1 Thursday, 15 March 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.

5 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

6 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Stamp, you want to make an application to us.

7 MR. STAMP: If I may, very briefly, Your Honours. The

8 Prosecution, as indicated yesterday or the day before, intends to file a

9 motion to admit exhibits from the bar table, as you put it. The motion

10 would have to address issues of admissibility in respect to a variety of

11 documents along a series of documents, and therefore would be in excess of

12 the 3.000-word limit. The awkward part of the motion is that we are not

13 sure yet, because we are working hard to try to get the motion ready

14 tomorrow. Exactly how many words there will be --

15 JUDGE BONOMY: I don't--

16 MR. STAMP: We're not sure how many we would need to exceed it.

17 JUDGE BONOMY: I don't think you need trouble yourself on this

18 matter, because you obviously could put in several motions each of the

19 same length, short of the 3.000, so I don't think that you should worry

20 about that. It's a matter of convenience to put it all in the one, but

21 the length of the motion will not matter; it's the quality that counts.

22 MR. STAMP: Very well, Your Honour. Very well.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: So you have permission to exceed the word limit.

24 We, I don't think, have seen anything yet in relation to Mr. Coo that we

25 anticipated receiving yesterday. Perhaps it's on its way.

1 MR. STAMP: I believe it was sent yesterday. It should be --

2 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, I'll see it later, no doubt. Thank you.

3 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

4 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, Mr. Stamp, your next witness.

5 MR. STAMP: The next witness is K82, but I see Mr. Ivetic on his

6 feet.

7 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours, I apologise, just a quick matter for

8 clarification. It's my understanding that although the Prosecution sought

9 reconsideration of the order that the Trial Chamber made its own

10 initiative to initially exclude this witness's testimony and that was

11 reversed. It's my understanding that the sanction that was imposed

12 against the Prosecution for lack of disclosure with respect to the

13 reference of the special police unit, the PJP, of the 18th of September

14 2006 is still in effect, and the latest 65 ter summary that we received

15 just -- well, it looks like yesterday - I thought it was the day before,

16 but in any event, recently - now has even more of a reference to the

17 special police units. I don't know whether it's a typo or what, but all

18 of a sudden in the first page of the 65 ter witness notification it says,

19 soldiers including special units of the police took part in the operation,

20 and the witness's statement does not say that, so I'm just asking for

21 clarification whether it's a typo and indeed whether the sanction for lack

22 of disclosure and notice continues to be in effect, as I believe it does.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: What was the sanction Mr. --

24 MR. IVETIC: That there was no reference to -- excluded from

25 consideration any reference to the PJP in paragraph 31 of the statement,

1 which was the only place the PJP was mentioned where the witness had said

2 he thought he saw the PJP on the road, which was, of course, the first

3 mention to the PJP that we had received at all. The 2002 original

4 statement that had been disclosed to us said that there was only one

5 policeman who was a -- from a local village who was showing them the way

6 and did not mention the police at all. And indeed the only reference in

7 the 2006 statement was paragraph 31 which is -- had been disclosed just

8 days before the witness was to testify in September of 2006. And

9 that's -- as far as I know, that's still the only reference to the PJP.

10 That's why I'm a little bit baffled by the amended 65 ter summary that all

11 of a sudden has -- has something different that's never been in any of the

12 65 ter summaries to date.

13 JUDGE BONOMY: Which paragraph of the 65 ter summary?

14 MR. IVETIC: It's the first page, the very last paragraph, that

15 begins: "In February 1999," and it begins on the end of the second

16 line: "About 700 or 800 soldiers including special units of the police

17 took part in the operation ..."

18 Now, the witness's statement says military police. If that's what

19 we're talking about, then obviously that's the clarification I need, but I

20 obviously need to know, because I'm concerned that it could be something

21 else.

22 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Stamp.

23 MR. STAMP: Firstly, my understanding is that this 65 ter summary

24 is identical to the one that was received previously. If the issue is in

25 respect to the matters at Jeskovo village in paragraph 6 of the statement,

1 which we intend to tender, then the facts stated in the statement is what

2 we propose to lead in evidence.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: Did this statement exist before when the witness

4 previously gave evidence?

5 MR. STAMP: Yes, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: And was paragraph 6 there at that time?

7 MR. STAMP: Yes, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE BONOMY: And were you bearing in mind the issue of paragraph

9 31 or not?

10 MR. STAMP: Paragraph 31 also is --

11 JUDGE BONOMY: I think we are going to have to leave the bench to

12 look at this. It's a great pity that this wasn't raised with us before we

13 got here this morning, Mr. Ivetic. This is very unfortunate.

14 MR. IVETIC: I apologise, Your Honour --

15 JUDGE BONOMY: I'm here in the morning with plenty of time when I

16 come in to look at issues like this, and I can't remember the order that

17 was made at the time. I'll need to go now and look at it and look at this

18 issue in relation to it.

19 We can't just sit around here flittering our way through the

20 proceedings. Someone will speak to you so you can give them the

21 appropriate documents and we'll have a look at them. We'll need to leave

22 the bench for the moment to do that.

23 --- Break taken at 9.10 a.m.

24 --- On resuming at 9.24 a.m.

25 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Ivetic, I was not particularly conscious of

1 this issue in dealing with the motion for reconsideration; on the other

2 hand, a colleague of mine was and assumed it was implicit in our decision

3 that the evidence in paragraph 31 would be admissible. We are months on.

4 The issue of notice is quite different from what it was at that time. So

5 we'll hear any further submissions that you wish to make on this point

6 before making a final decision, since there is some doubt about the Trial

7 Chamber's final position on it at the time the reconsideration motion was

8 granted.

9 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

10 First of all, reconsideration was never sought for this order in

11 the Prosecution's motion on this matter, so I don't think it can be

12 covered by the reconsideration. Second, with respect to notice, I

13 respectfully submit we're at the same stages that we were in September of

14 2006, because since this witness was excluded and since the order was in

15 place barring any reference to the PJP, our team would have no need to

16 conduct any investigations with respect to this witness and this

17 particular crime scene that was not in the indictment and with reference

18 to the police being barred, there were no investigations conducted. We

19 had other things to conduct. As Your Honour knows, we've been dealing

20 with the Prosecution's case and scrambling trying to prepare our own case.

21 So really there is no way that we could investigate within the

22 short time-period, since this witness has been put back on our plates,

23 more than was originally in this statement in 2002, which clearly in the

24 statement from 2002 he says there was only one policeman with us from the

25 village of Novak who was a local guide who showed us the terrain. So that

1 was all we were ever put on notice for, all that we ever prepared for, and

2 based upon that, we didn't view this witness as being a critical witness

3 for the police and there wouldn't be much material to cross-examine him

4 on. Now --

5 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Stamp tells us that paragraph 6 was always

6 there.

7 MR. IVETIC: It was in the 2006 statement given I believe two days

8 before the witness was called to testify in September. I believe the

9 date's the --

10 JUDGE BONOMY: That's plainly covered by the reconsideration

11 decision. Is that right?

12 MR. IVETIC: I'm trying to see. I think we're talking about two

13 different incidents.

14 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, they are two different incidents.

15 MR. IVETIC: We're talking about -- Trnje is the one that I

16 believe I am concerned about, not Jeskovo --

17 JUDGE BONOMY: But you did raise --

18 MR. IVETIC: Then that was my mistake, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE BONOMY: All right.

20 MR. IVETIC: My reference to the PJP that was the subject of and

21 is referenced at paragraph 2 of the March 13th -- the procedural history

22 on the March 13th decision by the Trial Chamber on the reconsideration.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, if we decide to allow this evidence to be

24 heard, what remedy might you require?

