull up 65 ter 2061. And --

10 Q. This is a 11-page document which is a report of the military

11 police units during Operation Storm dated August 13th of 1995.

12 Mr. Berikoff, in the third paragraph there is an formation of the

13 military police called the AT formation or anti-terrorist formation.

14 Were you aware of that formation?

15 A. I was aware of that formation -- if it is the same as

16 anti-sabotage or terrorist unit, yes, I was, because it was the same

17 group -- or a group of people wearing the same type of patch I believe

18 when President Tudjman came into the town of Knin, sir.

19 Q. What kind of uniform did those people wear?

20 A. They wore camouflage uniforms and it had the crest with

21 lightening bolts on it, sir.

22 Q. Now, with AT formation of the military police do you know whether

23 or not those formations were also called special police?

24 A. No, I do not, sir.

25 Q. This particular report 13 August 1995, which is 65 ter 2061,

Page 7859

1 discusses the various members recruited from the military police, the

2 traffic police that were involved in Operation Storm. Were you at all

3 familiar with these formations?

4 A. No, I was not, sir.

5 Q. I just want to make one thing perfectly clear and we may have

6 made this clear before, but I just want for the purposes of the record to

7 make sure that it's clear.

8 The military police that were -- that Major Juric commanded, it's

9 true, is it not, that Major Juric, based on what you have learned today,

10 had nothing to do with the Ministry of Interior special police.

11 A. I cannot verify that. However, based on the information you

12 said, I -- if they're accurate, that's true, sir.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, again, if you refer to what the

14 witness learned today, this assumes that he was in a position to draw any

15 conclusions from what he has seen, and sometimes people learn things not

16 as they were taught. I'm not saying that we're teaching the witness

17 anything here.

18 But the witness is limited to what he saw on paper today.

19 Whether he learned that it's true what was on paper, whether he learned

20 that the paperwork does not match with his own recollection, whether --

21 that's totally unclear. So, therefore, I would invite you to refrain

22 from unspecified reference to what the witness learned today.

23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I will do that, Your Honour.

24 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I would like you to -- can you tell me without

25 having known -- without having reviewed the documents today, irrespective

Page 7860

1 of those documents, do you know whether Major Juric was the head of the

2 special police of the Ministry of Interior?

3 A. At the time I felt that he was a member and head of the military

4 police/special police. The reason I say that is on numerous occasions

5 that I had myself or myself with other people had run into Major Juric,

6 he had the authority over the -- definitely over the military police

7 throughout the sector at check-points that we got stopped at, it was

8 Major Juric's name that was recognised beyond anybody else's, and when we

9 first met Major Juric at the Ministry of Defence or in the police station

10 it was Major Juric who seemed to command all of the control even when a

11 lieutenant-colonel came into the room, it was the -- it was the major

12 that was, in fact, giving the orders to the lieutenant-colonel, sir.

13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Could we please pull up D268. Page 2.

14 Actually, we can start on page 1.

15 Q. Ms. Higgins had this document tendered into evidence and asked

16 you some questions about it.

17 This was an order from Major-General Lausic describing what

18 Major Juric's tasks were, and if you look on the second page of this

19 document, would you agree that at least as per this document, D268, there

20 is nothing in this document that shows major Lausic, at least on paper,

21 has any type of control over the Ministry of Interior special police?

22 A. According to the document, that's correct, sir.

23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I neglected to move 65 ter 2061

24 into evidence. I'd like to move that document into evidence, Your

25 Honour.

Page 7861

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.

2 MR. RUSSO: No objection, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.

4 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes exhibit number D737.

5 JUDGE ORIE: D737 is admitted into evidence.

6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: By the way, I have 45 minutes, Your Honour, not

7 an hour. Sean and I discussed this over the break, just so you know.

8 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If this happens with the text authorities, you

10 usually say you made a mistake. Now you are bound. I think we all

11 accept the authority of our registrar for the time keeping.

12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Sure, just as an officer of the Court I wanted

13 to make the Court aware I had less time than I had previously.

14 Could we please call up P747.

15 Q. Before getting into P747, Mr. Berikoff, I enumerated a list of

16 areas in which you thought you had seen the special police during the

17 course of Operation Storm and shortly afterwards from the 4th and 9th of

18 August. One area which I neglected to include was the area, the village

19 of Strmica. I did not add that to the list of Knin, Drnis and other

20 places. Would you agree with me that with respect to the village of

21 Strmica the Republic of Croatia Ministry of Interior special police, at

22 least according to the reports that I enumerated, was not in Strmica?

23 A. I would agree sir.

24 Q. Back to P747. This was a list that you had compiled?

25 A. Yes, it is.

Page 7862

1 Q. And it was a day-by-day brief summary of places you had gone to.

2 Correct?

3 A. Yes, it is, sir.

4 Q. Now on the 8th of August, in 1 e you discuss HV troops or

5 Croatian special police likely responsible for destruction in Knin.

6 Now, based upon P614, which showed that -- which I had gone over

7 with you earlier, that the special police, at that point in time, were

8 located in Kulen Vakuf in Bosnia, the notation of Croatian special police

9 being likely responsible is mistaken. Correct?

10 A. According to the information I received today, it's possible,

11 sir.

12 Q. You also mention for example on August 11th the village of

13 Civljane on page 2 of this document, which is 1 h.

14 If we could go to page 2, please. Thank you.

15 Again, on August 11th, you note you witnessed HV troops,

16 including the special police, going into numerous residences.

17 Again, going back to P641 by August 11th the special police were

18 in Sector North, at least according to the documents that you were

19 presented with earlier today. Correct?

20 A. The information I put in this document was based on the

21 information I had and the assumptions I had at that time, sir, of people

22 wearing grey coveralls and those wearing camouflage. However, based on

23 the documents you showed me today, yes, sir.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, you earlier referred to P614 which

25 is among the documents you referred to at the beginning of the session

Page 7863

1 after the break.

2 Now we have 641. Is that --

3 MR. KUZMANOVIC: It should be 614, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE ORIE: 614. And think you said --

5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes. I didn't see the transcript, but thank

6 you. It's 614. If I said 641, I was incorrect.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's the 26th of November document.

8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes.

9 JUDGE ORIE: 2001.

10 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Correct.

11 Q. Similarly on August 11th, you note going into Donji Lapac, again,

12 this is in P741, 1 i, when you go back to P614, Donji Lapac, the --

13 according to that document, the Croatian special police were already out

14 of Donji Lapac as of August 8th, correct?

15 A. That's correct. And, once again, my assumption was for the same

16 reason, sir.

17 Q. And at least with respect to P614, any ID of Ministry of Interior

18 special police, would you agree with me in areas identified as Cetina or

19 Strmica or Kistanje is mistaken?

20 A. I won't say it's mistaken, sir. It was my assumption at the time

21 based on the information I had. On the information I received today from

22 you, according to the documents they were not there.

23 Q. And, again, other than noting that they were in grey coveralls

24 there's nothing specific about these people that would identify them as

25 members of the Ministry of Interior special police. Correct?

Page 7864

1 A. No, there was not, sir.

2 Q. Did you ever speak to any of these people?

3 A. No, I did not, sir. Other than Major Ivan Juric.

4 Q. Now, I'd like to go, please, to -- one of your statements, D284,

5 page 22.

6 The date of this statement, by the way, is May 26th and 27th of

7 1997, and we had Captain Hill here who testified earlier in this case,

8 and he talked about this particular incident that I'm going to refer to

9 between lines 18 and 36.

10 One thing I'd like to ask you is, you state in the -- line 20 at

11 the end of line 20: "We were forced out of our vehicle at gunpoint by a

12 number of intoxicated Croat soldiers."

13 Can you describe for me what do you mean by that? Can you

14 describe for me how you knew they were intoxicated and what do you mean

15 by intoxicated?

16 A. You could smell alcohol on their breath. They were acting

17 erratically, they were yelling and screaming at us, and mainly you could

18 smell a vast amount of alcohol on their breath, sir.

19 Q. Okay. I'd like to go to P748 for a moment, please. Page 9 of

20 17. If we could to the section of 9 August 1995.

21 And about a third of the way down there's a sentence that begins

22 at the far right-hand side.

23 And I'll read this. "We went travelling in a 'restricted area'

24 today just to see how far we could push the envelope. Very, very tense.

25 I'm getting tired of being constantly afraid. We were stopped at an HV

Page 7865

1 check-point near the KenBat headquarters today when one of the HV

2 soldiers spotted the rifle that Geoff was carrying."

