080827ED

Page 24699

1 Wednesday, 27 August 2008

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Registrar, could you call the case, please.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case number

8 IT-05-88-T, The Prosecutor versus Vujadin Popovic, et al.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: So good morning, everybody. Thank you. All the

10 accused are here. Prosecution is Mr. McCloskey and Mr. Vanderpuye.

11 Defence, I notice the absence of Ms. Tapuskovic, Mr. Bourgon, and

12 Mr. Haynes.

13 Dobar dan gospodine, Professor.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Hopefully we will finish with your testimony very

16 soon, and --

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I hope so too.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. You've been extremely helpful and very

19 cooperative. I didn't expect your testimony to last this long, so I'm

20 sorry if it did. But it means that the parties have attached, obviously,

21 a lot of importance to it.

22 Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

23 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. Good morning to you

24 --

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning.

Page 24700

1 MR. VANDERPUYE: -- Your Honours. Good morning to my learned

2 friends.

3 WITNESS: SLOBODAN REMETIC [Resumed]

4 Cross-examination by Mr. Vanderpuye: [Continued]

5 Q. And good morning to you Mr. Remetic. I going to try and -- well,

6 I will comply with the Trial Chamber's direction, but I'm going to try

7 myself to move this along.

8 Now, yesterday, you talked about certain words that were

9 particular to the Dalmatian coast. One of the words was the word "sjor;"

10 is that right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And the word "sjor" is derivative or related to the word

13 "Signor," right?

14 A. Yes, Signor. A Romanesque term.

15 Q. And in the context of your observation of Mr. Beara, his speech

16 in April of this year, the use of that term corresponds with the dialect

17 that you heard him use when you interviewed him?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And in fact, that dialect incorporates other Romanisms as well?

20 A. I don't know what specific words you are referring to. Surely

21 not only in the Cakavian but in all other coastal regions, even deep into

22 the territory of Montenegro are full of Romanisms. The area of Mount

23 Durmitor, the area from which Vuk Karadzic originated, is full of

24 Romanisms. Even the name Durmitor is derived from Latin.

25 Q. I'm only referring to the dialect that you observed Mr. Beara

Page 24701

1 use. That's all. Does that incorporate other Romanisms other than the

2 word "sjor"?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Are you familiar with the term "skape"?

5 A. I'm familiar with the term "skape." You can find them on Mount

6 Durmitor as well. These are openings in rocks, pits, holes.

7 Q. Is the use of that term consistent with the dialect that you

8 heard Mr. Beara use in April of this year?

9 A. No, I don't know. I don't know about this detail, but I do not

10 rule out the possibility, just as it is probable to hear the word "skape"

11 even out side the Cakavian-speaking regions. You can also here them in

12 the Stokavian-speaking regions. It is not marked. It is a wide-spread

13 word equal to the use of the word "burazer."

14 Q. Okay. So there's nothing linguistically distinctive about the

15 use of that word in your opinion; is that right? You can answer yes or

16 no so we can move this along.

17 A. No, because half of the words have been borrowed from other

18 languages. The word "soba" comes from the word Hungarian. "Carapa"

19 comes from Turkish. Half of the garments that I have on me do not have

20 Slavic origins in their names. And let me remind you of something if you

21 allow me, and it is my duty to do so, and I beg for your patience. Since

22 we are insistent on individual cases, this whole region experienced

23 turbulent history. Various civilisations and administrations existed

24 there and left their traces behind. The region where Beara and I spent

25 our youth, that is Bosnia and Herzegovina, had been part of

Page 24702

1 Austria-Hungaria for 40 years. People joined the army under the German

2 command, and I can ascertain -- and I'm speaking from my experience that

3 illiteral people were eager and are still eager to use in Bosnia various

4 words that they learned from the commands.

5 Q. Sorry to interrupt you. My question is really quite limited and

6 specific, and that is whether or not the word "skape" carries linguistic

7 significance in your opinion, and you can tell me yes or no.

8 A. It has a linguistic significance. It is a Romanism in our

9 dialect. It is not marked either territorially or dialectically. It is

10 widespread.

11 Q. Now, yesterday we talked a little bit - or maybe a lot, actually

12 - about language or dialect as an identifiable feature that is mutable.

13 We talked about the concept of code-shifting, which is changing dialects,

14 and we also talked about changing dialects in the context of somebody

15 that is bidialectal, that they can speak two different dialects or

16 understand two different dialects.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. You observed in your report, if you recall, on page 14 that

19 Mr. Beara was without fault when translating all detailed differences and

20 constructions from the texts attributed to him into his linguistic model.

21 That's in your report at page 14, correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Now, are you aware of any studies that relate to the effects of

24 switching dialects, that is on the listener?

25 A. Well, it's common knowledge. These issues have been the subject

Page 24703

1 of numerous dialectological studies. I did not especially address this

2 issue. My area of study was the influence of other dialects on their

3 neighbouring dialects, for which purpose Bosnia is a particularly good

4 ground since it has three religions, and religious affiliation as a rule

5 is reflected in the differences in dialects.

6 On the 3rd of March of this year, I held an academic speech on

7 the subject of the Serbian dialects of Bosnia in the light of dialectical

8 interference and its linguistic and social linguistic aspect. I viewed

9 this topic in a broader framework in order to find out to what extent the

10 Bosniaks and the Croats have influence with their dialect, that of the

11 Serbs.

12 Q. All right. What I wanted to know specifically was whether you

13 were acquainted with a study that was conducted in Sweden. In

14 particular, it derives from a article that is entitled "Switch Of Dialect

15 As Disguise," and it is written by Sjostrom, Eriksson, Zetterholm,

16 Sullivan, and published in 2006, part of the centre of languages and

17 literature department in university there. And in particular what they

18 caution is that because a dialect can be switched or imitated, that

19 "forensic practitioners who currently use dialect as a primary feature

20 during analysis need to reduce their reliance on this feature and be

21 aware that they can be easily misled."

22 Are you familiar with such a concept, and is that something that

23 you took into consideration when you interviewed Mr. Beara in April of

24 this year?

25 A. If I'm not wrong, that implies that someone is willingly changing

Page 24704

1 his dialect. Are you referring to that, that someone is willingly and

2 knowingly switching to another dialect in order to conceal his identity?

3 If this is what you mean, well, these problems are beyond my scope of

4 expertise, and I don't see any reason for this being done. I'm not an

5 expert in these kind of issues. You can call it a disguise, and when you

6 say "disguise," it, I assume, implies a willing act or a knowing act, and

7 I didn't see any purpose for that, for that kind of behaviour on the part

8 of Mr. Beara.

9 Q. Okay. Well, let me ask you about the circumstances under which

10 you examined him, then. When you went to go visit Mr. Beara at the

11 detention unit - I think you testified to - first, that was an

12 appointment; he was expecting you. Isn't that true?

13 A. Yes, a meeting had been convened.

14 Q. He knew that you were coming there for the specific purpose of

15 evaluating his speech, right?

16 A. I said that I wished to meet him to have a talk with him and to

17 see and hear in what way he is talking now. It goes without saying that

18 if he is going to be visited by a linguist, then, sir --

19 Q. It is correct that he knew you were coming there for the specific

20 purpose of evaluating his speech? That's correct, right?

21 A. I suppose so.

22 Q. It is also correct that he knew that you were there for the

23 specific purpose of evaluating his speech in the context of these

24 specific intercepts. That's true too, right?