25 MR. IVETIC: Well, obviously additional time to prepare. I don't

1 know to what extent I would be able to perform investigations at this

2 point, but that would be -- that would be all that would be available to

3 me, I think, at the time. I can't think of anything else I would be able

4 to ask for.

5 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

6 Mr. Stamp, do you want to say anything on this?

7 MR. STAMP: Yes, Your Honour. I think this clearly a matter of

8 notice. That was what was indicated in the order, and I must confess that

9 I have to find the oral order, but it was a real issue at the time.

10 There was an issue of notice in respect to paragraph 31 where the

11 reference was made to the PJP. But that issue -- time has passed and the

12 Defence has received is, in my submission, adequate notice --

13 JUDGE BONOMY: The trouble is they had no reason to follow it up,

14 because the witness had been excluded.

15 MR. STAMP: The -- the decision or the indication that the witness

16 might be re-called I think was raised -- I can't recall the date, but I

17 think it's at least two weeks or three weeks ago. So there has been some

18 time for the Defence to look into that. And one can look at the paragraph

19 itself. It is part of the witness's narrative as to what he understood

20 based on what he heard. What value can be --

21 JUDGE BONOMY: All right. Thank you very much.

22 MR. STAMP: Can I say another thing in reference to paragraph 6.

23 Although the reference to police is not in the statement itself but is in

24 the notification, this is the same notification that was filed in

25 September last year and this is a part of the transcript of the witness's

1 evidence in Milosevic case. So there was adequate notice -- more than

2 adequate notice, in respect to that part of his statement. I don't know

3 if you need a reference to the police in the Milosevic transcript, but

4 it's --

5 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah, there's no issue over paragraph 6.

6 MR. STAMP: No issue?

7 JUDGE BONOMY: No.

8 MR. STAMP: Very well.

9 [Trial Chamber confers]

10 JUDGE BONOMY: We consider that the situation we are dealing with

11 is quite different from the one in September, and it's clear from the

12 reconsideration of the decision there were a number of issues -- or a

13 number of points in issue then which are no longer a problem. We have

14 decided that it's appropriate to hear this evidence and we think it

15 unrealistic to exclude the particular part in paragraph 31 that's referred

16 to. We think that Mr. Stamp has adequately answered the issue of notice;

17 however, if it does emerge at some stage that there are points that might

18 be clarified in the light of a short adjournment for the purpose of

19 further inquiry, then obviously we will consider an application to provide

20 that remedy to any accused adversely affected by this decision.

21 We can now proceed to hear your next witness, Mr. Stamp, who is?

22 MR. STAMP: That's K82, and there are some additional protective

23 measures in place, voice and image distortion.

24 JUDGE BONOMY: Good morning, witness K82.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

1 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you for your patience while we resolved

2 certain administrative issues here. We are now ready to proceed with your

3 evidence. Will you please make the solemn declaration to speak the truth

4 by reading aloud the document now before you.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

6 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

7 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Please be seated.

8 The first person to ask you questions here will be for the

9 Prosecution, and that will be Mr. Stamp.

10 Mr. Stamp.

11 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Your Honours.

12 WITNESS: WITNESS K82

13 [Witness answered through interpreter]

14 [Witness appeared via videolink]

15 Examination by Mr. Stamp:

16 Q. Good morning, K82.

17 A. Good morning.

18 Q. I would first like to show you a document and ask you to have a

19 look at it, that is Exhibit 2302. And can you answer me yes or no, does

20 the particulars stated on that document relate to you personally?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Thank you very much.

23 MR. STAMP: Your Honours, could the identification sheet which I

24 tender be received in evidence under seal.

25 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

1 MR. STAMP:

2 Q. K82, I know that you have been through some of this before, but

3 I'm going to take you briefly through your statement again. Do you recall

4 giving a statement to members of the Office of the Prosecution of this

5 Tribunal on the 14th of September 2006?

6 A. Yes, I remember.

7 Q. And attached to that statement were certain exhibits which you

8 marked?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Now --

11 A. Maps.

12 Q. Thank you. Is the statement correct and true, to the best of your

13 knowledge and belief; that is to say, would your answers remain the same

14 if you were asked those questions in relation to the statement again?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And I understand that you have had an opportunity to review again

17 the statement and the attachments yesterday. Is that correct?

18 A. That is correct. I did that yesterday.

19 MR. STAMP: Your Honours, could the statement be received in

20 evidence.

21 JUDGE BONOMY: That's P2315?

22 MR. STAMP: P2315.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

24 MR. STAMP:

25 Q. K82, it's a long statement and it is before the Tribunal here, so

1 I am not going to ask you to relate all the details that are in the

2 statement. I wish you to assume that it has been or will be read by the

3 Tribunal. I just want to ask you one or two questions about some aspects

4 of the statement. At paragraph 5 of the statement you speak of a military

5 operation which took place in Ljubizda Has in December 1998, and you said

6 that you were ordered by Lieutenant-Colonel Konjikovac, who was the deputy

7 of the brigade commander Delic, to return to the village in the evening

8 and to expel the people from their houses. How do you know --

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. How did you become aware that Colonel Konjikovac made this order?

11 A. Because during the course of the day Lieutenant-Colonel Konjikovac

12 came to us and said we had to go back to that village in the evening,

13 spending the night there.

14 MR. BAKRAC: [Microphone not activated]

15 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, Mr. Bakrac.

16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. Bakrac.

17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. If I'm not mistaken, I

18 see on the screen that the witness is reading from his statement, not at

19 this very instant, but while the questions were being put to him I saw

20 that he was reading while answering.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I respond to

22 this?

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.

24 MR. STAMP: Umm --

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You can remove the statement from

1 where it is in front of me, I certainly don't need it, if he thinks I'm

2 reading from that.

3 MR. STAMP:

4 Q. Yes, thank you --

5 JUDGE BONOMY: Could -- what's the problem with the witness having

6 his statement in front of him? He's had to verify that it's true.

7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it was my understanding

8 that yesterday he had the opportunity of reviewing to see whether it was

9 true; he confirmed that it was true. And we are now interested in -- I

10 mean in cross-examination we are going to see what his possibility is or

11 ability is to reproduce certain things and we are going to look at his

12 credibility and the truthfulness of what it is that had happened.

13 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, you can ask him to answer your questions

14 without reference to the statement, but there's no reason why the

15 Prosecutor can't ask his questions with reference to the statement. So at

16 this stage there's nothing wrong with that, but the witness is quite happy

17 to lay it to the side and proceed, so hopefully everyone's happy with that

18 arrangement.

19 Carry on, please, Mr. Stamp.

20 MR. STAMP: Thank you, Your Honours.

21 JUDGE BONOMY: And I am beginning to get extremely impatient about

22 the interruptions that are taking place without foundation, in my opinion,

23 and we've started this morning with an inappropriate way of dealing with a

24 matter that should have been resolved before we came on the bench. Now

25 we've got interruptions inappropriate to the witness's evidence. He's

1 been put through a very difficult situation by the way in which his

2 evidence has had to come before the court. He was the subject of

3 extensive delays when he gave evidence before. So I invite counsel to be

4 very cautious in interrupting this any further and to insure that there's

5 solid foundation for any interruptions.

