121012IT

Page 4044

1 JUDGE ORIE: So you may proceed, Mr. Petrusic.

2 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

3 Cross-examination by Mr. Petrusic: [Continued]

4 Q. [Interpretation] General, sir, we left off yesterday in

5 mid-sentence, as it were, and it was that proposition that I made. We

6 were discussing the column leaving. That's on line 15, page 4039 of the

7 transcript.

8 We said that that was in March 1992, and my -- I put it to you

9 that that event actually occurred on the 15th of May, and that on this

10 occasion, some 59 members, JNA members, were killed while this column was

11 trying to pull out.

12 Now, would you agree with that?

13 A. I think your date is probably more likely to be correct than

14 mine, but I'm unaware of the exact number of people who were injured or

15 killed in the incident.

16 Q. But in any case, you do know that there were casualties, both

17 dead and wounded.

18 A. Yes, I do.

19 Q. General, sir, if we know that on the 3rd of May during the

20 evacuation of the command in Sarajevo there was an incident, and that

21 there was an incident while the garrison was trying to pull out of Tuzla,

22 and that there was another incident when the Jusuf Dzonlic barracks was

23 evacuated - that was in Sarajevo - would you then agree with me that

24 General Mladic's concern for the security of these pullouts was quite

25 justified?

Page 4045

1 A. I know nothing of the detail of the first two barracks

2 evacuations, but on the basis of the Jusuf Dzonlic barracks, the

3 execution of that evacuation, I think General Mladic had reason to be

4 nervous about the success of executing the Marsal Tito barracks.

5 Q. General, sir, answering the Prosecutor's question on page 3966

6 about the evacuation of the Jusuf Dzonlic barracks you said that around

7 30 vehicles were lost on the following day, as well as 30 men.

8 Now, in the days that followed, did you learn anything about the

9 fate of these 30 men?

10 A. Only to the extent that neither side seemed to be particularly

11 concerned about it within about 48 hours of the event, so I assume it was

12 resolved satisfactorily. Neither side asked us to take any action to

13 assist them to resolve the issue. So I assume it was satisfactorily

14 fixed.

15 Q. Could we now have P321, please, on the monitors. We need page 7

16 in the B/C/S, in the Serbian version, and page 7 as well in the English

17 version.

18 You know this document. It is about the evacuation of the JNA

19 garrison, and it -- from the barracks, and it was compiled on the

20 20th of May.

21 Now, General, sir, on page 3941 of October 10, you said that in

22 the end it was General Mladic who prevented their pullout from the city,

23 and you were referring to the pullout of some 2.000 people that were

24 supposed to be evacuated by -- through a humanitarian organisation from

25 Sarajevo and taken to the coast.

Page 4046

1 Now, General, sir, if you now take a look at the next page -

2 that's paragraph 8 in English - there it says that Colonel Cadjo, the

3 liaison officer, JNA liaison officer, called to advice that

4 General Mladic had heard that the column with children was not to leave

5 that night.

6 Now, General, sir, my question is this: Did you ever hear from

7 Colonel Cadjo that General Mladic --

8 MS. BOLTON: I'm sorry, I think my friend may have misspoken when

9 he was reading the text, at least as it appears in English. I heard him

10 to say, General Mladic had heard that the children's embassy or convoy is

11 not to leave tonight when it is written that "General Mladic had word."

12 JUDGE ORIE: If we all agree on that to be the proper reading

13 then it is hereby corrected.

14 And you may proceed, Mr. Petrusic.

15 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. I can accept that. But my question was really about something

17 else. So General, sir, did you ever hear from Colonel Cadjo that

18 General Mladic had ordered that this children convoy was not to leave on

19 that night?

20 A. I don't know the source of the information 20 years after the

21 event, but it was quite clear -- it is quite clear in my recollection

22 that the convoy was not going anywhere without General Mladic's authority

23 and he was tying its release in events to the barracks. He was using the

24 convoy as a bargaining tool. Whether it was Colonel Cadjo or

25 General Mladic who said the convoy wasn't leaving, I can't remember.

Page 4047

1 Q. Now, if we look at the previous page, or, actually, paragraph 5

2 of this document, you will see there, and let me ask if you will agree

3 with me, that after the agreement was reached the Presidency called and

4 came up with a new proposition, proposal, that the JNA did not accept; in

5 other words, was it the Presidency that changed the agreement that had

6 previously been agreed around this convoy?

7 A. It may well have been. There was constant bargaining going

8 backwards and forwards. I'm simply in this cable stating what the

9 bargaining position was at a point in time. At some point after this

10 cable the children were -- were -- the convoy was released. Barracks was

11 delivered to the food [sic] and both sides were happy. Counsel, this is

12 just a record of bargaining positions at -- at a point in time before it

13 is finally resolved.

14 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have 65 ter 27602.