3 Meaning Geoff Hill, correct?

4 A. Yes, that's correct.

5 Q. "He went ballistic and forced us out of our vehicle at gunpoint.

6 We were made to lay face down on the ground and wait. They took Captain

7 Hill's weapon from him because it was a Serb AK-47, one that had been

8 collected from a Serb soldier who was killed the first day of the

9 offensive, pure stupidity on Jeff's part, and a HV soldier who actually

10 came from Canada and could speak perfect English saved the day."

11 Now, this from your daily journal. Correct?

12 A. That's correct, sir.

13 Q. And that was made contemporaneous with roughly that day of

14 August 9th, 1995. Correct?

15 A. Yes, it was.

16 Q. And there's not one mention in this August 9, 1995 entry of

17 someone being -- or anyone being intoxicated that confronted you.

18 Correct?

19 A. That's correct. However, to the best of my recollection, there

20 was a strong stench of alcohol, sir.

21 Q. Okay. So two years later in 1997 you included the fact that you

22 were stopped by a bunch of intoxicated Croatian soldiers while on

23 August 9th of 1995, you simply say they were stopped at an HV check-point

24 in a restricted area. Correct?

25 A. The recollection of the alcohol was done or was recalled a lot

Page 7866

1 earlier. It was two years later when I was spoken to.

2 Q. You further say in this same paragraph in P748: "He," meaning

3 the HV soldier who was from Canada, "and the Croat escort took us to meet

4 the CO of KenBat. What a useless piece of trash."

5 Are you referring to the CO of KenBat there?

6 A. Yes, I was, sir.

7 Q. Why was he a useless piece of trash?

8 A. I don't recall my opinion of why. He seemed -- at the time he

9 seemed more interested in himself and didn't really care what was

10 happening elsewhere and that is my opinion of him at that time, sir. I

11 don't recall the whole incident of speaking with the CO of KenBat.

12 Q. Three lines down from that you say: "We ran into Major Ivan

13 Juric again. He asked us a few questions and was wondering why we were

14 in a restricted area. We gave him some story which I'm sure he did not

15 believe for a minute. He invited Geoff and I into a HV/HVO compound for

16 a bite to eat."

17 Now I noticed, Mr. Berikoff, that in several portions of your

18 statements you use HV/HVO. Why do you use the term HVO? First of all,

19 what is HVO?

20 A. HVO the Bosnian side of the Croatian military.

21 Q. And was there any identifying mark that would note these soldiers

22 as HVO?

23 A. No, there was not, and that's why I put it down either/or, sir,

24 at the time.

25 Q. So HV/HVO was something that you just put down because you

Page 7867

1 weren't sure?

2 A. That's exactly it, sir.

3 Q. Did you have any --

4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. ...

5 Yes, may I remind you of the pauses. At the same time, you

6 mentioned KenBat several times. Now we know that sometimes CanBat is

7 C-a-n-B-a-t.

8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I will --

9 JUDGE ORIE: -- and sometimes it is K-e-n-B-a-t. What did you

10 refer to?

11 THE WITNESS: In this instances, Your Honour it's Kenya.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Kenya, okay, then it is right.

13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: K-e-n, Your Honour.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you.

15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I should have made that clear. Thank you.

16 Q. Let go back to D284, same page, number 22.

17 Now in May of 1997 as you described this incident at lines 23,

18 you had talked about being forced out at gunpoint for a reason that was

19 quite stupid on the part of Captain Geoff Hill. You also note on line 27

20 that not just Captain Hill but Corporal Tremblay decided to carry an AK

21 because of the folding stock, rifle stock.

22 So there were actually two Serb weapons in the vehicle. Correct?

23 A. Yes, there were, there were Captain Hill and Corporal Tremblay

24 who was Captain Hill's driver.

25 Q. Okay. Now were Captain Hill or Corporal Tremblay reprimanded ed

Page 7868

1 for this?

2 A. Yes, they were -- I'm not sure about Corporal Tremblay. I do

3 know for a fact that Captain Hill was reprimanded, because when we

4 returned back to the UN compound I reported the incident to General

5 Forand and General Forand, he also got quite upset about the incident and

6 called Captain Hill in.

7 Q. Do you know what kind of reprimand Captain Hill received?

8 A. No, I do not, sir.

9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Let's go to P729, please, and when we get there

10 we can go just to the cover sheet at first. I don't think this is the

11 document. Did I say 729?

12 Q. The document I'm referring to, unless I wrote it down wrong and

13 I'm sorry, is the daily journal -- yes, 729, Sean. I'm sorry.

14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this is P729.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, are you referring to the daily

16 journal of the witness?

17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes. 30 July to 20 August, 1995.

18 JUDGE ORIE: 30 July, yes, that's ...

19 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I'm sorry, D729; my mistake. Thank you,

20 counsel.

21 Thank you, Mr. Registrar; my mistake. And that's page --

22 Q. Mr. Berikoff, before we go to page 5 of this document, this is a

23 daily journal that you compiled. Correct?

24 A. Yes, it is, sir.

25 Q. And is it an excerpt of the previous daily journal that I

Page 7869

1 referred to, P748?

2 A. Yes, it is, sir. As I indicated at the beginning of my

3 testimony, the journal was an ongoing project as I changed it from

4 handwritten notes into electronic format.

5 Q. Okay.

6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Why don't we go to page 5 of that document,

7 please.

8 Q. And we, again, referenced the check-point incident of August -- 9

9 August. And in the middle of the paragraph -- or about a third of the

10 way down in that entry, there's a sentence that begins with: "Went,"

11 w-e-n-t.

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. "Went travelling again today in a restricted area. Very, very

14 tense. I'm getting tired of being constantly being afraid. For example,

15 today we got stopped at a Croat check-point near the Kenyan Battalion

16 headquarters." And, again, the issue of the Serb AK that Captain Hill

17 was carrying is referenced.

18 There is no indication in this entry of you being accosted by

19 intoxicated Croatian soldiers, is there?

20 A. No, there is not.

21 Q. And this was on August 24th of 1996. Correct?

22 A. That's correct. However, that is not when the journal was done

23 was August 1996. The journal was done ongoing as soon as I went to

24 Sarajevo, if you recall from my answer the other day, sir.

25 Q. I do. What was the purpose of signing it on August 24th, 1996?

Page 7870

1 A. The purpose that I signed was it was a document that I turned

2 into the investigator during an interview, sir.

3 Q. Page 7 of this document toward the bottom, you have a notation

4 here, it's the 12th of August, about the last quarter of the page,

5 there's a sentence that -- on the right that begins: "We were

6 spotted ..."

7 And it says: "We were spotted by a number of HV special police

8 (death squad) who surrounded us and placed us under arrest, supposedly

9 for being in a restricted area."

10 What is the HV special police death squad?

11 A. Once again, from rumours or raw information that I had heard

12 while I was there, people wearing the grey coveralls were also in many

13 instances referred to as death squad. Some of that information came from

14 the refugees in the camp. That's what they called them.

15 Q. Okay. You have no evidence, factual evidence, to show that there

16 were anything resembling a death squad in this area, do you?

17 A. No, I do not, sir.

18 Q. Now, was it your impression that -- or did you gain the

19 impression during the course of your time that there were certain squads

20 that went house to house?

21 A. I'm not sure if it was certain squads. But numerous soldiers and

22 civilian police did go from house to house, yes, sir.

23 Q. Now, at some point in time, did you report your knowledge and

24 information that you gained to your -- you did report your knowledge or

25 information that you gained to your superiors. Correct?

Page 7871

1 A. Following every -- every trip that I took throughout the sector,

2 when I returned back to the compound, I gave verbal reports to General

3 Forand and the operations staff.

4 Q. And was that Colonel Leslie?

5 A. In the first couple of days it would have been Colonel Leslie.

6 Later on it would have been the Jordanian Chief of Staff who I don't

7 recall what his name is, sir.

8 Q. Colonel, now General Leslie, testified earlier that he left on

9 the 7th or 8th of August of 1995. Does that square with your

10 recollection?

11 A. It was -- it was shortly after the offensive that he left, so,

12 therefore, yes, it would have probably been the Jordanian Chief of Staff,

13 sir.