6 Mr. Stamp, please.

7 MR. STAMP: Thank you.

8 Q. We were speaking about what Colonel Konjikovac told you in respect

9 to entering the village. When your unit entered the village of Ljubizda

10 Has, do you know where he was, that is, Colonel Konjikovac?

11 A. I don't know exactly where he was. I just know in the evening

12 when he came to see us and when he told us where it was that we would be

13 spending the night, the military police that took the people from the

14 village to out there where we were, where we spent the night, in that

15 village, that night.

16 Q. Can we move now to February 1999, and I refer to your statement at

17 paragraph --

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. -- 6, you speak about operations in the village of Jeskovo. You

20 said that you were told by commander that about 700 soldiers would be

21 taking part in the operation and it included special units of the police.

22 Did you actually see and observe the units that took part in the

23 operation; and if so, could you tell us what units took part in that

24 operation, apart from your unit of course?

25 A. Yes, because on the previous day the colonel who was there got us

1 together and told us what it was that we were supposed to do the next

2 day. The next day I really saw these special units of the police that

3 were going with us to clean up the village, that is.

4 Q. You also said in respect to that operation in February 1999 that

5 Colonel Delic, the brigade commander, issued the order to clean up the

6 village. I'd like to know how -- or could you just tell us, please, how

7 did you become aware that he issued the order.

8 A. Because on the previous day he got us all together and he told us

9 where it was that we would be going the next day, that we would be going

10 out there to clean up that village.

11 Q. You said that in that village you actually saw the bodies of ten

12 civilians -- ten persons in civilian clothes, or who were not wearing KLA

13 uniforms, but you --

14 A. And I don't know the exact number, but it was around ten.

15 Q. Yes. And you said that you think about 25 to 30 people were

16 killed in that operation. Can you elaborate upon this. On what basis do

17 you say that perhaps 25 to 30 people were killed in that operation?

18 A. When this operation was over in the evening, at the place where

19 the army had met up, I know that that is what was said, that about 25 to

20 30 people had been killed. And after that, I learned that perhaps about

21 four men were killed when we had left that village.

22 Q. If we could move to the village of Trnje.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Your unit was involved in burning houses and other property in

25 that village. Can you say how many houses in all were burned during that

1 operation, approximately, please, if you can't be precise.

2 A. I cannot tell you exactly how many houses were burned, but

3 according to what I saw and as far as I can remember, I think it was about

4 20 or 30 houses for sure that we came across that had been burned.

5 Q. About how many houses were in that village? Approximately what

6 proportion of the houses in the village were burned?

7 A. Now I cannot say for sure how many, but most of the houses in that

8 village had been burned, I think.

9 Q. And you indicated that there were haystacks or agricultural assets

10 that were burned. Can you tell us about that, about how many that were

11 burned?

12 A. Yes. When the action started, when we entered the village, the

13 haystacks were the first as we walked in, and that was torched straight

14 away.

15 Q. Well, was it only one haystack or were there others?

16 A. Several, several of them.

17 Q. At paragraph 19 of your statement you speak of the shooting of

18 about 15 villagers, including women and children, that you participated

19 in. About how many members of your group participated in that shooting?

20 A. I saw that -- well, about five or six of us, as many as happened

21 to be there at that moment.

22 Q. And where were the other members of your unit at that time?

23 A. They were there in the yard farther away from us, and there were

24 others in front of the entrance into the yard. They were deployed there.

25 Q. Apart from the approximately five soldiers who participated, did

1 the other members of your unit become aware of the shooting?

2 A. Well, probably so. Those who were watching -- I mean, most

3 soldiers came to that gate to see what it was that had happened. Word

4 travels fast from one unit to another, and then people probably stopped by

5 to see what it was that had happened.

6 Q. Do you know if the senior officers became aware of this event?

7 A. Well, probably so since they issued that kind of order that

8 civilians should be shot.

9 Q. At -- I think the next day it was, your unit -- your company

10 returned to its base. Where were your base at that time, and we're

11 talking about late March 1999?

12 A. I did not understand your question.

13 Q. Where was your unit, your company, stationed at or based at in

14 late March of 1999?

15 A. After that operation in Trnje, the one that you were talking

16 about, we returned to that hill where the logistics battalion was, and I

17 belonged to it, too, where one company had stayed behind. After that, we

18 returned to Prizren, to some school, whatever it was. It was a school.

19 And then we stayed there for a while.

20 Q. Did members of your unit discuss the events that had taken place

21 at Trnje?

22 A. Well, you know what? When something happens, probably every one

23 of us talked to someone, saying what it was that had happened, why.

24 Q. Very well.

25 MR. STAMP: Could we call up Exhibit 1981 -- P1981, I'm so sorry.

1 Q. K82, I know you have indicated that an order such as this, a

2 written order such as this, would not have been given directly to

3 personnel at your level. But there are some issues in this order I'd like

4 to ask you about.

5 MR. STAMP: Could we look at page 3 of the order, first paragraph

6 on that page in English. Do we have it?

7 Q. The order states in that part: "With some forces, prevent any

8 spill-over and pulling out of STS which is the KLA from the area of

9 Retimlje to the general sector of Paragusa and in the village of Trnje and

10 Lesane and then ensure that the road remains passable and that control of

11 the territory is established."

12 Now, Trnje and Lesane is the area where your unit was based at the

13 time. Is that correct?

14 Did you hear me? I just want you to --

15 A. As far as I understand, you don't really have to resort to

16 paragraphs. As far as I know, I cannot look at it now so that the man

17 wouldn't say that I'm reading from it. I can only tell you about what it

18 was that had happened, what happened in the field. As for these - what

19 are they called? - statements, exhibits, I cannot tell you anything about

20 things like that because that kind of thing did not reach me. That kind

21 of thing could not have reached me either.

22 Q. Well, in the order it says that the -- that you should treat the

23 loyal civilian population correctly especially fleeing refugees and

24 people's property and you should open fire only on features used by the

25 STS to engage you and that you are to observe the provisions of

1 international law.

2 Were you in the field at Trnje and Lesane that day given any order

3 like that, to observe international law and to treat the population

4 correctly and not to destroy their property?

5 A. Well, I told you about what had happened of what was going on on

6 the ground. I really didn't know anything about any orders, nor can I

7 tell you anything about such provisions. I don't know anything about

8 that.

9 JUDGE BONOMY: Even if he was given that order, what would it

10 matter in light of the other orders that he claimed he was given?

11 MR. STAMP: The -- it is just to give him an opportunity to

12 comment on something which would be the subject of argument later,

13 that -- orders which will be -- which will be presented to the Court

14 included orders like these were not, it is the Prosecution's case, not

15 intended to be carried out, that these orders are --

16 JUDGE BONOMY: I think it's appropriate to comment in relation to

17 this exhibit, but what's happened here would lead us to look at the

18 exhibit for the purpose of understanding the questions and answers, but

19 there's no way that what has happened with this witness would amount to a

20 satisfactory manner of introducing this document as a whole. It may have

21 been introduced already into the case for all I know, but if not, then

22 this is a document whose authenticity, et cetera, and whose relevance

23 would have to be established by a written filing.

24 MR. STAMP: Very well, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE BONOMY: The witness has no knowledge of the document

1 whatsoever.