25 A. I don't know about that. All I know is that I saw and heard that

Page 24705

1 he definitely still speaks in the way that he spoke at the beginning of

2 the war and as he was identified by his fellow combatants from the Army

3 of Republika Srpska when they thought that he was a Croat. I said on

4 several occasions the Beara of pre-war period speaks Cakavian, Ikavian,

5 and Croatian, and he still speaks that. There is something else,

6 however, in the transcripts, and this is the problem that I faced, sir.

7 Q. All right. Having conducted that interview, did you determine

8 whether or not Mr. Beara had access to the intercepts against which you

9 were going to compare his dialect? You can answer that yes or no.

10 A. I don't know. No, no, I don't know.

11 Q. Did you inquire as to whether or not he had access to the

12 information against which you were going to compare your observations?

13 A. No.

14 Q. So you never asked him whether or not he'd seen the intercepts

15 that you were there to compare his speech against?

16 A. No.

17 Q. All right. You never asked his attorney. Whether his attorney

18 provided him with those intercepts that you were going to compare your

19 observations against?

20 A. I don't remember asking him that.

21 Q. Today, as you testify in court, you have absolutely no ability to

22 say whether or not Mr. Beara was familiar with the intercepts that you

23 were comparing his voice against and is the subjects of your analysis?

24 A. You are asking me if I knew whether he knew. I don't know. I

25 don't know if he knew.

Page 24706

1 Q. Well, Mr. Remetic, isn't a relevant consideration to know whether

2 or not Mr. Beara has knowledge of the intercepts in question since you

3 are comparing what he is telling you against what you're observing in

4 those documents? Isn't that an important thing to know?

5 A. Sir, in my view, the important thing was first to sit on the side

6 and listen to him talking to other persons, then to talk to him on

7 specific topics, and then I was assured that I could use this procedure

8 on the basis on a number of examples that I had on paper from the

9 transcript. And I asked him a question to which he replied to me, this

10 is the way the Serbian people speak, this is the way the Montenegrins

11 speak; and this is as a linguist is the path that I took, and I wouldn't

12 have done it any differently if I had to do it today.

13 Q. When you interviewed Mr. Beara, you observed his speech in the

14 context of his discussions with his lawyers, right? Is that correct?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Okay. You observed that speech on the 7th of April in the

17 context of his discussions with Mr. Ostojic and Mr. Meek in the presence

18 of Ms. Dzambazovic, right?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Okay. And you observed that speech also in the context of his

21 discussions with Mr. Ostojic and the presence of Ms. Dzambazovic on the

22 following day, right?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. You directly posed questions to Mr. Beara in order to determine

25 distinctions that he can make relevant to the purpose of your examination

Page 24707

1 of these intercepts, right?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And in the context of what information he gave you, you compared

4 these intercepts against the way he presented himself over that 7- or

5 8-hour period of observation, right? You can answer that just yes or --

6 A. Yes, yes, yes, yes.

7 Q. You testified previously that putting direct questions to the

8 subject of an analysis during a linguistic examination of that person is

9 something that is not in accordance with the canons of your profession?

10 A. Yes, but when you examine an illiterate person who speaks in a

11 certain dialect is quite a different thing. I made a clear distinction

12 that in this particular case I was able to do that because I was dealing

13 with a very intelligent and cooperative collocutor, and let me tell, you

14 there were not too many questions of that kind because what I heard on

15 the first day was enough for me to create a clear picture of the way that

16 Beara speaks nowadays. As for my conclusions on the transcripts I

17 reached them within the context not only of his present dialect because

18 as I said so many times before, not to discard that altogether in

19 advance, but I, rather, looked at the standard Croatian language that he

20 uses outside the dialect itself.

21 Q. The reason why a linguist doesn't put direct questions on dialect

22 to the subject of his examination is because he can influence the

23 results. Isn't that true?

24 A. You are absolutely right.

25 Q. That has nothing to do with the literacy, Mr. Remetic. It has

Page 24708

1 nothing to do with literacy; that's true, right?

2 A. Please, until April this year I researched the dialect only

3 through conversations with authentic speakers who were born in the

4 certain region and very poorly literate or totally illiterate. This

5 method by posing questions I applied only after I had a clear picture of

6 the present linguistic model employed by Mr. Beara.

7 Q. All right. And in determining that linguistic model by

8 Mr. Beara, you didn't consider his possible motivation to be less than

9 candid with you about the way he speaks?

10 MR. OSTOJIC: Mr. President, I apologise for interrupting, and I

11 do have to object. I think we've heard enough of this. If the

12 Prosecution has evidence that Mr. Beara changed or altered his dialect,

13 they should bring it forth. This is purely speculation. It's something

14 that I know they utilize in their cross, but there's no evidence that he

15 changed or altered his speech at any time. But they should have concrete

16 evidence and put it to the witness, or perhaps they should bring their

17 linguist, which they don't have, to share with us these concepts that my

18 learned friend is learning from the literature or reading from the

19 literature.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: I think you have misread Mr. Vanderpuye's question.

21 It's a very simple question, and it's a straightforward one, whether in

22 his assessment the gentleman, professor, considered or not the possible

23 motivation on the part of accused Beara to mislead the professor in the

24 course of his work.

25 So please answer the question.

Page 24709

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had no reason to suspect because

2 I realized and I was almost shocked and surprised to such an extent that

3 he still speaks in the same manner that he spoke before the war, that he

4 is using the Split-based Cakavian dialect as I had been told. I was

5 surprised. Anyway, gentlemen, Mr. Beara is here, and any other approach

6 in this analysis is possible. We have the subject, the speaker, and my

7 findings can be cross-checked, and it can be verified whether he is still

8 speaking the same way as he did before as I stated, and I think this

9 should be much easier for you to do that then for myself.

10 MR. VANDERPUYE:

11 Q. Mr. Remetic, the logic in which you assessed --

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. -- subsumes that you've made the determination already,

14 preconceived determination of how Mr. Beara spoke before you spoke to

15 him, because what you've said is you had a linguistic model about how he

16 spoke before the war in order to analyse how he spoke during the war by

17 comparing it against what you observed after the war. That's the whole

18 purpose of your determination is to figure out how he spoke during the

19 war. That's the subject of the intercept, isn't it, Mr. Remetic?

20 A. Sir, I had three assignments or three things to do. I'm begging

21 your pardon sir, please. Actually, I had three things. I had

22 transcripts, I had an insight into how Beara speaks today, and I had

23 information that early he spoke as a Croat would do. He was in service

24 in Split. I could only assume what standard he used, and I was surprised

25 and never expected that I would encounter this speech model as I did in

Page 24710

1 the detention unit. I was surprised. I was astonished, sir, and I said

2 yesterday that if I had been 30 years younger or if I were 30 years

3 younger now, if I were just starting my career, I would analyse his

4 speech pattern very seriously. I did not come to confirm anything. I

5 just wanted to see how his -- or hear, rather, how he speaks today.

6 That's all.

7 Q. When you met with Mr. Beara -- or rather, let me withdraw that

8 and rephrase it. Your comparison is based only on examination of what he

9 -- your examination of the intercepts is based only upon a comparison

10 against what he sounded like in 2008 when you met him, right?

11 A. Yes, yes. I did most of the work before meeting with Beara. So

12 I returned home on the 9th, and already on the 18th I dispatched my final

13 report. I had been working on it for months. It's logical, it can be

14 verified, and this is something that goes without saying, of course.