14 Q. Now, I'd like to pull up D329, just the transcript, please.

15 Mr. Berikoff, earlier in this case during General Forand's

16 testimony this document and transcript was introduced into evidence. It

17 was an interview done in July of 2003 of General Forand and General

18 Leslie regarding Operation Storm and its aftermath.

19 Now, you had earlier testified that you had changed your opinion

20 on the nature of the artillery attack on Knin, and I wanted to ask you a

21 question about casualties during that time-frame.

22 You've given us some estimate of -- or not some estimate, but you

23 have given us some observations of a number of people that were dead that

24 you had seen during the 4th and 5th of August. Correct?

25 A. Yes, sir.

Page 7872

1 Q. On page 2 of that transcript, the third -- fourth paragraph, and

2 I'll represent to you that L means Leslie, in answer to a question about

3 shelling stated that the shelling, at the bottom, "it killed a lot of

4 civilians and we'll never know the exact number but estimates range from

5 10 to 25.000 dead."

6 Now, as intelligence and information officer for Sector South,

7 you did not give that estimate range to General Leslie, did you no?

8 A. No, I did not, sir, because I did not see anywhere near that

9 amount. It was in the double or triple digits at the very most, sir.

10 Q. So the number of 10 to 25.000 is flat wrong?

11 A. I would say it is flat wrong based on the information I had at

12 the time, sir.

13 Q. Now page 3 of this particular document in the middle, there's a

14 comment by the reporter in the transcript that says: "General Leslie

15 says that he saw Croatian police afterwards going house to house and

16 killing anyone they found."

17 And then the quotation is attributed to him: "There were a

18 variety of organisations that then swept into the former Serbian Krajina.

19 There were special police teams wearing their very distinctive blue

20 uniforms who were engaged in hunting and killing in the mountains of

21 Serbian civilians and I saw dozens and dozens of farm houses and even

22 villages burning many, many days, in some cases, months after the initial

23 assault had taken place."

24 Now, I wanted to ask you a question about the special police

25 teams wearing their very distinctive blue uniforms.

Page 7873

1 Did you as the intelligence and information officer provide that

2 information to General Leslie?

3 A. No, I did not because the only time I saw blue uniforms was when

4 I was in fact in Bosnia when the Serbs were wearing blue uniforms. I did

5 not see any blue uniforms in Croatia. They were the grey coveralls that

6 I had seen in Croatia, sir.

7 Q. Now, were you aware at any time of any forces engaging in what

8 Leslie, General Leslie called hunting and killing in the mountains of

9 Serbian civilians?

10 A. No, I'm not, sir. I am aware of the destruction of homes in the

11 area, but not of hunting and killing.

12 Q. Okay. Thank you. Do you know as a military intelligence

13 information officer what kind of movements the ARSK had during the 5th

14 and 6th of August in the area of Donji Lapac?

15 A. No, I don't, in the area of Donji Lapac, no, I don't, sir. It

16 was later on that I learned and followed the route that they had

17 withdrawn from the area of Knin.

18 Q. Were you aware that before your arrival in Donji Lapac, I believe

19 it was the 11th and 12th of August of 1995, that UNMO sitreps designated

20 that there was looting going on by the army of BH coming across the

21 border into Donji Lapac.

22 A. I was not aware of the UNMO report, sir.

23 Q. Did you have access to UNMO reports at all, sitreps?

24 A. The only access I had to UNMO reports were what was given to us

25 in the morning prayers and it was a verbal report, not written. I did

Page 7874

1 not see the UNMO reports. They would have gone through the operations,

2 through a different chain of command to headquarters.

3 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Can we please pull up P114. If we could go to

4 page -- on the right-hand corner 9592, on the right-hand upper corner of

5 this sitrep.

6 Q. Toward the middle of this UNMO sitrep on this page there's a

7 notation at 10 -- at 10 12.30 Bravo, meaning the 10th of August at 12.30

8 correct?

9 A. Yes, it is, sir.

10 Q. "At Donji Lapac UNMO patrol observed soldiers wearing BiH

11 insignia helping refugees from Bihac with trucks to collect cows and

12 other household items left behind by the Krajina Serbs."

13 Now, you said you were not -- you did not observe that when you

14 were there, on the 11th and 12th?

15 A. No, I did not, sir.

16 Q. Were you -- and I already talked to you about the fact that the

17 Ministry of Interior special police were already out of Donji Lapac

18 before the 10th of August. Correct?

19 A. According to the document you showed me, yes, sir.

20 Q. Were you aware that the ARSK, as they were going through

21 Donji Lapac, was harassing the UN forces in the area and were demanding

22 fuel before they left Donji Lapac?

23 A. With regard to the harassing by the ARSK, that was ongoing when I

24 first got there right until we left. As far as asking for fuel, I cannot

25 respond to what they asked for up in the Donji Lapac area. I've already

Page 7875

1 indicated the fuel issue in the Strmica area, sir.

2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Why don't we go to P111, please. If we could go

3 to 9575 of that document, please.

4 Q. Toward the middle of that document there's a discussion that

5 around -- that on the 6th of August, ARSK trucks carrying 100 persons

6 arrived at B platoon 5th, is that company?

7 A. Yes, it is, sir, 5th company.

8 Q. In Donji Lapac area and starting harassing and asking for fuel

9 and rations. After negotiations with them, they left the area.

10 Now, you were not in Donji Lapac until the 11th?

11 A. That's correct, sir.

12 Q. Were you aware of the shelling that had gone on in Donji Lapac

13 both before it was taken and after the Croatian special police entered

14 Donji Lapac?

15 A. Yes, I was. As I indicated earlier, I am aware of heavier combat

16 activities up in that area, sir.

17 Q. Mr. Berikoff, if you could please tell us the nature and extent

18 of the briefing that you got when you got to Zagreb before you became

19 intelligence and information in Sector South.

20 A. I virtually -- I was just given a general sitrep of the situation

21 in the whole area of the former Yugoslavia and in particular in

22 Sector South, saying that the situation was very tense, there was a

23 likelihood of a possible HV offensive to retake the Krajina if

24 negotiations that were being held were not successful.

25 I was not given a detailed briefing to the extent of what forces

Page 7876

1 were in the area, where they were located, or the identification of those

2 forces, sir.

3 Q. Would that be for both sides. Correct?

4 A. That was for both sides, sir.

5 Q. And stated in one of your statements that on the 27th or 28th of

6 July several local UN personnel did not show up for work and they were

7 leaving the area.

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. Did you come to a conclusion as to why that was happening?

10 A. Yes, I did. In the sense that there was also mobilisation of

11 ARSK forces and it was my conclusion that a possible offensive by the HV

12 was near at hand.

13 Q. And that mobilisation I believe you had stated was broadcast on

14 Radio Knin?

15 A. Yes, it was, sir.

16 Q. Did you hear the broadcast?

17 A. I did not hear it myself. I had heard from various sources

18 including our operations staff.

19 MR. KUZMANOVIC: One moment, Your Honour.

20 [Defence counsel confer]

21 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Mr. Registrar, can you please pull up P112. If

22 we could go to 9581.

23 Q. This is a sitrep, Mr. Berikoff, from the 8th of August of 1995,

24 and on this page, at the bottom of the page, JorBat was on the border

25 there. Correct?

Page 7877

1 A. That's correct sir.

2 Q. And the border area near Donji Lapac, right?

3 A. That's right. Their headquarters was just north of the town of

4 Donji Lapac.

5 Q. And this particular sitrep reports that on the 8th of

6 August artillery shelling was reported in the general area at Boricevac

7 from the BH side, correct?

8 A. That's what the document says, yes, sir.

9 Q. So at least on the 8th of August, according to this sitrep,

10 Donji Lapac was still in play in terms of combat operations?

11 A. Yeah. And I indicated that previously as well, sir.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, you were kind enough to draw our

13 attention to the corrected time given to you by -- you are now well --

14 you're over one hour and a half. Can you please try to conclude.

15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes, Your Honour, if I could have one moment,

16 and I will conclude.

17 [Defence counsel confer]

18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: One other question, Your Honour, and I will be

19 done.

20 Q. Mr. Berikoff, in the area of Boricevac were you aware of a very

21 large weapons storage facility that was in that location?

22 A. No, I was not, sir.

23 Q. Thank you.

24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: That's all I have. Thank you, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kuzmanovic. Could you assist me in

Page 7878

1 one of the documents, I think it was 614, refers to Otrovica. Could you

2 assist me to find this on a map.

3 MR. KUZMANOVIC: What was the name of the place, Your Honour?

4 I'm sorry.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Otrovica.

6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Mitrovica?