2 [Trial Chamber confers]

3 MR. STAMP:

4 Q. Without showing you another document, I would just like to ask you

5 about one thing and that is Exhibit P1995 and that is a report from the

6 brigade command in respect to events that happened in the area where your

7 unit is supposed to have operated during that time. And in that report it

8 indicates that the KLA had pulled out into the villages of Trnje and

9 Lesane during the night and were routed and crushed.

10 Now, you were in Lesane and Trnje. I just want to ask you this:

11 Did you have any contact or battles with KLA units during the course of

12 the operations there?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Did your unit in Trnje and Lesane suffer any casualties?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Thank you. I'd like to move on from those documents now and turn

17 to paragraph 30 to 32 of your statement, in which you describe travelling

18 back to Trnje to collect bodies and dispose of them. Firstly, do you know

19 who authorised or ordered your unit to return to Trnje to collect the

20 bodies?

21 A. I really wouldn't know that.

22 Q. How many soldiers travelled to Trnje to collect the bodies?

23 A. I can't give you the exact number, but I believe that we travelled

24 in two trucks in order to collect those bodies. As far as I can remember,

25 there is some 10 or 20 soldiers who went there to collect the bodies.

1 Q. And you said that when you were on your way to Zur, to the hills

2 of Zur, to bury the bodies of the women, you were joined by other soldiers

3 who provided an additional escort. About how many soldiers went to Zur to

4 bury the bodies, do you remember?

5 A. I remember the soldiers who were sent to the place where the

6 bodies were buried, who were keeping guard, but I can't give you their

7 exact number. Maybe a dozen or so were involved, but I can't give you the

8 exact number at all.

9 Q. Well, if I could clarify, you said about 20 were -- 20 went to

10 collect the bodies and maybe a dozen or so were sent to keep guard. Would

11 that make it approximately - and I know we are -- we can't be precise -

12 approximately 32 soldiers went to Zur to bury the bodies?

13 A. Approximately that would be the case, but I can't give you the

14 exact number. I don't remember.

15 JUDGE BONOMY: Where's the reference to 20?

16 MR. STAMP: Sorry. He said 10 to 20, actually, 10 to 20

17 soldiers --

18 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah, I noted -- the answer that I noted at that

19 stage was 10 or 12, but I see the transcript says 10 or 20.

20 MR. STAMP:

21 Q. Is that what you said, K82, that 10 -- or could you just tell us

22 again approximately - and I know it's approximately - how many soldiers

23 went to collect the bodies in Trnje.

24 A. I can't be sure of that. I don't know whether there was 10 or 20.

25 I can give you an approximation. There were between 10 and 20 soldiers,

1 and then we were joined by the security guards, by those who were keeping

2 guards and providing security for the -- for the area. I couldn't even

3 see all of them. I can't tell you exactly.

4 Q. Thank you. Could we move on to Rugovo at paragraph 34 of the

5 statement in which you discuss being sent with your unit by the end of

6 April to the village of Rugovo where you participated in looting the

7 village. These were civilian trucks that were used, according to your

8 statement. Who drove these trucks? And I'm not asking you to identify

9 the persons by name necessarily, but the persons who drove these trucks,

10 did they belong to any organisation?

11 A. No. As far as I can remember, the drivers were drivers -- members

12 of the Army of Yugoslavia, our drivers.

13 Q. And these various car parts, et cetera, were loaded on to these

14 trucks. Where did these trucks go to, do you know?

15 A. From the village the lorries went back as far as I can remember.

16 We came back on those lorries to Prizren where they had originally started

17 from.

18 Q. And do you know how the looted property was disposed of in

19 Prizren?

20 A. I don't know. I don't know about the properties. I don't know

21 what happened in Prizren, where it ended up, what happened to that

22 property. I don't know.

23 Q. Thank you, K82. There are going to be questions -- further

24 questions of you by me colleagues, but before that could I ask you -- you

25 had indicated in a previous statement that you had been convicted of a

1 criminal offence and sentenced to a period of four years' imprisonment.

2 You had been convicted of robbery in 2000 -- robbery allegedly committed

3 in 2002, and sentenced to a term of imprisonment of four years'

4 imprisonment and that you are in the process of appealing your conviction

5 and sentence. Can you tell us what has become of that appeal and that

6 case? What's its status now?

7 A. I was not sent to prison for four years. I just spent ten and a

8 half months in the investigation prison, and after that period I was sent

9 home on provisional release. And then an appeal was filed and now this

10 case is being retried.

11 Q. You indicated in your statement the reasons why you came forward a

12 few years ago to testify about the events, the reason including the dreams

13 you had of the people -- crime, the people that were shot, et cetera. Can

14 you tell us about this. You told us about those reasons some time ago.

15 Are the reasons still the same? Why do you wish to tell your -- to tell

16 about the events that you participated in?

17 A. This is the only reason, the reasons that you have just

18 mentioned. That's why I decided to testify in the previous case and now.

19 I don't have any other reason to be here.

20 Q. Thank you very much, K82.

21 MR. STAMP: And thank you very much, Your Honours. That's the end

22 of the examination-in-chief.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Stamp.

24 Mr. Zecevic.

25 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, we will follow the following order:

1 General Lazarevic, General Pavkovic, General Lukic, General Ojdanic,

2 Mr. Sainovic, and Mr. Milutinovic. Thank you very much.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: K82, the first counsel for the accused to

4 cross-examine you will be Mr. Bakrac.

5 Mr. Bakrac.

6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I didn't

7 want to try your patience, but the last question by my learned friend is a

8 blatant example of a leading question and the witness himself confirmed

9 this by saying, Whatever you stated, this is how I felt. In order not to

10 aggravate the situation that occurred this morning and not to aggravate

11 the trial chamber, I have the authority by my colleagues to tell you that

12 I will be the only one putting questions on behalf of General Lazarevic

13 and General Pavkovic, I will be the only one putting questions to the

14 witness, and maybe very briefly for General Lukic. And we promise that we

15 will finish our cross-examination very quickly, which will enable us to

16 finish this witness's testimony by videolink today.

17 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Bakrac.

18 Let me make it clear that you and I have different views of what

19 is leading question is. A question based on the witness's statement that

20 he has just confirmed in court this morning seeking further information is

21 not a leading question. Anyway, proceed now with your cross-examination.

22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

23 Cross-examination by Mr. Bakrac:

24 Q. [Interpretation] K82, I shall start by quoting the end of your

25 statement and the end of the chief examination, the examination-in-chief.

1 You have just told us that in your state you were convicted to a prison

2 term of four years for a robbery and that this sentence was abolished and

3 that the case is being retried. Do you have a document to that effect?

4 Do you know why the sentence was abolished?

5 A. I submitted those documents to Mr. Barney Kelly, the investigator

6 of the Tribunal. I believe that he has all these papers, all these

7 documents. I was sentenced to four years in prison, and then after an

8 appeal was filed by my lawyer, the sentence was abolished and it is being

9 retried.

10 Q. Mr. K82, I promised the Trial Chamber that we will finish your

11 testimony today. Could you please answer my questions briefly and can you

12 focus on my questions. You provided Barney Kelly with certain documents

13 that we did receive, and you provided him with these documents in 2005 or

14 2006. My question to you is this: In the meantime have you received any

15 other documents? You've told us that an appeal was lodged. Do you have a

16 document testifying to the fact that the sentence has been abolished and

17 that it is being retried?

18 A. Yes, that case is being retried. I have this decision and I can

19 provide you with this document. This document is currently in the hands

20 of my lawyer.

21 Q. Do you know why the sentence was abolished?

22 A. I really don't know. Everything is stated in the decision. I

23 really don't know.