15 Q. General, sir, this is an intercept dated the 24th of May, 1992,

16 and in the middle of page 1 you can see that one of the participants in

17 this conversation was Milosav Gagovic, and he says there that the Viktor

18 Bubanj barracks had been evacuated and that they had left alive healthy

19 and there was not a bullet was fired?

20 Now, on the following page - in English that will be page 3,

21 line 2, starting with RM, the initials RM. And in the original -- in the

22 original transcript, it says Ratko Mladic. And then we can read the

23 following:

24 "Pass on the message to your men to keep the situation calm. Do

25 not allow any shooting anymore, otherwise you will spoil things for me.

Page 4048

1 Inform all your people that Viktor Bubanj barracks has been relocated

2 with no casualties or fire."

3 General, sir, now when you see this intercept, can you tell us

4 what it is in your view that General Mladic is referring to when he says

5 "do not allow any shooting anymore, otherwise you'll spoil things for

6 me"?

7 A. My interpretation is that he is seeking to impose a cease-fire in

8 that area and he doesn't want his soldiers in that area firing or it may

9 disrupt future evacuations of the barracks. And he demonstrates, if not

10 on this occasion but certainly on other occasions, that when he wants to

11 he can impose a cease-fire on the city.

12 Q. Okay. Let's continue with this intercept. Let's see now page --

13 the following -- the next page in English where Ratko Mladic says:

14 "And we should not burn and destroy all around us. Let's give

15 peace a chance."

16 General, sir, when it says "burn and destroy," does that imply

17 the use of some artillery weapon?

18 A. It includes, in my view, all types of firing. He is trying to

19 calm down one of his commanders. He's trying to make sure the situation

20 is quiet so he is unlikely to be using wild or provocative language. He

21 is trying to calm people down here.

22 MS. BOLTON: Sorry, I'm still not seeing the portion of the

23 intercept that was being referred to about burning everything down. I'm

24 not sure what page this is on in English.

25 Oh -- I think -- I see the line. I think it's just perhaps

Page 4049

1 not -- the translation -- is my friend referring to where he says, "and

2 we shall not destroy everything around us"? That is what is written in

3 English.

4 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] That's precisely it. It is

5 probably to do with the translation or interpretation.

6 MS. BOLTON: [Microphone not activated] Thank you.

7 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence will

8 propose, will move to tender this document, with -- to MFI it, in view of

9 the Defence's position regarding our -- the final decision about

10 intercepts.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just try to understand this. You ask

12 questions and you ask, How do you understand this, Mr. Mladic said this,

13 How did you interpret that? And at the same time you're reserving the

14 right to challenge the authenticity of it. How would we understand the

15 testimony of this witness if you say, Well, but we say it's not

16 Mr. Mladic but please tell us what Mr. Mladic said or how we have to

17 understand that. Isn't that a bit inconsistent, Mr. Petrusic?

18 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] I can agree with you. However, if

19 the Trial Chamber adopts the view that those documents are authentic, I

20 did not want to miss this opportunity to question this witness about what

21 he knew about this intercept, or related to this intercept.

22 [Trial Chamber confers]

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Petrusic, it is not only what the Chamber

24 will say about it. It -- the issue is what your position is.

25 You are asking the witness questions about it. Apparently you do

Page 4050

1 not want to tender it. You said you want it to be MFI'd. We'll consider

2 it during the break, but, of course, the Chamber would like -- if you use

3 the document, that you take a clear position.

4 MS. BOLTON: May I just be heard briefly on that, Your Honour?

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Ms. Bolton.

6 MS. BOLTON: I agree with the observation that Your Honour made

7 that you can't basically have your cake and eat it too. Either this is

8 General Mladic speaking and your acknowledging General Mladic is speaking

9 and therefore you're asking for comments on what he said, or else there's

10 no relevance to the questions that are posed.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, of course, there is another matter; that

12 is, that if this witness would be have been called, well, let's say, in

13 half a year for now and if matters on authenticity would have been

14 settled then, of course, the dilemma would not exist any further for the

15 Defence.

16 So I'd like -- I prefer to have it MFI'd at this moment, not

17 necessarily for the reason Mr. Petrusic gave but for the Chamber to

18 consider whether we accept or not this way of proceeding.

19 Madam Registrar, the number would be ... ?

20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter 27602 will be D75, marked

21 for identification.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.

23 You may proceed, Mr. Petrusic.

24 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. General, sir, finally, did you know that there were military

Page 4051

1 targets in Pofalici?

2 A. I don't know where Pofalici is.

3 Q. General, sir, I have no further questions.

4 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] We are through with our

5 cross-examination.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Petrusic.