7 JUDGE ORIE: No. Otrovica, I think it was. Let me just check.

8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Are you thinking of Otravic, perhaps, Your

9 Honour?

10 JUDGE ORIE: It says Ostrovica. It was -- you referred to

11 page --

12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... yes, 26. On 31, it's

13 on 26 as well. That is in Bosnia near Kulen Vakuf, Your Honour. That's

14 across the border into Bosnia, where the special police ended their

15 operation in Kulen Vakuf, at the edge of Kulen Vakuf. So Ostrovica is a

16 village right next to Kulen Vakuf.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I found it.

18 Yes, may I then ask you in relation to the same page 31 of

19 P614 --

20 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes.

21 JUDGE ORIE: -- I think it was, it is a draft translation on the

22 second line, the semi-last word is their, t-h-e-i-r, which I would be

23 inclined to read as there, t-h-e-r-e.

24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I would agree, Your Honour, the second-last line

25 where it says "engaged there," it should be t-h-e-r-e. The second their

Page 7879

1 on the second-last line should be their own units. I agree.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

3 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I agree and we will see to it -- actually, this

4 is a P document if I'm not mistaken. P614.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: We can have that corrected. We'll work with the

7 Prosecution to get that fixed.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Because one of the questions that came into my

9 mind, and you might want pay further attention to it in the future, is

10 special police forces that had been engaged there, what that exactly

11 meant.

12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Being engaged there, whether -- how many there were

14 and how limited that is -- or what limitations are included in that that

15 had been engaged there.

16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Understood. Thank you, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, any need to re-examine the witness.

18 MR. TIEGER:

19 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Your Honour, I would estimate approximately 30

20 minutes.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed.

22 Re-examination by Mr. Russo:

23 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Your Honour. I will make my best attempt

24 to be brief.

25 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I'd like to take you back to a few areas covered

Page 7880

1 during your cross-examination.

2 Let me first ask Mr. President, I know on several occasions I

3 will be referring to the transcript of the last two days. My particular

4 transcript begins from 1 on every day, and I know that there was some

5 issue about that with previous witnesses. I don't know if the Court's

6 begins at a different number, but I can give it --

7 JUDGE ORIE: I can tell you very quickly. The 1st of

8 September transcripts starts at page 7588, whereas the transcript of

9 yesterday, the 2nd of September, starts at page 7702. So it takes some

10 calculations, but I take it that you have access to e-court as well.

11 MR. RUSSO: I do, Your Honour. I just don't have the same page

12 beginnings as you do and there's sometimes a bit of a miss. I have done

13 the calculations although I think mine were off by --

14 JUDGE ORIE: If there's ever any problem with the Word Wheel and

15 search facilities, if you give a key word, then we will be able to find

16 it rather quickly.

17 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.

18 Q. Referring to transcript page - and the page starting from 1, it

19 would be page 83 from lines 3 to 6, and I believe in Your Honours'

20 transcript that would be page 7670 or 7671, depending where you begin.

21 Mr. Kehoe asked you about the departure of civilians from Knin

22 prior to Operation Storm and I believe Mr. Kuzmanovic just touched on it.

23 Do you recall that?

24 A. Yes, I do, sir.

25 Q. And can you tell the Court whether you observed any RSK military

Page 7881

1 or police involvement in the departure of those civilians?

2 A. In the actual departure of the civilians, no, I did not, sir.

3 Q. Thank you. I noticed your qualification of the term actual

4 departure. Does that mean that in some other fashion you saw their

5 involvement?

6 A. No, I did not.

7 Q. Referring to page -- transcript 88, page 1 to 7, for Your Honours

8 that would be transcript page 7675, 1 to 7, Mr. Kehoe asked you about

9 whether the HV used the right type of ammunition for the destruction of

10 buildings and facilities in Knin, and you indicated that they did.

11 First let me ask you, approximately how many military buildings

12 and facilities did the HV actually destroy in Knin?

13 A. I cannot answer that, sir, because I don't know how many military

14 installations there were in Knin, sir.

15 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, counsel. I'm just a little bit -- I

16 apologise. I am a little bit confused on the pagination. I think the

17 official transcript, Mr. Russo, 7675 covers the evacuation issue and this

18 ammunition issue, I'm not sure I'm following the transcript exactly.

19 My apologies. I certainly didn't mean to interrupt, but I think

20 I have the official transcript and my pagination appears to be a tad

21 different.

22 MR. RUSSO: In any case, it should be approximately four to five

23 pages beyond the departure issue. That is probably --

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, if you give precise words. For example,

25 you earlier used departure. Now departure appears not on my WordWheel

Page 7882

1 there. So if you would give one word which is exact, then with WordWheel

2 it is so easy to find it.

3 MR. KEHOE: I beg to differ. I'm not that quick. I'm a bit of a

4 dinosaur. I'm still back on the old hard copy, so to the extent that we

5 get some assistance on the hard copy, I would appreciate it.

6 MR. RUSSO: I will try to assist both parties, Your Honour.

7 With respect to departure issue the word to look for is

8 evacuation. With respect to the questioning I'm now asking, the Court

9 can look for destruction, buildings, or facilities and should find the

10 reference.

11 MR. KEHOE: I will say just for the record that the departure

12 issue is the one that is on 7675. So if we can start from that premise.

13 JUDGE ORIE: That's line 5, yes, I found it.

14 MR. KEHOE: I apologise, Mr. Russo, I'm just trying to stay with

15 you.

16 MR. RUSSO:

17 Q. So, Mr. Berikoff, first of all, let me get your definition of

18 what it means for a building to be destroyed.

19 A. For a building to be destroyed, it would mean that it's no longer

20 inhabitable, sir.

21 Q. And I understand your last answer was that you couldn't tell me

22 how many military targets were destroyed. Can you give the Court an

23 approximation of how many buildings in Knin were completely destroyed

24 under your definition of that term?

25 A. Under my definition of that term, I would say approximately 100

Page 7883

1 homes were destroyed during the offensive, and then following the

2 offensive, looting, et cetera, and further destruction continued.

3 Q. And taking homes out of that calculation, and speaking only about

4 buildings or facilities and assuming these were not places where people

5 are living, how many of those kinds of buildings or facilities did you

6 see destroyed under your definition of that term?

7 A. I cannot give an accurate number. However, the -- the factory

8 was hit, the POL portion was hit, the rail head was hit. There were also

9 indications of shell impacts in and near the Ministry of Defence. The

10 barracks at the northern end of town was also hit, the area of the police

11 station, so I would consider these all military-type targets, sir.

12 Q. I understand that. I think you may be misunderstanding my

13 question. You have named the factory, the POL station, the railway, the

14 Ministry of Defence building, the barracks and the -- and the area around

15 the police station.

16 What I'm trying to determine is of those, how many were

17 destroyed.

18 A. I cannot give an accurate figure on that one, sir. I do not

19 know.

20 Q. Okay. Now --

21 A. Or I don't recall.

22 Q. Regarding the weaponry that was used against Knin, I believe

23 you've already testified and certainly it is in your statements that MBRL

24 rockets were fired into Knin?

25 A. Yes, they were.

Page 7884

1 Q. Do you think that MBRL rockets are appropriate weapons to use

2 against military targets in civilian-populated areas?

3 A. The multiple-barrel rocket launcher is an area weapon and a

4 commander would definitely have to take into consideration the collateral

5 damage that this has caused. I believe I explained there to Mr. Kehoe as

6 well, sir.

7 Q. And I understand?

8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.

9 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Your Honour.

10 Q. I understand your answer that a reasonable commander would have

11 to take into consideration the damage that that would cause.

12 Is that a particular concern where, as you call them, area

13 weapons are used?

14 A. Yes, it is.

15 Q. And from your perspective, are -- would the use of airburst

16 ammunition be considered an area weapon?

17 A. Yes, I would.

18 Q. Thank you. Now, Mr. Kehoe also asked you whether it would be

19 reasonable for a military commander to fire artillery at the tanks which

20 you saw driving through Knin on the morning of 5 August. Do you recall

21 that?

22 A. I recall the question.

23 Q. And let me just ask to you briefly to explain to the Court your

24 understanding of how artillery should be used to hit a target that is

25 moving through an urban area?

Page 7885

1 A. It all depends how the -- how the withdrawing force is leaving an

2 urban area. If they are going in massive built-up areas the commander

3 should consider the likelihood of collateral damage that it would cause,

4 and if possible, it is better to use more of a weapon system that would

5 be able to bring fire immediately upon the withdrawing force.