24 Q. Can you move freely about in your country?

25 A. Yes, I can.

1 Q. Do you have a passport?

2 A. No, I don't.

3 Q. Why don't you have a passport?

4 A. For the aforementioned reasons.

5 Q. The reason being --

6 A. The reason being that I was convicted.

7 Q. Very well. How did you arrive in the place where you are now?

8 But don't mention the name of the place.

9 A. I used my ID.

10 Q. Very well. Let's now go back to the event that my learned friend

11 Stamp asked you about and also in your statement there are -- there is

12 information about that, but you also provided a separate statement about

13 the particular event, the act, for which you were sentenced to four years

14 in prison. The robbery was committed on the 4th of June, 2002. Is that

15 correct?

16 A. I believe so. I can't remember the date, actually.

17 Q. Is it correct that on the 6th and 7th August, 2002, you provided

18 your first statement to the investigators of The Hague Tribunal?

19 A. I can't remember. I can't remember the date, so I can't answer

20 your question.

21 Q. I have your first statement in front of me, and it bears the dates

22 of 6th and 7th August, 2002.

23 A. I suppose that's correct.

24 Q. Thank you very much. Do you remember where the statement was

25 provided?

1 A. Yes, I do.

2 Q. Can you tell us where this statement was provided?

3 A. I don't know whether I'm allowed to tell you.

4 Q. Yes, you are.

5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] May I ask the Trial Chamber to move

6 into private session just for a moment?

7 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.

8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] K --

9 [Private session]

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 [Open session]

14 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.

15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. K82, before you provided your first statement, did the Montenegrin

17 police look for you on account of the robbery that was committed?

18 A. I really can't remember.

19 Q. And if I jog your memory and tell you that at the Milosevic trial

20 to a question put to you by the Prosecutor as to whether there was any

21 reason for which you were not in possession of a passport you said that

22 there was a reason and that was the fact that you hadn't gone to the

23 police to apply for one because some two months before that the police

24 came to your house and your brother told you that you were being looked

25 for. And then you turned to your relative to deal with that problem. Is

1 that all correct?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. K82, your examination-in-chief took place on the 6th of September,

4 2002, and if you were being searched two months before that, that was in

5 July 2002, you were being searched for this robbery some months before you

6 provided your first statement to the Prosecution and before anybody -

7 yourself included - knew that you would be testifying in The Hague. Am I

8 right?

9 A. You are right, but I don't see why you are telling me all this.

10 Q. K82, we will be the judges of that. We are the ones who know the

11 reasons. I'm just asking you to answer my questions. When the police

12 looked for you, at the time you were not even a potential witness in The

13 Hague?

14 A. That's right. I was not a potential witness. I didn't know why I

15 was being looked for.

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] And now I would like to ask the Trial

19 Chamber if we could go into private session for a moment.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.

21 [Private session]

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 11762-11775 redacted. Private session

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 [Open session]

15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. May I conclude from your answer that you personally did not shoot

17 at these 15 people?

18 A. No --

19 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- can't understand this. I don't

21 know how could you conclude that on the basis of my answer that I did not

22 open fire.

23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. Did you shoot or did you not shoot?

25 A. Yes, I did. I did shoot. Absolutely. It would not be true to

1 say what you have just said. It is not true that I had shot at that woman

2 and the child and it is not true that I told somebody that I did.

3 Q. But what is the truth? Who did you shoot at?

4 A. I really don't know. I opened fire at the group of people in

5 front of me. Whether I hit somebody or not, I don't know. I was just

6 waiting for all this to end, for us to go away from there.

7 Q. In other words, you opened fire at random without aiming at

8 anybody specifically?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And you received that order from whom?

11 A. From my sergeant, who was there.

12 Q. Are you aware of the fact that an order that might constitute a

13 crime is not something that you are duty-bound to carry out?

14 A. No, I'm not aware of that. On the contrary, I was told that if

15 you turn down -- if you refuse an order in the state of war, you may be

16 liable to criminal responsibility, you may even receive a death penalty.

17 Q. Is that what you told -- they told you?

18 A. We didn't do things because we wanted to do them but because we

19 were ordered to do them.

20 Q. Very well, then. Before shooting at the group of 16 people, is it

21 true that you mentioned that before that, you had attended an incident

22 when your sergeant ordered a soldier --

23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, maybe we have to go

24 into private session again for the next few questions.

25 JUDGE BONOMY: Very well.

1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

2 (redacted)

3 JUDGE BONOMY: Just a second until we get into private session.

4 [Private session]

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 11779-11780 redacted. Private session

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 [Open session]

23 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.

24 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter's note that the loud-speakers

25 are on in the place where the witness is sitting and we can hear

1 ourselves. Could the registrar over there be warned about that and could

2 the loud-speakers be turned off because we can hear ourselves on the

3 English channel.

4 JUDGE BONOMY: That will be attended to.

5 Please continue, Mr. Bakrac.

6 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I proceed? Are we

8 still dealing with the technical problem?

9 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.

10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. K82, you have just told us that you shot at random at a group of

12 people and that you were only waiting to leave the place. Is that

13 correct?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. How could you then count the people in that group? How could you

16 be positive that there were 15 people in the group?

17 A. I did not count them. Before that, while all this was happening

18 in the yard, I believe that there were between 10 and 15 people. I can't

19 be sure of the exact number. I don't know whether there were exactly 15

20 people there.

21 Q. When you opened fire at them, were they standing?

22 A. No, they were sitting down.

23 Q. In your statement and in the Milosevic case you stated that when

24 you shot at them they fell down on top of each other. How is that

25 possible? Now you are telling us that they were sitting down.

1 A. Your Honours, I really don't know what else could happen. Even if

2 a man is sitting down, he can just fall on the floor. How else could I

3 have expressed that? How else could I have described what happened to

4 them.

5 Q. In your statement you say that you opened fire at random and that

6 your only concern was to get away from there as soon as possible, and in

7 the statement you also say that they were asked questions about the KLA,

8 that they were asked for money, and what question -- who asked them those

9 questions?

10 A. You're trying to confuse me. This happened before the shooting

11 started where they were being gathered in the yard, while they were being

12 ordered to sit down. This is when all those questions were put to them,

13 and not once -- the things happened the way I described they did.

14 Q. And who was it who asked them all these questions about the KLA

15 and the money?

16 A. One of the soldiers who were standing over there.

17 Q. Was that soldier from Montenegro?

18 A. Yes, he was.

19 Q. Yes. In what language did he ask them all this? What was the

20 language of that conversation?

21 A. I believe that this was our language, the only that he could

22 understand.

23 Q. That he could understand. And then you noticed that these people

24 as well spoke our language, the Serbian language?

25 A. He did not ask all of them. He just asked one of them that he

1 took away from the rest of the group. He did not address the entire group

2 so that we could hear it. He took that person a little bit further away

3 from the group.

4 Q. Let's move on. It was only in your statement provided in 2006

5 that you said that after this incident which you attended as one of the

6 four, five soldiers that participated in the event, that the other

7 soldiers were so stressed out that their noses were bleeding and that they

8 had to be hospitalised. You remember that in 2006?

9 A. Yes, that's the truth.

10 Q. Who were the soldiers who were taken to the hospital, all of them?

11 A. No, not all four of them. Only one of them who was there. He was

12 taken to the hospital because he was bleeding profusely and I know that he

13 had to be taken to the hospital for the bleeding to be stopped there. It

14 was just incredible how profusely a person could bleed from his nose. I'd

15 never seen such a thing before.

16 Q. And you knew why he was bleeding so heavily; this is at least what

17 you stated in your statement?

18 A. No, I didn't. Your Honours, I really didn't establish any

19 diagnosis. We all believed that it was the result of stress. What else

20 could have been at stake at the moment?