15 Q. Okay. So you didn't consider any other speech, a known speech

16 attributable to Mr. Beara at any time before 2008?

17 A. I believe that I've already said that on several occasions. I

18 expected to find traces of his childhood, but I didn't find anything,

19 nothing that would be differential, nothing that would be marked. And

20 let me repeat once again; later on, I practically excluded the speeches

21 of northwestern Serbia when he doesn't speak Ikavian. He speaks Croatian

22 just like my host he is who said to me yesterday, let's go "lijevo,"

23 left, just like Beara said when he addressed the lady and told her why

24 are you so pale, "blijeda." I understand that fully. This is Croatian.

25 Q. I understand that. My question is whether -- a very simple

Page 24711

1 question, and I understand that your answer is in fact you did not

2 consider any other speech known to be attributed to Mr. Beara before

3 2008. Yes, that's correct?

4 A. Who is it who attributes speech to him, and what speech is

5 attributed to him? Nobody attributes anything to him. I was just told

6 that he spoke Croatian, that he spoke Croatian as any Croatian would do,

7 so I just assumed that he would be using the Split variant of the

8 Cakavian dialect. What speech are you talking about?

9 Q. Let me give you an example. Were you made aware of an article

10 that was published in Svedok, 29 October 2002? Were you made aware of an

11 article attributing certain statements to Mr. Beara by his attorneys, by

12 Mr. Beara, or by anyone else?

13 A. No. No, no. No, no.

14 Q. Any information concerning a statement or some exemplar of

15 Mr. Beara's speech from Mr. Beara, his attorneys, his wife, or any other

16 source?

17 A. I didn't. The only thing I requested were audiotapes of the

18 intercepts, and attorneys told me that they did not have any because the

19 only thing I was asked to do was to analyse that material.

20 Q. All right. Mr. Ostojic went over a number of intercepts that you

21 reviewed. I'd like to draw your attention to a couple of them, if I may.

22 What I'd like to draw your attention to is 65 ter 3627. If I could have

23 that on the -- in e-court, please. If I could, please, may we go to the

24 page with the ERN number ending 153, 7153. All right. Okay. If we

25 could just go to the -- if you could just look at the fourth line from

Page 24712

1 the bottom of that page. All right. It would be the top line now on the

2 page. That's attributable to Mr. Beara. Do you see that?

3 A. Where? What text? There are several sentences here containing

4 the word "Beara."

5 Q. Well, I'm talking about the --

6 A. Which text? Which sentence? Give me the beginning of the

7 sentence. There's several of them here.

8 Q. Go up two lines. That may help you. Okay. The first one starts

9 with -- looks like "Znas sta." Do you see that?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And in particular, I'm referring to the part where it says

12 "etencina bre."

13 A. Yes, well -- yes.

14 Q. Okay. Now, what type of language is that? What type of dialect

15 is that?

16 A. This form may originate in two ways. It could to be Ikavian, and

17 in the Croatian variant "prijek" could be "prek" [phoen] because R is

18 dropped out after J like "brijeg" and plural is "bregovi," as in

19 "lijevobi" [phoen] becomes "ljevo" or -- and this "prek" can be the

20 original Ikavian or it could be a derivative of the Croatian "prijek."

21 This form is not a reliable identifier. It is not well marked for

22 anything.

23 Q. Is it consistent with the dialect that you observed Mr. Beara --

24 that Mr. Beara spoke to you with in April of this year?

25 A. Not Ikavian but it could be the Croatian variants of the former

Page 24713

1 common language or what is currently known as the Croatian language. In

2 the Croatian the form is "prijek" and the derivative is "prek." This is

3 not part of the dialect that he uses, but it could be part of the

4 standard language that he uses.

5 Q. Okay. What about two lines down, you see a word attributed to

6 Mr. Beara?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Which on the tape appears to be "kretencina bre." Now, is that

9 something --

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. -- that is consistent in the dialect of Mr. Beara?

12 A. This "bre," I don't think so. "Bre" is something that is a

13 filler word, primarily in Serbia, and this is also something that could

14 have creeped into the language of the officers because the officers of

15 the army hale from all over the place. This is not imminent to the

16 coastal Cakavian linguistic area. It is more commonly heard in the

17 eastern parts.

18 Q. All right. And he hales from there but spent a substantial

19 amount of time in the western part, which he demonstrated to you when you

20 interviewed him, right?

21 A. Well, yes.

22 Q. Okay. If we could go to Intercept 3607. Before we do, by the

23 way, on 3627, the one that's on the screen, you did reach the

24 determination that is Mr. Beara on the tape, didn't you?

25 A. I think that it is Beara.

Page 24714

1 Q. Let's go to 3607, please. All right. If we could we could go to

2 page with ERN ending 7108. All right. I think it's all right if Mr.

3 Remetic can see that. At the bottom of the page?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. You see the term "Gdje," G-d-j-e with a question mark attributed

6 to Mr. Beara. Do you see that, Mr. Remetic?

7 A. Yes. I'm not sure that I heard him say "gdje." I'm not sure

8 that I heard him that way. The recording was not that clear to me. I

9 know that this is part of the standard norm, however, in practice; and

10 this is something that I stated in my statement in free-flow

11 communication. The way people speak in Bosnia is different. They will

12 say "Je."

13 That's in Bosnian. That's also how I would speak in

14 communication with my relatives and colleagues who are Bosniaks and Croats

15 and who are also linguists from Sarajevo, but this would be in free

16 communication when I talk to them on the phone. I would never use it in a

17 paper, or I would never use it speaking from a rostrum.

18 Q. All right. In your report on page 16, you say that Mr. Beara

19 today says "gdi", g-d-i, right?

20 A. Yes. "Gdi" is what he says most of the time. However, if he

21 uses the standard form, then it can be "di" or "gdi". I've told you that

22 there's no single village, either Cakavian or Stokavian, that would be

23 purely linguistically defined, and this, of course, applies even more to

24 any educated man who is well versed in speaking a standard norm.

25 Q. Mr. Remetic, if it's not linguistically defined, then it has no

Page 24715

1 linguistic significance in terms of making identification, right,

2 particular in individual identification?

3 A. Well, you know -- what do you mean? Are you referring just to

4 this form, or are you referring to the whole body of the analysed text?

5 Q. What I'm referring to is sub (a) in section 11 of your report

6 where you specifically point out that Mr. Beara's "current manner of

7 speech is in sharp contrast to these facts," referring to the term "gde,"

8 g-d-e, and you say that Mr. Beara today says "gde" as a significant

9 linguistic distinction, which you are now apparently contradicting.

10 That's what I'm referring to.

11 A. I'm not contradicting anything. I adhered to what I said about

12 Beara's speech, and I based that on the eight hours of my experience.

13 Q. Okay. With respect to this intercept, 3607, you had an

14 opportunity to hear that. Is that Mr. Beara's voice on this intercept?

15 A. My impression is that it is.

16 Q. Let me refer you, then, to intercept 3626. If we could have that

17 in e-court, please. Okay. All right, in this intercept, if you go,

18 well, first of all to the third line from the bottom or the fourth line

19 from the bottom, you see the term "los muchachos," right, that I'd

20 referred to yesterday. Do you see that, Mr. Remetic?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. All right. Now, if we could go down a little bit on this page.

23 All right. The second to last line on the page in front of you now, you

24 see the word "gde," g-d-e, right?