6 However, as Mr. Kehoe indicated the other day, the -- the

7 withdrawing force going through an area, yes, you would try to also

8 eliminate that force, if possible, sir.

9 Q. I don't want to expand the scope of my question. Let's just take

10 the example of -- you saw several tanks, if I'm not mistaken, several

11 tanks making their way through Knin on the morning of 5th August, right?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Can you explain to the Court from your perspective what would be

14 the appropriate way for a commander to engage those tanks with artillery?

15 A. What -- in -- now, this is just my opinion, but in my opinion the

16 commander could wait until the tanks have gone out of the city on the

17 outskirts and then engage them. However, it's up to the commander, sir.

18 Q. And if the commander chose to engage them while they were driving

19 through the city, would a reasonable commander expect that the likelihood

20 of collateral damage would be higher than if he waited for those tanks to

21 leave the city?

22 A. Yes, he would, sir.

23 Q. And the whole concept of mobile targets is that targets are

24 mobile, obviously, so if a tank is moving -- let me ask you this: How

25 far can an ARSK tank move?

Page 7886

1 A. It all depends what type of tank it is, sir. Some can go as high

2 as 50 miles an hour, depending on the model.

3 Q. Well, the model that --

4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.

5 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, if you'd take a breath now and then, the

7 interpreters can do the same.

8 MR. RUSSO: My apologies, Your Honour.

9 Q. Can you tell the Court or give the Court some idea of how fast

10 the kinds of ARSK tanks that you saw moving through Knin on the morning

11 of the 5th can move.

12 A. The type of tanks that we saw moving through Knin were the older

13 T-54, 55 tank and the old SU type tank and they are much slower than the

14 newer model, sir.

15 Q. Can you give us an idea how much slower?

16 A. About half the speed or less, sir. They're also moving through a

17 town of -- with streets, et cetera, and turns where they would have to

18 slow down, sir.

19 Q. Now, do you know from which direction or directions the HV

20 advanced toward Knin on the 4th of August?

21 A. There was a couple of directions that they came. They came from

22 the -- from the east and I -- and, as far as I am aware, they also came

23 from the south.

24 Q. And do you know how far the HV advanced toward Knin from the

25 east, by the end of 4 August?

Page 7887

1 A. By the end of 4 August, I believe they were within ten to 15

2 kilometres inside the Krajina.

3 Q. Is that ten to 15 kilometres away from Knin?

4 A. No, it's not. It's ten to 15 kilometres from the border of the

5 Krajina, coming either from the east or from the south.

6 MR. RUSSO: Mr. Registrar, if we could please have Exhibit D728.

7 Q. And while that is being pulled up, Mr. Berikoff, can you tell me

8 how far away Knin was from the confrontation line on the 4th of August,

9 in the eastern direction?

10 A. I -- I don't recall, sir.

11 MR. RUSSO: If we could go it page 11 of D728.

12 Q. Mr. Berikoff, this is the -- if you'll recall the collection of

13 maps that you generally agreed with and was admitted during Mr. Kehoe's

14 cross-examination.

15 MR. RUSSO: If we could, Mr. Registrar, please zoom in on the

16 light blue area, immediately to the left of where it says "OG North,"

17 roughly the middle of the page. Further over to the right. Thank you.

18 Q. Now, the exhibit indicates that this light blue area immediately

19 to the left of the letters OG North indicates that the HV, on the 4th of

20 August, achieved some distance just within -- just beyond the

21 confrontation line towards Knin. Is that right?

22 A. According to the map, that's correct, sir.

23 Q. Well, did you agree with that map?

24 A. In general terms, yes, I did and I would say, yes, they came over

25 the border about that far, sir.

Page 7888

1 Q. And looking at the map, I understand there's not a scale on the

2 map, but judging the distance from Knin to that line, how many kilometres

3 are we talking about?

4 A. Probably ten to 15 kilometres from the eastern portion of the

5 border, sir.

6 Q. Okay. Now, how long would it take an artillery projectile fired

7 from ten kilometres to reach Knin?

8 A. Depending on the weapon system, sir, not very long.

9 Q. Can you give us an area of not very long?

10 A. No, I can't. I'm not artillery person.

11 Q. Seconds?

12 A. It would be within seconds.

13 Q. Less than a minute?

14 A. Less than a minute, yes.

15 Q. Okay. And in less than a minute would you agree that the tank

16 could move from one position to another relatively -- even ten metres, 20

17 metres?

18 A. That's possible, yes.

19 Q. Okay. And assuming that tanks are moving through Knin on the 5th

20 of August, would a reasonable commander believe that firing artillery at

21 those tanks from a distance of approximately ten kilometres away was

22 going to be very effective?

23 A. That depends if the artillery was already targeted on a certain

24 location that the tanks would be passing, sir.

25 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Judge, I would object on the scope because

Page 7889

1 the -- I'm sorry, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, I was listening to the French

3 translation, which is a bit behind, so --

4 MR. KEHOE: Much more interesting than I am.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, your words would be translated as well.

6 Let me just read. Yes. You would object because --

7 MR. KEHOE: We are talking about a reasonable commander and what

8 a reasonable commander knows and does at the time he fires in on a

9 particular area. And that I think is the objection to the scope of this

10 question. Because the question that counsel is asking is asking

11 questions about what a reasonable commander would do which I trust. What

12 this commander knew at the time i.e., General Gotovina or if it was a

13 brigade commander doing the firing.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, I think the objection to the extent that

15 it is an objection that's clear that what was reasonable or not depends,

16 often, on what the person acting knows or doesn't know. Sometimes it may

17 include as well what he should have known.

18 Would you please keep this in mind when continuing your line of

19 questioning.

20 MR. RUSSO: I will do that, Your Honour. Mr. Kehoe had asked the

21 same question with respect to a reasonable commander. I understand the

22 qualifications to be the same and I do agree that it's what a reasonable

23 commander would know at the time and what he should know.

24 Q. So, Mr. Berikoff, in asking these questions please bear that in

25 mind.

Page 7890

1 Now, again, I'll restate the question.

2 Assuming that there were tanks as you say moving through Knin on

3 the 5th of August, would a reasonable commander believe that firing

4 artillery at them from a distance of ten kilometres away is likely to be

5 very effective?

6 A. It would not be very effective unless as I indicated earlier he

7 had a pre-set target that he was firing upon and waited for those tanks

8 to cross there, sir.

9 MR. RUSSO: If we could please have Exhibit D299.

10 Q. Mr. Berikoff, this was a document shown to you by Ms. Higgins and

11 if you'll recall -- let's just wait till the English translation comes

12 up.

13 This is a document in which General Cermak is requesting the

14 assistance of General Forand and his resources to remove damaged vehicles

15 from the town of Knin.

16 Now, did you hear from anyone in the HQ compound or anyone in the

17 UN possibly assisting with this that anybody had to remove either a

18 damaged or a destroyed tank from Knin?

19 A. No, I did not.

20 Q. Did you personally observe a damaged or a destroyed tank in Knin

21 after the 5th of August?

22 A. No, I did not.

23 Q. And in attempting to destroy tanks that are moving through a

24 city, would a reasonable commander have to consider the amount of

25 collateral damage likely to occur from that attempt?

Page 7891

1 A. A reasonable commander would definitely have to consider that as

2 well.

3 Q. Based on what you personally observed, would you consider the

4 amount of collateral damage to the residential areas of Knin to be

5 extensive?

6 A. It was extensive, yes.

7 Q. Now at -- Mr. Kehoe also read you an intercept by General Mrksic

8 on the 4th of August suggesting that ARSK forces had withdrawn from their

9 positions for the defence of Knin. Do you recall that?

10 A. Yes, I do.

11 Q. Let me refer to your third statement which is tab 3 in your

12 binder. It's Exhibit D84, at page 12, lines 1 through 13. For the court

13 officer, this appears in the B/C/S at page 9, lines 7 through 23.

14 Now, in that passage, Mr. Berikoff, you state your opinion that

15 the stories being put out by the Krajina media on 4 August about the ARSK

16 fighting and maintaining high spirits was all a deception because the

17 ARSK had left the area and the town of Knin itself was extremely lightly

18 defended.

19 Is that correct?

20 A. That is my assessment, yes.

21 Q. And let me ask you: Did you see any evidence that -- personally

22 observe any evidence that the ARSK forces actually made a defensive stand

23 at or outside of Knin?