21 Q. Very well then. Let's move on. In paragraph 11 of your statement

22 you say that --

23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] And I will kindly ask the Trial

24 Chamber to move into private session because I'm going to mention a few

25 names.

1 [Private session]

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 11786-11792 redacted. Private session

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 [Open session]

11 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.

12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. In paragraph 13, you said that before you entered into the village

14 the anti-aircraft gun positioned on the hill shelled the village for about

15 20 minutes. Is that right?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And then the entrance into the village you came across an elderly

18 man who was carrying cattle feed, and when he saw you he fled, jumped

19 across the wire fence, and a burst of gun-fire was fired at him by your

20 sergeant?

21 A. That's not true. We surrounded the village, the outskirts of the

22 village when the anti-aircraft gun started shelling.

23 Q. And then on the edge of the village you noticed this man who was

24 carrying cattle feed?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Excellent. The anti-aircraft gun is shelling the village for 20

2 minutes. All that time this man is carrying cattle feed as a matter of

3 course, and when he sees you he starts running away and you kill him. So

4 he did not hear the shelling, he did not see the shelling, and once he saw

5 you, he got scared, he started running away, you killed him. That is your

6 testimony today?

7 A. Your Honours, may I respond?

8 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A few minutes ago I said that he is

10 not right what he said. I said that we took up positions around the

11 village before the anti-aircraft guns started shooting, so at that moment

12 when we took these positions that's when that happened. It's only

13 afterwards that the anti-aircraft gun started firing.

14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. So you took up positions in the village and then you were shelled

16 by your own gun. Is that what you're trying to say?

17 A. At the outskirts of the village, that is where we took up

18 positions. That is the upper position. I cannot explain it to you right

19 now. It's underneath the gun where we had started out from.

20 Q. Oh, actually you were where it is that you set out from. That's

21 what you're ultimately testifying now as opposed to what you said before?

22 A. It's not any different. That is what actually happened.

23 Q. You also testified that you went further on to the village of

24 Mamusa and that over there you shelled and torched the first seven or

25 eight houses. I am putting it to you that you invented this as well

1 because Mamusa was a Turkish village where there was no KLA presence and

2 where the villagers were not against the regular authorities. Do you

3 agree with me?

4 A. I really don't know how much I agree, but as for the meadow that

5 was there we went to the first seven or eight houses. Now, whether these

6 houses belonged to Mamusa or not, I really cannot say anything for sure.

7 But those first seven or eight houses were shelled and torched. After

8 that we returned to the place where our people were firing at us.

9 Q. These seven or eight houses for which you say now that you don't

10 even know whether that's Mamusa or not, how far away were they?

11 A. Well, I cannot know now exactly after all this time exactly.

12 Well, it had to be at least 4 to 500 metres across this meadow I think.

13 Q. Thank you. Very well. And now we are coming to the end of this

14 incident. How long did the action last? If I understand your statement

15 well, then the action took three days. Is that correct?

16 A. Two or three days, maybe three days, I don't know, because we

17 spent two nights there, so ...

18 Q. After the end of this action on the fourth day you returned to

19 collect the bodies. Is that your testimony?

20 A. I don't know whether this was on the fourth, fifth or what day,

21 how much later we went back to collect the bodies I can't say that for a

22 fact.

23 Q. Very well then. Then I'll skip my next question because you're

24 not sure of the facts there. According to your evidence when you arrived

25 to collect the bodies, in the house where there were approximately 10 to

1 15 people you did not find any bodies. The only bodies that you found

2 were the bodies of how many women and where were they?

3 A. The bodies were not in the house, they were in the yard of the

4 house, but we did not find them; that's true. As for the women's bodies,

5 we found those on a meadow, meadow near the creek where the people had

6 been gathered. So while they were fleeing the village they were killed.

7 Q. So by the creek and the bridge across that creek. Is that

8 correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. How many women were there when you came to collect the bodies?

11 A. I don't know, maybe four or five pieces.

12 Q. In your first statement you said seven to eight women.

13 A. I can't remember. Maybe they had -- there were seven to eight, I

14 don't know.

15 Q. So you don't know, there might have been ten or four or five, you

16 don't know?

17 A. There was some men and four or five women; that would be that.

18 There were other male bodies.

19 Q. And when you arrived, they were all in the same place, the four to

20 five men -- women and some four men?

21 A. No, they were not in the same place. The men were at the same

22 place from which the women and the children had been released. The men

23 were gunned there and the women were shot in the meadow.

24 Q. And those women were by the creek?

25 A. They were in the meadow.

1 Q. I don't know who's lying here, maybe it's you, because Witness K54

2 in the transcript says that when you arrived to collect the bodies that

3 two women were in the yard, one woman was by the house, and the last two

4 woman were in the field behind the house. He didn't mention any creeks.

5 He didn't say that they were all together, and he was speaking about the

6 same event when you came to collect the body. Who's telling us the truth,

7 you or him?

8 A. When I arrived there -- I'm telling you what I saw. In the meadow

9 there might have been -- I don't know how many women but I know there were

10 women across the meadow, and in the creek there were the men who had been

11 executed and the women and children had been released from there

12 originally, and this is what I saw.

13 Q. And you're claiming that somebody had arrived before you to

14 collect the bodies from the yard. Is that correct?

15 A. I suppose so because the bodies were not there when we arrived. I

16 don't know who we heard it from, but it seems that the special police

17 units had collected the bodies but I can't be sure of that. We only heard

18 that from somebody.

19 Q. Let's move on. And when you arrived, you collected only the

20 female bodies and you left the male bodies lying around for somebody else

21 to come and collect them. Do I understand your testimony well?

22 A. You understand it well, but I didn't know if anybody else would

23 arrive. Our task was to collect the female bodies, nothing else.

24 Q. In paragraph 30 of your statement when you talk about your arrival

25 for this duty to collect the female bodies, you say that on the way there

1 you came by an elderly man with a cane, that one of the soldiers fired a

2 single shot, and that the old man fell on the ground. Then your sergeant

3 asked, Why did you shoot him? The soldier replied, Because you ordered me

4 to do that. And your sergeant said to him that he should not have killed

5 the old man before they had a chance to ask him for directions to Trnje.

6 Is that your statement?

7 A. Yes, it is.

8 Q. You were in Trnje for three days?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. But you don't know how to get to Trnje. What is a lie here? What

11 is fabricated? Did you fabricate the whole episode? Were you at all in

12 Trnje? Is that true or is it true that you only collected the bodies?

13 What is the fact and what is the fabrication?

14 JUDGE BONOMY: Hold on.

15 Which question would you like the witness to answer? There's at

16 least six there.

17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, just one, please.

18 Q. Did you know where Trnje was or did you not know where Trnje was?

19 A. May I answer, please?

20 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When we went to Trnje, it was dark

22 or it was very early in the morning and we took a totally different route

23 across the villages of Novaci or whatever they're called and when we went

24 to collect the bodies we took a main road leading to Suva Reka. So we

25 didn't know exactly where the road forked off to Trnje, our sergeant

1 didn't know that where we had to take the turning towards Trnje. That

2 would be my answer.

3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. Earlier today on your examination-in-chief you said to my learned

5 friend, Stamp, that there were a number of civilian lorries involved. In

6 your statement you say that there was just one civilian lorry and a

7 military lorry. Which is the truth?