25 A. Yes, yes.

Page 24716

1 Q. It's not -- okay. If you go -- now, are we on the next page on

2 this? If we could go down a little bit or to the next page if there's

3 nothing. You see the line that begins "kako nisi." You see that? It's

4 the third line down on this page.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. In this you see, again, the term g-d-e," gde," right?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. All right. You heard this tape, as well, right?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And this was a tape also of Mr. Beara, wasn't it?

11 A. I think so, yes.

12 Q. Let me take you to Intercept 65 -- well it's intercept, 13 July

13 1995, at 1009, and that is 65 ter 1130. I don't think I need it in

14 e-court, but let me ask you first. This is an intercept that contains

15 language to the effect of Sjor Lucic, which is attributed to Mr. Beara.

16 Do you remember this intercept, or shall I put it on the screen for you?

17 A. This is the first intercept, sir, with Sjor Lucic, yes.

18 Q. That's correct. And "sjor" you've indicated is a typically

19 Dalmatian term?

20 A. Yes, I did.

21 Q. Yet in your report you conclude that the dialect does not reveal

22 the speaker's origin, and you reason in your report that that's because

23 it doesn't appear in the other intercept that you evaluated.

24 A. Yes, that's the swallow, remember. That one swallow was what

25 initiated the search for a flock, and there was no flock.

Page 24717

1 Q. Okay. You also point out in that intercept -- in your analysis

2 of that intercept is the use of the term "gde." That's on page 16 of

3 your report.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. That was the basis for excluding Mr. Beara as a potential

6 participant in this conversation in your analysis?

7 A. Sir, this was not the basis. If you have looked at my report

8 very carefully, you will remember that I say in it that the language is

9 not marked for variances, that in every text there are elements of both

10 the western and eastern variants of the common language and that the

11 western variant prevails. Please, I'm reminding you that this is what I

12 say in my report, and I have also stated in my report that there are more

13 Ijekavian forms and only one "gde." "Sjor" was something that would be

14 marked, but there was just one confirmation that never repeated again.

15 In everyday language, this word shares the status of "burazer," and there

16 are quite a few of the word "burazer" in there. I drew my conclusions

17 based on the relationship between the western and eastern variant

18 characteristics. The intercept that contains "los muchachos" and

19 "dogadja" is the intercept that I would attribute to Beara's name, not

20 because of the "los muchachos" as much as for "dogadja," but then when

21 you have both "los muchachos" and "dogadja," you draw conclusions based

22 on that. Not a single transcript is very well marked for variants.

23 Wherever there is text, there are both groups of forms, so there's no

24 single transcript that can be attributed exclusively to either the

25 western or the eastern model, and there is practically no Cakavian

Page 24718

1 dialect in any of them except for this word "sjor" in one of them.

2 Q. All right. But you do have this word "sjor" in one of them, and

3 despite that word "sjor" being in one of them, you conclude that you

4 don't have enough information to attribute this intercept to Mr. Beara,

5 which conversely means you don't have enough information to exclude

6 Mr. Beara doesn't it, Mr. Remetic?

7 A. Yes, yes. I didn't have them then, and I don't have them now,

8 either.

9 Q. All right. If we could, we can go to intercept 15 July. Let's

10 start with 15 July, 094 hours, 65 ter 1178. All right. This is an

11 intercept that you mentioned in your report as I have it on page 18.

12 Now, in this report you conclude that it's not possible to accept without

13 reservation the view that this relates to Mr. Beara who did not

14 explicitly identify himself as such, even the - I can't even say this

15 word - hypochoristic Ljubo does not appear; and in any case, it could

16 refer to the bearers [Realtime transcript read in error, "Bearas"] of

17 some 30 names, right?

18 You then say, hereto appears the noun "burazer," which

19 accompanies the majority of the text initially connected with Ljubisa

20 Beara. Okay. Now, you've already said that "burazer" has no linguistic

21 significance because it's used everywhere.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

23 MR. OSTOJIC: I'm sorry, Mr. President, my learned friend. On

24 page 19, line 21, I think that report actually uses the word "bearer"

25 with a small B and not the name "Beara" as I think they typed, just so

Page 24719

1 the record's is clear on that, and I think --

2 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. I think you are correct.

3 MR. VANDERPUYE: Sorry. I'm not sure what he is referring to.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Pardon?

5 MR. VANDERPUYE: I'm sorry. I just -- the error.

6 MR. OSTOJIC: On the report -- you simply -- on the report, you

7 read it I think correctly, but I think it was just transcribed --

8 JUDGE AGIUS: It's a question of transcript.

9 MR. VANDERPUYE: Oh, all right. I'm sorry. I missed it. Okay.

10 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Vanderpuye kindly be asked to speak

11 up or closer to his microphone, please, for the interpreters.

12 MR. VANDERPUYE: I'll do that, thank you.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.

14 MR. VANDERPUYE:

15 Q. Now, when you say that it's not possible to accept without

16 reservation the view that this relates to Mr. Beara, it means you can't

17 exclude him based on what you've seen in this intercept, doesn't it?

18 A. Yes, I have no basis for establishing a link to Beara either in

19 linguistic terms, and there's also one illogical aspect which is probably

20 beyond the borders of linguistics, but it falls into the remain of some

21 basic logics. And that is that a staff officer does not know where the

22 385 switchboard is. Further on, look at this: This transcript begins

23 with 0954 and the next one, allegedly a minute later, and a test

24 demonstrated that this alleged conversation lasted for 2 and a half

25 minutes.

Page 24720

1 And another thing: When you said that the word "burazer" was not

2 a linguistic fact, I would say that everything is a linguistic fact.

3 Even if I say "a" or "a," these are linguistic facts. However, there is

4 a hierarchy of them.

5 Q. That's what I mean when I say "significant," but let me ask you

6 this: Were you ever provided with any information that a participant in

7 this conversation made a statement admitting his participation in this

8 conversation with Mr. Beara? Were you ever made aware of that fact?

9 A. No, no.

10 Q. You weren't made aware of the fact that General Zivanovic, the

11 Zivanovic mentioned in this intercept, made a statement on 2nd July,

12 2001, in an interview specifically saying that he recalled this

13 conversation or that he made a statement in October of 2001 in which he

14 says that he didn't want to get in trouble on the basis of one nebulous

15 conversation between he and Beara, referring to this intercept?

16 A. No. I find Zivanovic interesting because the operator said that

17 he remembered him as a person who is dropping his vocals, his vowels, and

18 that means that his dialect is different, and that is the feature that he

19 remembered Zivanovic by.

20 Q. I ask because you attach a factual significance to this intercept

21 in evaluating it rather than a linguistic one as concerns the reference

22 to the extension 385. Do you know what the extension 385 corresponded to

23 at that time?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Do you know why it is that Mr. Beara is asking for the

Page 24721

1 switchboard? Which switchboard?

2 A. Sir, I served in the army from 1971 to 1972, and that is all of

3 the experience that I have. I have no other knowledge, and I'm

4 completely uninformed when it comes to the issues of that nature. And I

5 can ascertain that I don't know anything about that, and I'm telling the

6 truth and only the truth.

7 Q. And you see in the intercept that General Zivanovic is

8 essentially deferring this matter, indicating that he is not in a

9 position to accommodate Mr. Beara. He says, I can't do that anymore, and

10 then he says Zlatar and 385, call there. You recognise that in the

11 intercept, right?