7 Any need to re-examine the witness, Ms. Bolton?

8 MS. BOLTON: Very briefly, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

10 MS. BOLTON: If we could have D75 MFI back on the screen, please.

11 Thank you.

12 Re-examination by Ms. Bolton:

13 Q. General Wilson, do you have -- have you ever heard of

14 Obrad Popadic before seeing this intercept today?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Any idea who that individual was or what role he may have played

17 in the armed forces?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Do you know if he a member of the JNA or the VRS or some other

20 armed force?

21 A. I don't know this individual at all.

22 Q. And I take it you had no knowledge of this conversation before

23 coming to court today?

24 A. I may have seen this intercept in the last few days, but ...

25 Q. So no personal knowledge of it prior to that?

Page 4052

1 A. No personal knowledge.

2 Q. And so the answers given to counsel today, are they based on any

3 knowledge or just your best guesses or speculation?

4 A. My interpretation. Best guesses.

5 Q. Okay. And if we could -- if I could refresh your memory as to

6 some conversation you had with counsel yesterday. One of the areas that

7 were asked questions about was the media. And this appears at page, for

8 my friend's assistance, 4007 to 4008 of the transcript when my friend put

9 to you this question:

10 "General, sir, can you agree with me that there were a lot of

11 sources in the media, a lot of information leaked -- was leaked through

12 the media to shape the public opinion, and the sources for that

13 information was rather unreliable, or rather, they were biased."

14 And you responded:

15 "Information, manipulation of information is one of the weapons

16 of war. Both during the war in Bosnia and virtually every other

17 conflict. The accuracy of media reports is often questionable and needs

18 to be verified by reliable means before accepting it as fact, and this is

19 what we attempted to do."

20 General Wilson, are you saying that there were -- every media

21 report from every agency during the Bosnian war was incorrect, or would

22 you need to look at the individual articles or reports to comment on

23 their accuracy?

24 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Bolton is that not perfectly clear from the

25 answer. The question was phrased in a way which, of course, would lead

Page 4053

1 to no successful -- I mean, would lead to nothing which would assist the

2 Chamber. Generally to say that leaked information would not be reliable,

3 of course, the witness then perfectly said is that: What you need to do

4 is to check on every single occasion, whether it's reliable or not by

5 verifying it. And he certainly did not even hint at what you now present

6 as a possible way of understanding his answer. I think his answer was so

7 clear that ...

8 MS. BOLTON: All right. I'll move on, Your Honour.

9 Q. My last area, sir, is with respect to some questions you were

10 asked about a special incident report from the 30th of May, 1992, which

11 was P336. That was a report about firing on UNPROFOR vehicles on the

12 30th of May, 1992, when you were going to Lukavica barracks to meet with

13 General Mladic. Do you recall that document, sir?

14 A. I do.

15 MS. BOLTON: And could we have P332 on the screen, please.

16 JUDGE ORIE: While waiting for that --

17 Mr. Wilson, when I would have understood -- when I would have

18 misunderstood your answer I just said was so obvious, I take it that you

19 would have immediately intervened and said, No, you have totally

20 misunderstood my answer. But I thought it was very clear.

21 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.

22 MS. BOLTON:

23 Q. You see before you, sir, that this is the document we've

24 discussed earlier. The record of your meeting on the 30th of May, 1992,

25 with General Mladic. And I wonder if we could please turn to page 2 in

Page 4054

1 both the English and the B/C/S, and we're going to look at paragraph 8.

2 So in answer to questions yesterday asked by my friend, you gave

3 the following response to the question:

4 "Was fire ever opened at you or at the UNPROFOR vehicles by the

5 members of the VRS that controlled that road?"

6 And you said:

7 "We were fired on many occasions along that route, including one

8 occasion my vehicle was hit or two vehicles we were travelling in,

9 convoy. We were hit 32 times and lost six of the eight tires in our

10 vehicle. Inevitably, when we raised this with the two parties they would

11 say it was the other party or we have no control of that area. We never

12 successfully identified who was responsible for these attacks."

13 Paragraph 8 of the document in front of you indicates:

14 "General Mladic apologised for the firing on UN vehicles passing

15 Marsal Tito barracks (special incident reports refers) and blames this on

16 the fact that the people in the barracks had become irresponsible because

17 of the firing they had been subjected to recently?"

18 With respect to that occasion, were you able to get an admission

19 from one of the parties as to who had been responsible for the firing?

20 A. I think it's outlined in paragraph 8 there. General Mladic

21 accepts the responsibility that it was some irresponsible individual from

22 the JNA. And in regard to your question yesterday, I -- I thought the

23 question was had I been fired upon on my journey of that day from the PTT

24 to the meeting with General Mladic, and I said I couldn't recall about

25 whether I was fired upon for that particular journey. I think we are --

Page 4055

1 if I misinterpreted your question yesterday, then so be it. But perhaps

2 right now we're talking about two different incidents.

3 Q. Yes. I think I have confused you. Perhaps we need to look at

4 the special incident report, which is P336.