8 A. I apologise, what event are you asking me about?

9 JUDGE BONOMY: Hold on a second. Can you clarify --

10 MR. STAMP: That's what I was about to --

11 JUDGE BONOMY: Can you clarify that, please, Mr. Bakrac.

12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will. I have no

13 noted it down when my learned friend, Stamp, was leading the question. He

14 asked him whether they took civilian transportation to collect the bodies,

15 then the answer said: "Yes." And he said that the civilian lorries were

16 driven by soldiers. I'm putting to the witness now that in his statement

17 he said there was just one civilian lorry and one military lorry and I am

18 asking him what is the truth of the two.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What the Prosecutor asked me was

20 about another detail, not about the event when the bodies were collected

21 and taken away. This is when we did take civilian lorries. He didn't ask

22 me about this other thing. I'm sure that he didn't.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: The question about -- or at least the answer about

24 civilian lorries I think was in relation to paragraph 34.

25 MR. STAMP: Yes, the events at Rogovo.

1 JUDGE BONOMY: That's certainly how I've noted it at the time, and

2 the witness said the drivers were from the VJ.

3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I accept that I have

4 misunderstood this detail. I apologise for wasting your time on this, but

5 I have another question, please.

6 Q. How many lorries did you take to collect the bodies?

7 A. I can't remember exactly, but as far as I can remember, there were

8 two lorries. But I'm not a hundred per cent sure.

9 Q. And those were military lorries, weren't they?

10 A. I believe that one of them wasn't a military lorry.

11 Q. Who did that other lorry belong to, do you know?

12 A. I don't. I really don't -- how should I have known?

13 Q. Did it have any markings on it? What was the colour?

14 A. I don't know. I know that it had a tarpaulin, this lorry where

15 the bodies were loaded on to. I really don't know how the lorry was

16 marked.

17 Q. So the lorry had tarpaulin and that was the civilian lorry?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Very well. Thank you.

20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just briefly, I'm going

21 to move on to the incident in Jeskovo and I will complete my

22 cross-examination before the next break hopefully.

23 Q. Let's go back to the first part of your statement, which refers to

24 the action in Ljubizda Has. Did this take place in December 1998, this

25 action?

1 A. As far as I remember, it was, but I can't remember the exact

2 dates. I really can't.

3 Q. I'm not asking you about dates. I'm asking you whether this was

4 in December 1998.

5 A. I believe so.

6 Q. If I put it to you that another witness from your battalion says

7 that this action took place on the 28th of February, who would be telling

8 the truth, you or him?

9 A. I repeat once again, I can't be sure of the period. I don't know

10 exactly when the action took place. I really can't tell you this. I

11 can't even know whether this was in December or in February. I know that

12 there was a lot of snow, that I remember for a fact, but I can't remember

13 when the action took place.

14 Q. Very well. You don't have to worry about that. We are not [as

15 interpreted] testing your credibility or your memory. Let's move on --

16 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, just one second. Your question -- and you're

17 lucky I didn't interrupt. I thought I had interrupted enough but now I

18 will. "Who would be telling the truth you or him?" was the question. It

19 was a question of credibility, and it's no surprise you get the answer you

20 got?

21 [Trial Chamber confers]

22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, there's a mistake in

23 the transcript. I did say that this is a question to test the witness's

24 credibility. So there is a mistake in the interpretation and in the

25 transcript, but in any case, I don't want to test your patience any

1 further. I shall move on.

2 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, certainly without the "not," the statement

3 doesn't really make any sense, but let's move on.

4 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Tell me, Ljubizda Has, how far is it from the border with Albania,

7 do you know?

8 A. I don't know. How should I know? It may be on the border itself

9 or at a certain distance, but I don't know.

10 Q. Very well. So when you say that you passed through the village

11 and that you took some positions outside of the village, at the foot of a

12 mountain, would you agree with me that those positions were on the border,

13 in the border belt?

14 A. I don't know. We took up positions in the village in order to

15 prevent anybody from descending from the mountain.

16 Q. On the border?

17 A. I don't know. I can't tell you that. I don't know whether it was

18 on the border or not.

19 Q. Very well. You don't know. That's okay. Let's move on. The

20 operation Jeskovo in February 1999. You say February 1999, and I believe

21 that you were shown documents speaking about an action that took place on

22 the 11th of March, 1999. Where -- when was this action, in February or in

23 March?

24 A. Again, I can't give you the exact date, I really can't. I don't

25 know. I don't remember the date.

1 Q. Do you know, and with the previous witness we have provided

2 certain documents and we don't want to waste any more time and show the

3 documents to you, do you know that this action was monitored by OSCE

4 monitors?

5 A. No, I don't know that.

6 Q. Do you know that the monitors reported in their report that seven

7 days prior to that action that the complete village was abandoned by all

8 the civilians and there were no civilians in the village. Are you aware

9 of that?

10 A. No, I'm not aware of that. I only know what our commander had

11 told us. He told us that there were no civilians there --

12 MR. STAMP: [Previous translation continues]...

13 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Stamp, we can't have everybody talking at the

14 same time. What is it?

15 MR. STAMP: It appeared that counsel is referring to some event on

16 the 11th of March on the -- it seems an assumption that a document was put

17 to the witness about some event on the 11th of March. I don't know who

18 put that document to the witness, so we need to know precisely about what

19 event we are talking about. The witness has spoken about a variety of

20 events, so if he is going to refer now to some report by some

21 organisation, we need to identify what time, what event we are speaking

22 about.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Bakrac, you say there that the witness had been

24 shown documents about the 11th of March. What documents are these?

25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I wanted to avoid

1 wasting time because we have recently had a witness speaking about the

2 same developments, and then the exhibits were 5D112, 5D113, and 5D114.

3 All these exhibits, the Chamber is aware of that, contained details that I

4 am putting to this witness without wasting any more time. I didn't want

5 to call up these documents in order to save time.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: We understood that. But earlier you did actually

7 say that the witness had been shown these documents, and that's the point

8 that's causing the difficulty.

9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours --

10 JUDGE BONOMY: If you look at page 69, line 10.

11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, I know exactly what

12 you're referring to. I was referring to some other documents and I might

13 have made a mistake. I was referring to some other documents about this

14 action, not the OSCE documents. But he allows for the possibility that

15 that action did take place on the 11th of March, that's why I decided to

16 move on to the other evidence.

17 JUDGE BONOMY: Very well. Your next question.

18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Are you also aware of the fact that the OSCE mission verified this

20 action, that it carried out inspection together with the Serbian MUP, and

21 that nine members of the KLA in uniforms were found? Are you aware of

22 that?

23 A. I've already answered that this is not something that I know. I

24 don't know anything about the documents, about verification, or anything

25 to that effect.

1 Q. Very well. But please be more concise. In the previous case,

2 when you testified in transcript page 9859, 21/23, in contrast to your

3 statement, you said that you had seen some ten people in civilian clothes,

4 and then when you were asked to elaborate on that, in transcript on page

5 9859, lines 18 to 20, you said that when you say -- when somebody

6 says "uniform" you mean a military uniform. And since your statement has

7 also been entered as an exhibit, that means that in Jeskovo you saw

8 uniformed members of KLA who had been killed. Is that correct?

9 A. I am absolutely baffled. I don't understand your question at all.

10 What are you talking about? What uniform? Without uniform? What did you

11 say?

12 Q. The men that you say you saw in this action in Jeskovo, you saw

13 them killed in Jeskovo, you say around ten of them. Were these men in

14 uniform?

15 A. They were wearing clothes; but that they were wearing clothes that

16 were the uniform of some army, that I did not see.