12 A. Sir, we are going beyond the area of linguistics. I can only do

13 some guesswork about this. Please, I am to -- nearing the end of my

14 scientific career. The whereabouts of Zlatar and Badem, what is

15 important to me was that Badem was adjusted. For me, it is important

16 that the transcript and manuscript collate and the current speech used by

17 Mr. Beara. However, these are the questions that I am not competent to

18 give you answers to.

19 Q. I'm asking you this because you have a number of other factual

20 observations that you make that appear to be well beyond the scope of

21 linguistics in your report, so let me refer you to the next one, and

22 forgive me if I go a little bit out of order, but with respect to the

23 intercept on 14 July 1995, you make a factual assessment of the

24 intercept. On page 18 of your report, you say here the operator has

25 unquestionably mixed up the speakers, and you base this on the fact that

Page 24722

1 there are a number of -- it was a one-sided conversation that precedes

2 the intercept. If I could put this up in e-court so everybody could see

3 that. That's 1164. A is the English, and B is the -- should be E.

4 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Mr. Vanderpuye is still a

5 bit far from the microphone.

6 MR. VANDERPUYE: All right. I hope that's bit better.

7 Q. What I'm referring to is right at the beginning. You see the

8 letter "J," and it says hello. All right? You see this is "ko je

9 major." You see that?

10 A. Are you referring to this one: "Hello, Badem, put Beara on," and

11 then, "who wants to speak to him"? Is that what you are referring to?

12 "Hello. Who is the major? I'm the duty officer at Palma. I need Beara

13 urgently." Is that what you're referring to?

14 Q. That's what I'm referring to. Tell us what it is in this

15 intercept that shows that the operator's apparently mixed up, and that's

16 included in your report. What did you observe?

17 A. Further down you see B saying, "wait a little, old man."

18 Q. Do you recognise in this report what it is you identify as the

19 operator being mixed up? That's all my question is, and if you could

20 point that out to us, that would be appreciated.

21 A. Yes, it says, "Wait a moment. Just a moment, old man..." and

22 this is uttered by someone called B, somewhere in the middle of the page.

23 But at the very end they say that they intercepted the conversation by a

24 mistake. They admitted a mistake in the procedure, but the words

25 attributed to Mr. Beara in this text, because you can see that he was

Page 24723

1 inaudible, this is so very little to go on. Why 155, where is that, and

2 then again I'm asking myself a question, how is it possible that he

3 doesn't know that location if he is the participant of some ...

4 Q. Okay. You evaluated that in your linguistic capacity. Is that

5 your testimony, Mr. Remetic?

6 A. Well, yes, this was just done en passant because the part --

7 there's no part of the text that can be attributed to Beara. It doesn't

8 offer any data for an analysis.

9 Q. Thank you very much.

10 A. Because allegedly it was impossible to hear him as we can see

11 from these dots in the text.

12 Q. All right. Thank you for that, Mr. Remetic. If I could refer

13 you to 65 ter 1179. This is the intercept of 15 July 1995 at 957. Do

14 you recall this intercept, sir, or do you want me to put it on the screen

15 for you?

16 A. Sir, I do not need the screen. It's the issue of whether it was

17 one or three conversations. After a lengthy and thorough analysis, I

18 concluded that there was one conversation that was subsequently adjusted

19 and harmonised, and I explained that in great detail, the discrepancies,

20 the chronology of the beginning, 55, 57, 1000.

21 Q. Sir, you are unaware, then, that these intercepts - that is, 955,

22 957 and 1000 - were captured by three different interceptors? You are

23 either aware or you're not; can you tell us which?

24 A. It might be that there were three persons, and I elaborated on

25 this issue accurately, and I tried to find justification for

Page 24724

1 chronological discrepancies, whether their watches were not working

2 properly and were not set to match each other. They probably did not

3 establish connections at the same time. According to their statements,

4 they were working under difficult conditions; and thirdly, it is possible

5 that you cannot hear the person all the time so that you have blank

6 spaces. I allow for all these possibilities, sir, and it makes sense.

7 However, where they match, one can see evident differences. The

8 beginning is different. The identification of the speakers is

9 substantially different.

10 Let me remind you, in the first version at 0955, Mr. Beara

11 explicitly introduced himself with his full name by saying Ljubo Beara.

12 The next version say that is he introduced himself allegedly as Colonel

13 Beara, whereas in the third version there is no introduction by name.

14 Please. And then the very linguistic content and the variance, you had

15 an opportunity to see the table differs. If you hear the same thing from

16 three sources, how come that you make different notes? These are very

17 serious discrepancies, and they are of fundamental importance for this

18 assignment. The very few facts that we had at our disposal made our task

19 very difficult and complex.

20 Q. Mr. Remetic, what you're talking about right now are factual

21 questions as distinct from the linguistic analysis that you were retained

22 to conduct, right?

23 A. As I see it, the crucial thing is whether a person introduces

24 himself or not. This is what I wrote in the preamble of my report. I

25 took that into consideration, sir. The analysis was carried out. You

Page 24725

1 have it in front of you. You have the tables and comparisons.

2 Q. Well, did you take into consideration this, that the fact is that

3 Mr. Beara on a tape that you heard actually did introduce himself loud

4 and clear in a way that you could identify his voice independently of his

5 name and the fact that he did use his name, and that is in 3603? It's a

6 tape that you heard and talked about in your direct examination by

7 Mr. Ostojic. It is -- did you take that into consideration?

8 A. I don't understand your question. I do apologise. Can you

9 please repeat it.

10 Q. In the intercept at 0955 hours, 65 ter 1179, there's an

11 attribution to Mr. Beara apparently saying "Ljubo Beara." In the

12 intercept at 3603, there's an attribution to Mr. Beara in which he says

13 "Ljubo Beara." In other words, he introduced himself on that intercept

14 as well.

15 A. Sir, I'm talking about what is written in the transcripts.

16 Q. As am I. And I am asking --

17 A. I did not hear -- this is what is written in the transcripts.

18 Q. I'm asking whether as a linguist in trying to determine whether

19 or not it is possible that the intercept involves Mr. Beara you

20 considered such facts as that he introduced himself on another intercept

21 using both his first and last name as it appears in an intercept which

22 you didn't have a tape for that you examined. Did you consider that?

23 A. Yes, but how can you have three different forms in the same

24 conversation? That's the problem. He may say, this is Beara, this is

25 Ljubo, this is Colonel Beara. It's all possible, but we have here one

Page 24726

1 conversation recorded by three operators, and each of them did that or

2 conveyed that differently. From a linguistic point of view, I find that

3 to be strange. If we have a single conversation, then either they put

4 dots where there are blank spaces, probably they didn't here, but if they

5 heard the conversation, how is it possible that they heard different

6 things? If you can provide an explanation to me for that, I would be

7 grateful.

8 Q. I'm glad that you asked the question, and what I'd like to know

9 is whether or not you asked to see the testimony of these particular

10 individuals before you wrote your report or at any time after to search

11 for that answer. Did you ask Mr. Ostojic for the testimony of these

12 particular operators?

13 A. I didn't ask for their testimonies. I don't even know whether

14 that was necessary or permissible.

15 Q. You're saying you want to know why it is the case, and you're

16 telling us that you never asked why? You never asked for their testimony

17 - is that fair to say - to review their explanation of how that's the

18 case?

19 A. Please, are we talking about the statements or testimonies given

20 by the operators? You corrected me yesterday. I did read the statements

21 (redacted). Please, the statements.

22 MR. VANDERPUYE: If we could go into private session for a

23 moment, please.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's go into private session please.