24 A. I did not personally see them make the defensive. However, I did

25 know where their defensive deployment area was located.

Page 7892

1 Q. Did you know where that defensive deployment area was located on

2 the 5th of August?

3 A. I was the assumption that it was the same area where I had seen

4 the positions prior to the offensive itself.

5 Q. And can you tell the Court where that was?

6 A. It was on the outskirts of Knin on the way to Otric.

7 Q. And was that area a civilian-populated area?

8 A. No, it was not. It was an open area on the outskirts of Knin.

9 Q. Now, Mr. Kehoe also asked you whether the war lords that you

10 referenced in your statement were wearing camouflage uniforms and other

11 military paraphernalia and accoutrements, and I believe you agreed that

12 they were. Is that right?

13 A. That's correct.

14 Q. First of all let me ask you, please, to define for the Court what

15 is it that you mean when you say the word war lord?

16 A. My assessment of a warlord is like a gang leader. It will be a

17 group of locals that get together and respond to the command and orders

18 of an individual who they feel has authority.

19 Q. Did you ever meet any individual that you would consider to be a

20 warlord?

21 A. I did not meet any individual specifically. However, there were

22 groups that appeared to be like a gang that definitely would not have

23 responded to the military.

24 Q. And are these the people that Mr. Kehoe asked you about and who

25 you said were wearing camouflage uniforms?

Page 7893

1 A. I believe they are part of the group that Mr. Kehoe asked about.

2 Q. Did you ever speak to any members of these groups?

3 A. Specifically in the Cetina area when we were detained and taken

4 to Vrlika police station, we were surrounded by such a group, and the one

5 gentleman in particular got in the vehicle and escorted us to the Vrlika

6 police station, sir.

7 Q. And did that individual or any of the troops that you attribute

8 to being part of a warlord's gang, did any of them ever tell you that

9 they worked for a warlord or for anyone other than the Croatian military?

10 A. No, they did not. It was just my assumption based on the type of

11 uniform they were wearing, the disorganisation that existed and just the

12 very -- various attitude that they had.

13 Q. I'd like to be clear about this. The only distinction you're

14 drawing between what you call HV/HVO soldiers and the people in the

15 service of these warlords is their uniforms and their attitude?

16 A. The uniforms, their attitude, their demeanour towards everybody

17 basically, and -- yes, you can say that.

18 Q. Did their demeanor include being drunk?

19 A. On numerous occasions there was alcohol involved, yes.

20 Q. I'd like to show you if I could, please, Exhibit P423.

21 Looking at the people riding on that tank, Mr. Berikoff, how

22 would you compare them to the people that you say you saw around the

23 sector being in the service of warlords?

24 A. That is similar to some of the people that I would say belonged

25 to a group of warlords. However, they did not have in many instances

Page 7894

1 those type of weapons systems.

2 Q. I don't think you indicated earlier that the weapons systems were

3 a basis that you used to distinguish between warlords and non-warlords.

4 Focussing strictly on the uniforms that these people --

5 MR. KEHOE: Object to commentary by counsel. If counsel wants to

6 ask a question, that's fine, but I object to commentary.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Your objection is to be taken seriously, yes.

8 MR. RUSSO: I understand that, Your Honour. I was just trying to

9 focus the witness on the fact that my question was not relating not to

10 the weaponry but to the uniforms.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but you did more. Please proceed.

12 MR. RUSSO:

13 Q. Focussing Mr. Berikoff, just on the uniforms that these

14 individuals in the photograph are wearing, how would you compare them

15 with these warlords that you saw in Sector South?

16 A. Quite similar, sir.

17 Q. Did you receive any information or intelligence from anyone to

18 indicate that there were, in fact, warlords in Sector South?

19 A. Yes, I did. Right from -- right from 1991 when I worked on the

20 Yugoslav crisis cell and onwards we were aware of groups of warlords as

21 well as their local group of I guess soldiers, you can call them, and

22 onwards.

23 When I got to Knin I was also -- so I was aware in general that

24 there were in fact groups of -- I would -- I don't know how to exactly

25 describe them but that there were warlords with troops loyal to them.

Page 7895

1 Q. Was it your understanding that those warlords were not within the

2 control of the HV?

3 A. Yes, it was.

4 Q. Where did that understanding come from?

5 A. Just from my understanding of a warlord and the group of troops

6 they have loyal to them throughout -- throughout anywhere, Somalia,

7 anywhere they are loyal to the warlord themself and not the rest.

8 Q. Mr. Berikoff, I would like to be very specific about the

9 situation in Sector South immediately following Operation Storm.

10 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I understand counsel doesn't like the

11 answer but the question was just asked. He is asking the same question

12 in a different fashion because didn't like the answer that the witness

13 just gave.

14 I object.

15 MR. RUSSO: I haven't asked my question yet so I'm not asking the

16 same question.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, whether Mr. Russo likes the answer or

18 not, perhaps we'll -- he will never tell us, I don't know. He had not

19 put the question yet.

20 Mr. Russo, would you please focus on questions rather than on

21 introductions to questions.

22 MR. RUSSO: Certainly, Your Honour.

23 Q. Can you give the Court any particular location that is either a

24 town or a particular area that you believe was controlled by a warlord

25 immediately following Operation Storm?

Page 7896

1 A. In particular, I would say the town of Oklaj had a group of these

2 type of people where they wore Rambo type shorts, cross-bandoliers

3 bandannas on their head and had an attitude very unmilitary-like.

4 Q. Other than Oklaj can you give the Court any other location that

5 you believe was controlled by a warlord?

6 A. The area around Cetina, I believe, was. Also areas around

7 Razvode and the Macure area, I have also seen them up there. Other than

8 that, I don't recall other specific names at this time, sir.

9 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I see that we're at the break.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Even at half the hour you indicated, Mr. Russo.

11 How much time would you still need?

12 MR. RUSSO: I would estimate another 15 minutes.

13 JUDGE ORIE: That is more than you indicated before.

14 I suggest that you try to conclude in the next six to seven

15 minutes. Then we will have a break until 1.00 and then after the break

16 there will be an opportunity for further questions from the Bench and

17 perhaps from the Defence.

18 Please proceed.

19 MR. RUSSO:

20 Q. Mr. Berikoff, you've just given us the areas of Cetina, Razvode

21 and Macure. On the 12th of August, I believe you indicated that you were

22 arrested by Croatian forces when you were watching the destruction IN

23 Cetina. Isn't that right?

24 A. Yes, I did.

25 Q. And weren't you taken to a police station after that?

Page 7897

1 A. Yes, I was. However, we were taken to the police station by the

2 Rambo type soldiers without -- they had the cross-bandoliers, et cetera.

3 Q. And do you think that the Vrlika police station was under the

4 control of a warlord?

5 A. I don't believe they were, sir.

6 Q. Were the individuals in the grey coveralls also in Cetina when

7 you were watching the destruction?

8 A. They were at the check-point when we attempted to get into the

9 Cetina area, yes.

10 Q. And did you also see the individuals in grey coveralls in the

11 area of Macure?

12 A. Yes, we did.

13 Q. And did you ever see the people you identify as these warlords

14 fighting with or against HV troops or individuals in grey coveralls?

15 A. No, I did not.

16 Q. Now, on the 9th of August, Mr. Kehoe and as well Mr. Kuzmanovic

17 asked you about the incident where you were stopped at a check-point

18 outside Bribirski Mostine by a drunken soldier. Do you recall that?

19 A. Yes, I recall that.

20 Q. And I believe in your statements you refer to that person as

21 sometimes a Croatian soldier but then you also use the term paramilitary

22 organisation. Is that the same thing that you refer to as being one of

23 these warlords?

24 A. It was a combination of both. They had HV soldiers as well as

25 these -- I guess, paramilitary-type forces, sir.

Page 7898

1 Q. I understand. I'm trying to find out if you're equating

2 paramilitary organisations with warlords?

3 A. Paramilitary, yes, I am, based with the warlord and gang-type

4 style of grouping.

5 Q. Do I understand your answer to mean that HV soldiers were also

6 working with these groups that check-point?

7 A. It was my understanding that's how it was, yes, now, but that's

8 all my understand was.

9 Q. And you were pulled out of your vehicle by drunken soldiers,

10 right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And I think your diary that you just indicated during

13 Mr. Kuzmanovic' cross-examination, it was a HV liaison officer that came

14 to the rescue?