17 Q. All right --

18 JUDGE BONOMY: Where is the suggested contradiction here,

19 Mr. Bakrac? I didn't understand the question, either. Where is it you

20 say the witness has referred to uniforms?

21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when he was asked about

22 this incident in Jeskovo and about these ten dead persons he saw in

23 Jeskovo, in the direct examination by Mr. Ryneveld during the Milosevic

24 trial, and the page is 9859, lines 21 and 23, this witness said: "These

25 persons were in civilian uniforms." When the cross-examination was over,

1 Mr. Ryneveld --

2 JUDGE BONOMY: Well --

3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] -- tried to clarify the matter with

4 the witness, and on page 9859, lines 18 to 20, he says the following:

5 "Yes. They were wearing civilian uniforms, ordinary uniforms."

6 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, that -- I don't know exactly what language you

7 may have used in Serbian to address that question, but the translation in

8 English was "civilian clothes," which makes the whole question

9 meaningless. Now I will ask the witness the question.

10 You're being asked what you meant in the Milosevic trial when you

11 referred to these people as wearing civilian uniforms. Can you explain

12 that.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, the clothing was the kind of

14 normal clothing that a person wears, that is to say clothes that do not

15 resemble a military uniform. As I could see these people, they were

16 wearing everyday clothing.

17 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

18 Mr. Bakrac.

19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. The report of the mission that these bodies were in black KLA

21 overalls, you're not telling the truth, right?

22 A. I am saying what it was that I saw. I don't know what you mean by

23 these uniforms. What are you expecting me to say? What kind of

24 uniforms? I don't understand this at all.

25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. My last

1 question and I hope that you will be pleased to hear that.

2 Q. In paragraph 6 you said that the order for cleaning up this

3 village of Jeskovo was given by Colonel Delic a day before you carried out

4 this operation. Is that right?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. How do you know about that, that he gave that kind of order?

7 A. I know because we, the march class, were gathered together by him

8 and he said that to us, that on the next day the clean-up of Jeskovo would

9 take place.

10 Q. So the brigade commander, Colonel Delic, is now side-stepping all

11 of his subordinates and he is issuing an order to you, the march class,

12 that the next day you would go for this clean-up. Is that what you're

13 saying now?

14 A. I'm not saying anything. I am saying that he rallied us together

15 and told us where it was that we were going on the next day.

16 Q. Excellent. Now I am going to tell you what it was that K54 said

17 that Colonel Delic on that same day when the action in Jeskovo was carried

18 out was at the entrance to the village and he heard him say that then -

19 he's from your logistics battalion - he heard him say then that they were

20 going to clean the village from the KLA. Who's lying, him or you?

21 A. That's not correct at all. The entire class of march knows that,

22 they were all there the previous day when he called us to talk to us.

23 Q. Thank you, K82. I have no further questions.

24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I do

25 apologise, I think that I went on for another five minutes after the usual

1 time for the break.

2 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Bakrac. Just one matter. You said

3 that the quotation from the Milosevic trial was an exhibit. It's not been

4 presented as one of the Prosecution exhibits.

5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. No, Your Honour. I

6 think that yet again -- well, I cannot say with 100 per cent certainty. I

7 don't want to make any false accusations, but I think that what I said was

8 that since this is not an exhibit, I am asking him about it so that we in

9 turn could quote the transcript saying what it was that he was asked.

10 And one more thing, Your Honours, if I may ask you, 5D132 and 133,

11 could they please be exhibits under seal.

12 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.

13 I think the last was my misunderstanding.

14 K82, we require to break again and we will resume at 1.00.

15 --- Recess taken at 12.27 p.m.

16 --- On resuming at 1.02 p.m.

17 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Aleksic.

18 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

19 Mr. Bakrac, my colleague, was very thorough and I have perhaps

20 five or six questions only for this witness.

21 Cross-examination by Mr. Aleksic:

22 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. K82. I would just like to

23 put a few questions to you, and first and foremost in the Milosevic case

24 you were shown P2062. I am not asking to tender this document. I am just

25 trying to lay a foundation for my questions. That is the order of Colonel

1 Delic from the 4th of February, 1999, in which it says in paragraph 12,

2 and it is addressed to all units within the 549th Brigade. In that

3 paragraph 12 it says: "Familiarise all units and personnel with the

4 provisions of the Geneva Convention and the treatment of imprisoned and

5 wounded members of the enemy force."

6 Mr. K82, did that actually happen? Were you personally informed

7 about the provisions of the Geneva Conventions?

8 A. As far as I remember, no.

9 Q. Thank you. Now, as for actions that you took part in with your

10 unit, you personally had no knowledge about intelligence data and

11 assessments that had to do with certain localities and that were perhaps

12 accessible to the commander of your brigade; right?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And you have no knowledge as to whether at that time Colonel or

15 General Delic had information like that, intelligence like that, prior to

16 these actions; right?

17 A. I don't know anything about that. I really don't know how it is

18 that I could have known about that.

19 Q. Okay. Thank you. Now, finally, a document that was exhibited by

20 the Prosecution, and it's on their list that my colleague Mr. Stamp showed

21 to you but it's a different provision.

22 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Could we briefly put document P1981

23 on e-court. Let me just find the page reference, please. 5.6 is the item

24 that I'd like to see. In English it's page 4 and in B/C/S it's page 3.

25 Fine.

1 Q. I'm going to read it out to you what it says here in 5.6.

2 "Forces to seal off territory," and then it says: "Parts of

3 Trnje, the Jezero feature and Mistra feature and so on are carried out by

4 parts of the logistics battalion and other units and their task is to

5 prevent the Siptar terrorist forces from withdrawing through their

6 positions."

7 In the order that is what it says and nowhere in this order issued

8 by General Delic does it say that the villages should be attacked and

9 torched and that no one should remain alive. Am I not right?

10 A. As for what I know, I know what was going on in the field and as

11 for these provisions I don't know anything about that.

12 Q. I know what you said. This document was shown to you while you

13 gave your last statement, and you spoke about that in paragraph 8 of your

14 statement. You said that you read that order. I read it out to you

15 again, now, and I'm asking you on the basis of what I read out to you, the

16 order -- isn't it true that it doesn't say that the villages were supposed

17 to be attacked and that no one should remain alive and that it was not the

18 task of your logistics battalion?

19 A. I am repeating once again, no order was read in front of us except

20 for what I told you about.

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 Q. Very well.

4 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I have no

5 further questions.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Ivetic.

7 MR. IVETIC: No questions for this witness, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

9 Mr. Visnjic.

10 MR. VISNJIC: No questions witness, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Petrovic.

12 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] No questions, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Zecevic.

14 MR. ZECEVIC: No questions, Your Honour. Thank you.

15 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

16 Mr. Stamp.

17 MR. STAMP: No re-examination, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

19 [Trial Chamber confers]

20 JUDGE BONOMY: K82, that completes your evidence. Thank you for

21 coming to the office to give that evidence, and that brings the need for

22 your presence there to an end. You're free to leave the office as soon as

23 the videolink is disconnected, which should be now. Thank you.

24 [The witness withdrew]

25 JUDGE BONOMY: What now, Mr. Stamp?

1 MR. STAMP: The next witness is K87, who I -- who we propose to

2 put on tomorrow at 9.00. I don't think he's ready yet. He probably

3 arrived today or late last night and he is not available for testimony

4 today.

5 [Trial Chamber confers]

6 JUDGE BONOMY: We shall resume then tomorrow at 9.00.

7 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.10 p.m.,

8 to be reconvened on Friday, the 16th day of

9 March, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25