25 [Private session]

Page 24732

1 practically prevents him and any other expert in his place from rising

2 above pure hypothesis and positively identifying Ljubisa Beara as a

3 participant in the conversations attributed to him."

4 That's what is in your report, and that is true, right?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Remetic. I have no further questions

7 for you.

8 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President and Your Honours.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Vanderpuye, and thank you, Witness.

10 Mr. Ostojic. You have re-examination, I suppose.

11 MR. OSTOJIC: I do, Mr. President. Thank you.

12 Re-examination by Mr. Ostojic:

13 Q. Mr. Remetic, if I can just start, perhaps, where my learned

14 friend left off. How did you think -- or did you find in analysing the

15 documents that the Prosecution provided for us, do you have any idea how

16 they came up with their criteria for determining which Ljubo is -- should

17 be attributed to which person? Did they ever give us that information,

18 do you know?

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

20 MR. VANDERPUYE: I think it calls for speculation. It's

21 completely inappropriately put to this witness as to what the Prosecution

22 -- how the Prosecution came up with its interpretation of the intercepts.

23 MR. OSTOJIC: Well, I think my learned friend misunderstood my

24 question. I'm not asking him to speculate. I'm asking, did they provide

25 us any analysis or any information as to how they came up with their

Page 24733

1 purported analysis, speculative or not.

2 MR. VANDERPUYE: If that's the case, then it's a question of

3 relevance, as well, and it's objectionable because it's completely

4 irrelevant.

5 MR. OSTOJIC: Oh, I totally disagree. I think it is relevant

6 since they carry the burden of proof.

7 [Trial Chamber confers]

8 JUDGE AGIUS: We consider it a valid question. However, you just

9 please restrict yourself in answering the question to whether you know or

10 not, okay? That's how I understood the question, and that's how it can

11 be put and answered.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The only thing that comes to mind

13 is that the OTP started from the operators' allegations. In some of the

14 transcripts, the operators identify the participants by giving their

15 names. In some other transcripts, on the other hand, the participants

16 identify either themselves personally or each other. Where no such

17 procedure exists, I as a layperson in military terms would not be able to

18 tell you how the intercepts and the participants in the conversations

19 were identified or how the participants in certain conversations were

20 linked with certain events.

21 MR. OSTOJIC:

22 Q. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Remetic. But really, I'm asking you with

23 respect to where there was not a compromise of an identity by either the

24 speaker -- either one of the speakers, when there's the name just

25 "Ljubo," did you review any documents or anything that would show how the

Page 24734

1 Prosecution came up with their analysis as to who that "Ljubo" should be

2 -- or that conversation should be attributed to? Did you have any of

3 that information? From, let's say, their linguist.

4 A. Well, I'm not sure. I don't know.

5 Q. Let me go on to this issue: How many intercepts of the 18 did

6 you review that had multiple purported conversations that were captured

7 by different operators except for those that we've seen on the 15th of

8 July at 955, 957 and 1000? So if we exclude those three purported

9 conversations or one conversation captured by three individuals, were

10 there any other intercept conversations that you have seen or reviewed

11 that were captured by more than one intercept operator?

12 A. The conversation that took place on the 15th was transcribed by

13 three different persons, and that's the only explanation I can provide.

14 There are some other cases where there are two different versions, the

15 first one usually crossed out and the second one valid, and then the last

16 -- or the valid one was usually typed up on a typewriter. If my memory

17 serves me well, and it does, the first intercept also has two versions,

18 two different beginnings.

19 Q. Just so the record is clear, Professor, so we're talking about

20 the intercept -- or you're talking about the intercept on the 13th of

21 July 1995 at 1009, which is 65 ter 1130, which had in the beginning

22 portion the --

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. -- manuscript and then rewritten after that. Are any others --

25 are there any other manuscripts, not the typed version. We know the

Page 24735

1 process that some were typed, some were not, some had the manuscript,

2 some didn't, and you've told us about that, and thank you very much for

3 that. But I'm asking you of the 18 -- or of any of the intercepts that

4 you reviewed, were there more than one intercept operator who captured a

5 conversation except for that one on the 15th of July at the time that we

6 said, 955, 957 and 1000?

7 A. I can't give you just a yes or no answer. However, in the

8 notebook that I'm holding in my hand, there are several instances of one

9 version being crossed out and the other typed up. I always analysed the

10 typed-up version as well as the manuscript, which served as the template

11 for the typed-up version. I did not pay much attention to the ones that

12 were rejected in the process. Obviously, on the 15th of July was

13 something that raised a big dilemma as to whether this was just one

14 conversation or three different conversations or just one typed by three

15 different persons.

16 Q. Thank you, Professor. Let me just move away and focus on whether

17 or not you were fair and objective when you looked at these intercepts,

18 and if we could have 2D551, please, and what we need -- that's his

19 report, and what we need is appendix 1 just on the screen, if possible.

20 Now, Mr. Remetic, I think the Court would permit you to look at

21 your only table if you have it in front of you. It might be easier for

22 you, so if you don't mind, if you could grab appendix 1, which is the

23 overview of the results of the linguistic analysis that you provided.

24 Take a look at it here.

25 A. I have that.

Page 24736

1 Q. Okay. We have now both of them there. I want to walk you

2 through a couple of them just to see. When you give the designation

3 zero, you're telling us in essence that, you know, you're not certain or

4 it's insufficient information, correct?

5 A. There's no solid basis for any serious analysis or for any valid

6 conclusions that would arise from that.

7 Q. Now, I want to look at the one at the 23rd of July at 8 -- 0805

8 hours. I know you're called here as a witness in order to give us your

9 objective opinion, but the Prosecution in that intercept themselves

10 concede that it's not Mr. Beara, and they're saying it's some other

11 Ljubo, actually Ljubo Bojanovic. How come you don't put a negative sign

12 there, sir? Why did you keep it as insufficient? Did you just look at

13 the corpus of the linguistic text that you had, and you didn't adopt what

14 the Prosecution said or any attorneys, but you did it independent of what

15 they thought and you left it as a zero, did you not?

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

17 MR. VANDERPUYE: It's obviously a leading question, Your Honour.

18 I'd ask my friend to rephrase it.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: No, wait, wait, wait, Professor, because it's --

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Ostojic.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait, Professor. Wait.

22 You either rephrase your question, or you move to another

23 question.

24 MR. OSTOJIC: I'll rephrase it.

25 Q. When we look at the 23rd of July, 1995, intercept, you know that

Page 24737

1 -- what the Prosecution's position is in connection with that intercept,

2 that the Ljubo mentioned in that intercept is a Ljubo Bojanovic. At

3 0805, having known that, can you just tell us why you placed a zero under

4 the four categories in your table on appendix 1, please?

5 A. Mr. Ostojic, this table, if I remember it well, was completed, or

6 rather, the job was completed before I came aware of the OTP analysis.

7 I've already said it here, that I completed most of the work before I

8 ever met with Mr. Beara and spoke to him. Maybe. I believe that this is

9 good, that this is better. If I met with Beara earlier, maybe November,

10 I suppose -- or I believe that the report would be shorter because I

11 would be less tempted to find different starting points from which I

12 could attribute particular conversations to Beara. My analysis testifies

13 to this effect because my conclusions are often phrased to the effect

14 that there is nothing to link Mr. Beara to a particular transcript. In

15 other words, it is obvious that I became privy to the OTP opinion much

16 later.