15 A. Yes, it was.

16 Q. Did the HV liaison officer have to fight with or otherwise

17 threaten the drunken soldiers in order to get you released?

18 A. They did get in a heated discussion. However, at the end of the

19 day the liaison officer was able to negotiate and take us to the

20 headquarters.

21 Q. Did the liaison officer --

22 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Sorry to interrupt. Just for clarification,

23 there is only one reference in one statement and it refers to one

24 intoxicated soldier. I thought that was -- not intoxicated soldiers.

25 MR. RUSSO: Let me ask you, Mr. Berikoff --

Page 7899

1 JUDGE ORIE: Do you know whether the question has to be put

2 again.

3 Did you understand the question to refer to the event where you

4 said you have seen one indicated soldier?

5 THE WITNESS: Yes, I do, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Then I don't think there is any need to further

7 repeat the question.

8 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.

9 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.

10 Q. Mr. Berikoff, did the HV liaison officer have to brandish a

11 weapon at the drunken soldier in order to get you released?

12 A. I don't recall him brandishing a weapon. I know there was a

13 heated discussion. Whether he -- I can't recall the weapon, sir.

14 Q. And you were questioned by Mr. Kehoe concerning whether or not

15 you thought that the Croatian forces had the ability to stop these

16 warlord-type people. Correct?

17 A. I believe I was, yes.

18 Q. And you've made a number of indications in your statements and

19 also during your testimony here about the level of authority that you

20 perceived Major Juric to have.

21 From your perspective do you think that Major Juric had the

22 ability to stop these warlords, if he wanted to?

23 A. I would say it would have been extremely difficult for

24 Major Juric to have stopped these -- these warlords and their -- their

25 troops or their followers. They were very unruly, and they had a

Page 7900

1 different type of demeanour about them. So it would have been extremely

2 difficult for him as well, sir.

3 Q. From your perspective, were these warlord-type people more

4 equipped weaponry wise than the Croatian forces?

5 A. In some instances, yes, they were.

6 Q. Now, you also indicated during, I believe, Ms. Higgins

7 examination --

8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, could I ask one question.

9 "More equipped weaponry wise than the Croatian forces," what did

10 they have more, are you talking about quantity or about quality, and if

11 you are talking about quality, could you tell us what they have, the

12 Croatian forces did not have.

13 THE WITNESS: I'm talking about both, Your Honour, both in

14 quantity but at times also quality where they would have various types of

15 western type equipment, sir.

16 JUDGE ORIE: That is still a bit too vague to me. Is it same

17 type of weaponry but more modern and from western fabrication or would it

18 be other types of weapons?

19 THE WITNESS: More modern and from western fabrication, Your

20 Honour.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

22 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.

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

24 JUDGE ORIE: I've stolen one and a half minutes from you.

25 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.

Page 7901

1 Q. You indicated, Mr. Berikoff, during Ms. Higgins' examination that

2 the letter that you had from Cermak was a joke, and I think there was a

3 suggestion that Mr. Cermak's authority was totally ineffective outside of

4 Knin.

5 Do you recall that discussion?

6 A. Yes, I do, sir.

7 Q. Now, when you were taken to the Vrlika station, what was it that

8 got you released from the Vrlika station on the 12th of August? We're

9 talking after the Cetina incident.

10 A. After a period of time, we presented the letter, the letter was

11 taken from us, and the police officer had gone away for a while and after

12 some time he came back, gave us the letter back, and that's when we were

13 escorted from the Vrlika police station and out of the sector.

14 Q. Last exhibit.

15 MR. RUSSO: If I could have P363. And we will go to page 3 of

16 that exhibit.

17 Q. I think you indicated, Mr. Berikoff, that you drafted several

18 reports --

19 MR. RUSSO: My apologies. I don't believe that --

20 Can we try, I'm sorry, P361. I'm sorry these are not the correct

21 exhibits.

22 Q. Do you recall an incident, Mr. Berikoff, in which you had

23 presented Mr. Cermak's letter at a check-point and HV soldiers were

24 arguing with other types of soldiers, one who saw authority in the letter

25 and another set that didn't? Do you recall that?

Page 7902

1 A. Yes, I do, sir.

2 Q. Can you tell the Court about that?

3 A. We were down in the Pakovo Selo area assisting the Kenyans

4 evacuate from their OP. On our way back we got stopped -- on our way

5 back from Pakovo Selo to Knin we got stopped at a check-point. They

6 detained us there and -- for a period of time. We showed the letter, a

7 telephone call was made to I guess their operation centre or wherever. A

8 gentleman came, another officer came. There was an argument that took

9 place between the two people with regard to the letter, and whether the

10 signature on the letter, or the name on the letter itself, was a person

11 of authority.

12 Some said it was; others said it was not. After a period of

13 time, we finally mentioned Major Juric's name and very shortly thereafter

14 we were allowed to be proceed.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo --

16 MR. RUSSO: No further questions, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ORIE: I think you have been more than compensated for the

18 time stolen from you.

19 We will have a break. And may I inform the parties that the

20 Chamber thinks that we can conclude the evidence of this witness today.

21 That will mean that you are limited in your time. The Chamber may have

22 some questions to the witness as well.

23 We will have a break and resume at five minutes past 1.00.

24 --- Recess taken at 12.45 p.m.

25 --- On resuming at 1.06 p.m.

Page 7907

1 things that you saw - and I'm not questioning that, Mr. Berikoff - in

2 camouflage uniforms, you didn't know if they were HV military police or

3 some of these -- these demobilised units just coming back and doing what

4 they were doing for revenge purposeless. Isn't that correct?

5 A. That's correct.

6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Berikoff.

7 MR. KEHOE: I have no further questions.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kehoe.

9 Ms. Higgins.

10 MS. HIGGINS: No further questions. Thank you, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.

12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: No questions, Your Honour. Thank you.

13 [Trial Chamber confers]

14 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Kinis has one or more questions to you,

15 Mr. Berikoff.

16 Questioned by the Court:

17 JUDGE KINIS: Mr. Berikoff, referring back to your statement,

18 P739, page 4, second paragraph from the bottom.

19 You mentioned here that Major Juric told me and Captain Hill

20 during one of the meetings following Operation Storm that he was his

21 responsibility to clean up area and ensure the Chetniks will not be able

22 to come back in area.

23 Could you please explain your understanding of wording "Chetniks

24 should not come back at the area," would it mean that is's a general

25 understanding of Serb ethnicity at all or it is just question on special

Page 7908

1 revenge groups or war groups. Thank you.

2 A. Yes, Your Honour, it is my understanding that the word Chetniks

3 referred to any Serb, whether it was military, civilian, male, female,

4 child. It was a general term used by most Croats to describe the

5 ethnicity of a Serb.

6 JUDGE KINIS: Thank you for this answer.

7 And next question is, in third paragraph in the same page. There

8 you mentioned such sentence: "Majority of the arson and looting had been

9 done with knowledge of Cermak and his officers."

10 My question is, could you please clarify what do you mean under

11 wording "his officers."

12 Do you know directly his some -- some subordinates, military

13 subordinates of him?

14 A. It is my understanding from the meetings General Cermak had with

15 General Forand and the answers that General Cermak gave to General Forand

16 was that he had informed his troops. By informing his troops, I would

17 assume that he also informed his officers, sir.

18 JUDGE KINIS: And a short question regarding your statement,

19 D284, page 15, line 23 to 27.

20 You mentioned that Croats turned off main water supply to the

21 compound and to Knin.

22 What is your opinion? Was it made for purposefully, is it

23 because this water supply pipe was damaged or there was some -- some

24 intent to create some problems for UN components.

25 A. I think it was a combination of both, Your Honour. At the

Page 7909

1 beginning there was a request from the Croats to -- for assistance from

2 Major Bellerose to assist in repairing the water works. After that,

3 there were occasions when they were turned off and left off for a period

4 of time. Then the water would come back on.

5 So I think it was a combination of both, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE KINIS: Thank you very much.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Berikoff, I have a few questions for you as

8 well.

9 I think your testimony was that you learned later that when you

10 experienced that on the 29th of July many local UN employees did not show

11 up for work, that this was caused because they had begun to evacuate.

12 Could you tell us from whom you learned that and what it was

13 exactly that you learned about the evacuation? You have told us already

14 something about whether this was influenced by ARSK authorities, but

15 could you tell us a bit more in detail what you learned, from who you

16 learned it, and what it exactly was.