5 MS. BOLTON: Pardon me, I've got the wrong exhibit number.

6 Sorry, it's P -- P341, Your Honour.

7 Q. So this is an incident that occurred on the 30th of May, 1992,

8 when you were travelling to Lukavica, not the incident we discussed

9 previously of the 25th of May, 1992.

10 A. Well, now that I've seen this report and I've refreshed my

11 memory, yes, we were fired upon on that journey.

12 Q. Okay.

13 MS. BOLTON: Thank you. I have no further questions in

14 re-examination, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Bolton.

16 The Chamber has no further questions for you either.

17 Mr. Petrusic, have the questions in re-examination triggered any

18 need for further questions?

19 MR. PETRUSIC: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Wilson, this then concludes your testimony

21 before this Court. I'd like to thank you very much for coming to

22 The Hague and for having answered all the questions that were put to you

23 by the -- either by the parties or by the Bench, and I wish you a safe

24 return home again.

25 You may follow the usher.

Page 4059

1 Then the third matter I had on my list is that the Defence asked

2 to enlarge the time the Defence will have to respond to the Prosecution's

3 sixth motion to admit evidence, pursuant to Rule 92 bis. This was filed

4 on the 11th of October, and the request was 14 more days to respond to

5 that sixth motion. Since the deadline for the response is today then the

6 Chamber wonders whether there's any objection to the motion being

7 granted.

8 MR. GROOME: Not from the Prosecution, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Not from the Prosecution. Then the Chamber grants

10 this motion, and the Defence has 14 additional days to respond to it.

11 These were the matters the Chamber had on its list. Is there any --

12 Mr. Groome, you had two brief matters, you said.

13 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour. The first one related to D55, and

14 Your Honours may recall this was a map of the Kozarac and Omarska area,

15 and Your Honour had raised the -- questions about the -- the projection

16 angle of the document, and I undertook to investigate that matter. We

17 have spoken to our mapping unit, and they inform us that it -- the scale

18 at the bottom would not be a reliable way to judge distances, and -- the

19 Chamber should be cautioned against doing so but that the map would be

20 accurate with respect to the relationship of the different locations but

21 certainly not the scale.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And this was due to the projection angle

23 or ...

24 MR. GROOME: I don't have that precise information. I will say,

25 Your Honour, that many of these maps are old and at this stage the

Page 4060

1 Prosecution does have far more sophisticated technology with determining

2 distance. So if any distance at any time becomes of importance or is

3 deemed important by the Chamber or even the Defence, the Prosecution is

4 happy to seek to get that information.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If I may add that if you do not make any

6 projection under a certain angle then you don't even need sophisticated

7 technology. You can just look at the map, measure it, and then you have

8 the answer. That's the reason why -- and I'm now speaking for myself for

9 the last ten year I've always insisted on having non-projected maps but

10 maps that someone can use. Perhaps for the future.

11 Then the second matter.

12 MR. GROOME: The second matter, Your Honour, relates to D59.

13 And, if you will recall, this was a document that had some handwritten

14 text on the original document that had not been translated. And the

15 Prosecution undertook to see if it could locate another copy that did not

16 have such handwriting. We were able to query our collection and found

17 another copy of this document without a handwritten note. We have sent

18 that to the Defence this morning. And Ms. Janet Stewart informs me that

19 there is different handwriting on this note.

20 [Prosecution counsel confer]

21 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I believe we -- I maybe spoke too early

22 on this issue. We have sent a copy of what we have discovered in our

23 collection to the Defence this morning, and we'll discuss it further

24 which is the most appropriate copy to have in evidence.

25 Thank you.

Page 4061

1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Groome, then the Chamber will wait

2 and see what happens in relation to D59.

3 Mr. Stojanovic, there was nothing else to ...

4 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we had an

5 opportunity to see this today, and we will wait for the official version

6 to come our way. We've only had opportunity to see it here in the

7 courtroom, and then we will respond to that, to that part which was

8 handwritten and which is clear to me because it is in the language I

9 speak.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, if the parties would reach any agreement

11 which would be the most appropriate -- which would be the most

12 appropriate copy to be used, then the Chamber would prefer to receive a

13 shared position of the parties.

14 MR. GROOME: I have no doubt that that will be the case,

15 Your Honour.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then if there's nothing else we adjourn. But.

17 Mr. Stojanovic, it's only a couple of days ago that the Chamber inquired

18 in some detail on how much time the cross-examination of the present

19 witness would take so as to be able to see whether we could still use any

20 time remaining this Friday. The indication was then still six hours.

21 Later it became four hours. And it turns out now out to be even far less

22 than that.

23 Would you, please, if we ask this kind of information be very

24 precise in your analysis on how much time you would need, because time

25 claimed and not used is, under the present circumstances, time lost, and