17 Q. Good, thank you. Sir, yesterday my learned colleague was asking

18 you about the word "burazer" and "buraz" on page 40, line 20, of

19 yesterday's transcript, and he read part of your report on page 17, and I

20 objected, and it was, you know, overruled. But let me turn to page 17 of

21 your report, and help me on that category. It's actually under the first

22 intercept if you are following along, which is section -- it says 11 as

23 printed. That might be a typographical error, but it is during the text

24 of your discussion of the first intercept, 13th July, 1995, at 1009

25 hours.

Page 24738

1 Now, when you discussed "sjor" and "gospon" and "burazer" in that

2 paragraph, I thought - and I want to keep it in context - if you could

3 focus for us and have it -- and read for us the paragraph before that

4 where you discuss the very word that my learned friend was trying to

5 challenge you on as to whether or not it's a western or eastern or

6 Dalmatian or predominantly Croatian or Cakavian word. You give us that

7 immediately prior to that, do you not, sir? Do you see that in your

8 report? Where you discuss the word "burazer."

9 A. "Sjor" is a dialect-marked word. It is a feature of coastal

10 regions. "Burazer," however, covers a broad area, and we hear this every

11 day on TV, in various shows. I can hear it in my conversations with my

12 own brother. Two days ago he called me and addressed me by calling me

13 "burazer." I told you yesterday that my head of the Academy of Sciences

14 and Arts called me "burazer" hundreds of times. "Burazer" is a common

15 word. There's also a truncated form, "buraz." Both are of Turkish

16 origin. "Buraz" is somewhat more often used in Bosnia than in Serbia,

17 but this word is not a cornerstone around which any house can be built.

18 This is just a lexical feature.

19 Q. Thank you. Now, Professor, help me with this. Can you share

20 with us the difference between a variant and a dialect?

21 A. This concerns the Serbo-Croatian standard language, which used to

22 have two variants from the very beginning, the eastern and the western or

23 the Belgrade and the Zagreb variants respectively, the Ekavian or the

24 Ijekavian variants. However, in practice in real conversations, the

25 latter is Ijekavian, and everybody including my kind hostesses here in

Page 24739

1 the Tribunal, when they point me to the "lijevo," I immediately know

2 where they come from, where they went to school, and where their

3 education in Serbo-Croatian comes from. The variants differ the most in

4 terminology, in the lexic or the words. The Croats as a rule translated

5 foreign words that infiltrated; the Serbs did not, however. In Serbia,

6 we have schnitzels, and in Zagreb they have steaks. In Serbia, we play

7 football, and in Zagreb they play the same game but under a Croatian

8 name. These are variants at the level of the standard language, whereas

9 dialects are a different thing. We have three dialects, and within these

10 dialects that are subdivisions into various speeches, colloquialisms, and

11 so on and so forth.

12 Q. When you say "knjizevni," is that not scholarly and one is, like,

13 a common discussion because my learned friend from the OTP yesterday even

14 told you at page 41 at lines 10 through 14 when he was describing his

15 pattern of speech, he says: "I'm an English-speaking person, and I use

16 the word 'man' quite frequently in my speech." Although we haven't heard

17 it in his questions today, I think when we scholarly -- or yesterday,

18 when we scholarly speak or as you say, "knjizevni," we may have a

19 different variant from when we speak in our normal conversational pattern

20 of speech. Would that be accurate?

21 A. Well, the linguistic norm or the standard language is a necessity

22 in anyone's society. For a community to function to pass and implement

23 important decisions, such a community must have a linguistic norm or a

24 code which is known as the standard language. A linguistic norm in my

25 terminology, which I often convey to my students during my lectures, is a

Page 24740

1 functional violation of a language. A language has to have a norm that

2 is used in official documents. For example, judgements have to be passed

3 in a standard language which is received pronunciation in any state.

4 There's also another thing, which is colloquial language, the language of

5 everyday conversations in everyday life, and this is the so-called

6 substandard speech. The standard form of a language is coloured or

7 peppered with the elements of local dialects. A judgement in Belgrade,

8 for example, in Novi Sad, or in Nis must be issued and printed in the

9 same standard language, and the judges who serve in these three cities

10 will use their substandard language, the languages of their own region

11 when they speak. The basis of those substandard languages is the

12 standard language, but it is coloured by some dialectal influences, and

13 that's how things are all over the world.

14 Q. Thank you, Professor. Just looking at this table here, we see

15 that you analysed four intercepts on -- well, relating to the 13th of

16 July, and we talked about the one at 1009 hours where it purports to be

17 that the person said "Beara speaking," and we saw the B/C/S version where

18 the word speaking or "govorim" doesn't appear. But with respect to these

19 four on the 13th, and let me just try to capture this for you, we know

20 the very next intercept - and I think the Prosecution takes the similar

21 position - they're not even claiming it's Mr. Beara. It's another fact

22 that they are, for whatever reason unimportant to you, trying to tie in

23 with our case, so we know that one is insignificant, at least for your

24 expertise and purposes.

25 The next one at 1945 on the 13th of July, the Prosecution has

Page 24741

1 taken a position that it is not Ljubisa Beara, so that's not related to

2 Mr. Beara, although the name "Ljubisa" appears on it as we've identified

3 three times.

4 The very next one, the Prosecution -- although I thought I had it

5 correct, the Prosecution now is taking the position that it is uncertain

6 who the Ljubisa is, so they can't even tell us whether it's Ljubisa

7 Beara. So out of the four on the 13th, only one is that the Prosecution

8 is alleging is against Mr. Beara, and we discussed that.

9 My question goes to the very next intercept, however, the 14th of

10 July, which is one intercept at 2102 hours. Now, I wants to show you

11 something that I didn't have a copy of, and that's the actual intercept

12 when the intercept operator was here who captured that conversation, and

13 he helped us out by identifying various marks or changes that he made in

14 his handwritten notes or manuscript, as you call it, of this purported

15 conversation. Now, if we could please have for you, Mr. Remetic, PIC 40

16 and also PIC 41, and it's split up into two pages, so forgive me for

17 that, but I think the main one we'll look at is PIC 41, but let's look at

18 both in -- for purposes of completeness because the Prosecution didn't

19 show you that, but they had a couple of questions on this intercept.

20 But let's see -- because you didn't read it -- their testimony, I

21 want you to see what he circled in terms of changes or alterations that

22 he may have made.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

24 MR. VANDERPUYE: I object to this line of inquiry. It is true

25 that I did cross-examine the witness with respect to this particular

Page 24742

1 intercept, but the question that was put to him was to identify the error

2 that he indicated in his report and nothing beyond that. So I think this

3 is well beyond the scope of cross-examination as concerns this particular

4 intercept.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Does the witness understand English? I would

6 imagine he does.

7 MR. OSTOJIC: A little bit I think, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. I would imagine I would prefer to discuss

9 this in his absence. Let me consult with my colleagues anyway.

10 [Trial Chamber confers]

11 JUDGE AGIUS: It's true that possibly does fall within the

12 parameters of a redirect, but on the other hand we believe that this

13 witness is not in a position to add anything to what we've heard already,

14 so we suggest you move to your next question.

15 MR. OSTOJIC: Fair enough, Mr. President.

16 Q. Sir, after now looking at this 14th and the one intercepted on

17 the 14th, and we will go back to your table, if possible - I know we just

18 switched from it - which is appendix 1. I know you have several of the

19 markings with respect to the three intercepts for the 15th and then one

20 other one.

21 Now, you fairly and objectively place on the two intercepts the

22 15th of July, 955 and 957. You put a positive sign for "participant

23 revealed himself or was revealed as Beara," correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Okay.