17 A. There was indications of an evacuation evident a couple of days

18 before the offensive. The information was gained through a number of the

19 locals, saying that they had heard that an offensive was about to start.

20 Had also heard from Zagreb that an offensive was about to start. One

21 time when I went to Primosten and on my way back there was a forced

22 mobilisation by the ARSK. There was soldiers standing alongside many

23 intersections carrying weapons and rucksacks, et cetera. When I asked --

24 when we stopped and asked some of them what was happening they said that

25 they were being mobilised, people were being told to leave the area and

Page 7910

1 that there was a possible offensive, sir.

2 JUDGE ORIE: People were told to leave their area. Was there any

3 specification as told by whom?

4 A. Not that I'm aware of, Your Honour. I don't know, sir.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do I understand that both, then, men of

6 military age would move out because being mobilised and that civilians

7 were moving out as well?

8 A. That's correct, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE ORIE: You said the information was gained by -- through a

10 number of locals.

11 Did you hear directly from them, or in which way was the

12 information given by these locals channelled to you?

13 A. The locals I'm referring to, Your Honour, are those employees

14 that had come to the compound and informed me that others were leaving.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. During your trips at this time, because you

16 referred to forced mobilisation, did you learn anything from locals

17 outside the UN circles?

18 A. Just through the rumour mill, Your Honour. Nothing specific.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.

20 Could I take you to your third statement; that is the long

21 statement. Page 14, last sentence, where you refer to the same doctor

22 that now wanted our help in evacuating casualties from the Knin hospital

23 because the Croats had, number one, shelled the hospital, and, number

24 two, captured the hospital, and he was afraid of what would happen to the

25 Serb patients that were now under the control of the Serbs.

Page 7911

1 Especially the last portion of this sentence, I do not fully

2 understand what you meant by that.

3 A. To the best of my recollection, Your Honour, the doctor was

4 afraid that if in fact the HV had taken over the hospital, that those

5 Serb patients were in danger.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But the last portion of the sentence reads:

7 "Serb patients that were now under the control of the Serbs."

8 Whereas you say that the hospital had been captured by the

9 Croats. What do I have to understand then being under control of the

10 Serbs?

11 A. I don't recall, sir, I'm sorry.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any chance that it is just a mistake, that

13 you intended to say were now under the control of the Croats?

14 A. That is possible, Your Honour. I don't recall at this time.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.

16 Then -- let me find it before I ...

17 One second, please.

18 When asked about the shelling to be indiscriminate or not and how

19 you developed your thoughts about that, and I'm referring to page 7649

20 for the parties, you said: "And that is when I formulated my own

21 assessment that it was not indiscriminate, as other people had

22 indicated."

23 It was not clear to me to whom you referred when you said "as

24 other people had indicated."

25 A. The other people that I am talking about is people such as

Page 7912

1 General Leslie, General Forand, other -- other UN soldiers, and myself

2 included during my initial assessment when the offensive initially

3 started.

4 When I went to Sarajevo I had an opportunity during quiet time to

5 look at an actual map of the city plan of Knin and saw those targets that

6 were in fact hit and indeed they were military targets, sir.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Do I have to understand this, that you had

8 conversations among yourselves, the people you just mentioned and --

9 A. Yes, we did, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE ORIE: About whether this was indiscriminate shelling, yes

11 or no.

12 A. That's correct, Your Honour, yes.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.

14 You have, in your evidence, you state how you were told how the

15 houses were destroyed, light a candle, turn on the gas and leave.

16 Now, you became familiar with some Croatian soldiers who told you

17 this. Could you be more specific where, when, under what circumstances.

18 A. There were some times when we would get stopped at a check-point

19 and have an opportunity to converse with the soldiers that were manning

20 the check-point and we asked how some of these places, if it was to be

21 done deliberately, how some of these places would be destroyed, and that

22 is how we were told. One of the soldiers in particular, I don't recall

23 the location, but one soldier in particular told us that that was one of

24 the methods, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did you hear this once, you were referring to

Page 7913

1 a particular Croatian soldier, or was it at more occasions that this was

2 explained to you?

3 A. It was a couple of times that I heard that. Other explanations

4 given were that there were electrical problems as well and that's what

5 destroyed the house, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In your testimony we also find that some

7 houses were marked by civilian, soldiers, or police as Croatian

8 households and that those were not touched.

9 Could you tell us whether you observed the markings on the

10 houses, or did you observe the houses being marked?

11 A. It was both, Your Honour. On occasion we would drive by an area

12 and we would see the marking on a house. On other occasions, we would

13 see either the civilian police or the HV putting marks on a house that

14 was not to be touched, sir.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, have you considered when you said that

16 those houses were not touched, have you considered that destroyed and

17 burned houses may have had similar markings but not visible anymore after

18 the destruction?

19 A. That may be true, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Have you seen untouched houses without such markings

21 there, where there was a large-scale destruction of houses?

22 A. On occasion, yes, Your Honour.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Have you observed situations where -- let's say in a

24 village or in a certain area where all the houses, untouched were marked

25 as you explained to us.

Page 7914

1 A. No, I did not, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE ORIE: There were always non-marked houses not being

3 touched?

4 A. That's correct, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you give us an estimate, an assessment

6 of whether that was then an exception that most of the untouched houses

7 would have been marked and only a few, or the other way around, that only

8 a few were marked and that a majority of the untouched houses were

9 unmarked?

10 A. It is my -- my assessment that this was an exception. It did

11 happen, though, throughout the sector where that did take place, Your

12 Honour.

13 JUDGE ORIE: The exception then being that where most of the

14 untouched houses were marked, that a few were not marked and untouched.

15 A. Yes, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Now, you said that they were marked by civilians,

17 soldiers or police. Did you observe markings by all of these three

18 categories?

19 A. Yes, I did, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE ORIE: And do you remember was this at -- did they do the

21 marking together, civilians with soldiers or civilians and police, or

22 soldiers and police, could you tell us how often you saw it and how you

23 saw it done?

24 A. It was done throughout the sector and I saw it on a regular basis

25 as I travelled the sector, Your Honour.

Page 7915

1 JUDGE ORIE: And would it always be either civilians or police or

2 soldiers, or would you see police together with civilians or soldiers or

3 all three groups together?

4 A. All three groups together at times, depending where in the sector

5 I was. If there was just civilians in the area, in particular up around

6 the Obrovac-Velebit valley or mountain area, it was just civilian. Other

7 areas, it was all three, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE ORIE: When you're talking about soldiers we have seen that

9 soldiers are -- can be identified by various means. Were they -- when

10 you saw it, were you always convinced by their uniforms and perhaps

11 insignia that they were soldiers of regular troops or would they be --

12 was there any doubt in your mind? Could they have been paramilitaries,

13 could they have been soldiers that were not in their units anymore?

14 A. That is possible, Your Honour. There were occasions when it was

15 the paramilitaries or partially -- wearing partial uniforms, yes, Your

16 Honour.

17 JUDGE ORIE: And also occasions where there were full uniforms?

18 A. Yes, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Would these soldiers have the usual weaponry for

20 ordinary soldiers or were they unarmed?

21 A. They would have the weaponry for ordinary soldiers, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Now, same questions in relation to the

23 identification of police involved in this marking. Could you identify

24 what kind of police it was and on the basis of what?

25 A. The police were either wearing camouflage uniforms, the grey

Page 7916

1 coveralls, or the civilian bluish-grey pants and shirt uniform, Your

2 Honour.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for those answers.

4 One final question, as far as the weaponry of paramilitary forces

5 or the forces or the persons who you thought were acting under the

6 command of warlords.

7 You told us that the weaponry they were using, both in quantity

8 and in quality, was better. Was the heaviest kind of weaponry you saw in

9 the hands of those individuals?

10 A. I saw a hand-held rocket launchers of western make or western

11 fabrication. Also, weapons as high as 50-calibre machine-guns, also

12 western style machine-guns sir, or weapon.

13 JUDGE ORIE: No mortars?

14 A. Mortars, I did notice them being western fabrication. They were

15 Yugoslav or former Yugoslavia type weapon systems, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Let me make sure that I understood your last answer.

17 They had mortars?

18 A. They had mortars, yes, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE ORIE: But they were locally fabricated mortars rather than

20 western type mortars.

21 A. That's correct, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Any idea about the -- what calibre?

23 A. It was approximately the 80-millimetre. They also had the

24 smaller caliber as well, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Not the 120-millimetre?