Page 24743

1 A. According to the operator, two of them actually said that he

2 introduced himself.

3 Q. And you're not taking any -- or you are not suggesting or trying

4 to determine whether the operators were truthful or honest or mistaken.

5 You just simply said the -- and you took their word for it, correct, and

6 therefore you put a positive sign with respect to those two at 955 and

7 957? Wait, wait.

8 MR. VANDERPUYE: I object to the question. It is leading, and I

9 would ask my colleague to rephrase it.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment because we were doing something else at

11 the time.

12 Yes, it is leading. Definitely, Mr. Ostojic.

13 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Mr. President. Fair enough.

14 Q. Sir, can you just tell us how you came up with the conclusion

15 which rendered the opinion that you place a positive sign on this first

16 category for the intercepts at 955 and 957 of the 15th of July, 1995?

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's hear what Mr. Vanderpuye has to say.

18 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, this was asked and answered

19 already on direct, and I don't think it's appropriate at this stage in

20 redirect examination.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's come to an end, please, Mr. Ostojic. Let's

22 conclude.

23 MR. OSTOJIC: Is he allowed to answer the question?

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, of course, of course. No, no, of course. You

25 proceed with your next question. It has been suggested by Mr. Vanderpuye

Page 24744

1 this question has already been answered.

2 MR. OSTOJIC: You know, if he can cite the page because the Court

3 -- in my attempt to try to get through this yesterday, we didn't cover

4 the 15th, with all due respect to my colleague, but I would be happy if

5 he could cite for me the page where he claims I covered this part. He

6 covered it in his cross-examination. I think I have a right on redirect,

7 but I'll be patient with the Court, obviously, since you've been more

8 than patient with me. If the Court wants me to move to another date or

9 intercept, I'll kindly do so. I just want to know that if they are going

10 to tell me that I cited it yesterday or the day before, that they should

11 at least provide me with that page, which I can assure them I did not.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

13 [Trial Chamber confers]

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

15 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Could you provide Mr. Ostojic with the reference;

17 and you, Mr. Ostojic, is this question meant to open the way for further

18 question on the same issue or not?

19 MR. OSTOJIC: I believe not, Your Honour. But I'll move on to

20 the 16th. They can read it, and if he can come back to me on that, I

21 would highly appreciate it.

22 Q. Looking at the 16th of July, sir, and I'm sorry we're jumping

23 around, but the 16th of July at 1111 hours. And my learned friend can

24 interrupt me at any time if he finds it in the last two days. At 1111

25 hours, we talk about this involved the word "triage" and your definition

Page 24745

1 and obviously the intercept that follows several hours later with this

2 female called Jelena and this other Djurdjic. But this one at 1111

3 hours, you also put a positive sign there.

4 My question to you with respect to this intercept, the only

5 identity that you found in connection with this is that, one, the

6 operator suggests that it's Ljubo Beara at the top, a person is asking

7 for Beara, and then someone answers with a C designation "Ljubo." Is

8 that correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Okay. Did the Prosecution since they carry the burden of proof

11 and want you to look at statements, did they give you the testimony of

12 the other participants of this conversation such as this gentleman

13 Cerovic or Turkula? Did they provide that to you to see who actually was

14 involved in this?

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

16 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, I can't see any conceivable basis

17 for a question like this. Its legality is, I think my colleague well

18 knows, is completely -- it is a completely inappropriate question; and,

19 as my colleague well knows -- as my colleague well knows, we provided him

20 with information directly related to this intercept. And I can go into

21 private session if need be in order to explain it further.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: I think I -- we don't need to do that. The

23 question can be divided into different parts, and certainly the first

24 part is not tenable. It is not acceptable. I mean, but the second part

25 of the question could stand, and you could rephrase it by asking the

Page 24746

1 witness what he was provided by the Prosecution, and leave it at that,

2 Mr. Ostojic.

3 MR. OSTOJIC:

4 Q. Mr. Remetic, did you hear the honourable President just now? Can

5 you just tell us what you were provided with in connection with this

6 conversation, whether you were provided any statements or testimony with

7 the other participants?

8 A. I did not receive any material whatsoever on this issue, no

9 statements. I think that today I have been asked that question, and I'm

10 already tired after three days.

11 Q. I appreciate that, sir.

12 A. And I was asked whether this was a conversation with Cerovic.

13 Supposedly Colonel Cerovic in this purported conversation was the one who

14 identified Mr. Beara at 1111, and based on that, I put the plus mark.

15 As for the 15th of July, I put the signs based on the data

16 provided by the operators. Whether they were right or not, it wasn't up

17 to me to say. I also completely questioned the credibility and veracity

18 of these three conversations that were put together afterwards. It is

19 written there, the name Beara, and that is why I put the positive mark.

20 Q. Thank you, and I apologise. I know it's taking a little longer,

21 Mr. Remetic. I just have a couple of more questions. I want to go back

22 to my learned friend yesterday -- or today was talking about a section in

23 your report on page 14 where you state "infallible command." And I think

24 I understand what they're trying to suggest, but let me go and look at

25 that section, which is in the middle of the paragraph. And again, I

Page 24747

1 think I objected, and I wanted to put it in a little better context. If

2 we could look at the sentence before that because that's what I think is

3 relevant to keep it in context. You state as follows, and it's on page

4 14, and you state by saying this: "The situation today shows that

5 Mr. Beara has definitely not forgotten the Cakavian dialect spoken in

6 Split, and he is furthermore aware of the distinctive (distinguishing)

7 relations between Ekavian, Ikavian, and Ijekavian, Bosnian, Montenegrin,

8 Serbian dialects and pronunciations..." Then you go on to say that in

9 your opinion he has an infallible command of those three.

10 You're telling us -- tell us what you mean by that. Are you

11 saying that he was able to switch and he either knew he was being

12 listened to over these telephone conversations that they purport or

13 allege against Mr. Beara? What do you mean by that, that he is aware and

14 has these distinctive and distinguishing relations between the three

15 dialogues?

16 A. Here are two questions, basically. First, let us clarify what

17 the command of distinctions mean. If you have a person who speaks five

18 languages but uses only one but he does know how to say the same phrase

19 in other languages, he is using this colloquial Split dialect, although

20 he's aware how these words would be pronounced in his native Sarajevo.

21 He must know that. He would know how to -- these words would be

22 pronounced in Serbia because that is where his family lives and where he

23 spent some time. He had some fellow officers and colleagues from that

24 region. That means that he has the command of distinctions. I didn't

25 hear him speak fluently Ijekavian or Ekavian, but he is aware of the

Page 24748

1 differences.

2 The second part of your question is whether he did that

3 deliberately or whether he knew that he was being listened in. Well, I

4 think that if he knew that he was being listened in, he wouldn't be

5 involved in any conversations, I suppose. This is a linguistic analysis.

6 If someone is aware that they are being taped, they will probably try to

7 avoid any conversation.

8 However, in these intercepts, I did take into consideration one

9 more thing. The manner of speech of the collocutor, could it be that he

10 adapted his speech to the person's dialect at the other end of the line?

11 I even found things like -- and I think it was on the 1st of August where

12 in the purported speech by Beara, the predominant dialect is Ekavian, and

13 his collocutor speaks with some Ijekavian dialect.

14 And also, something that could be of importance. You asked me

15 why I did not cite the opinion of the OTP. In my working version here,

16 you can see that I added in pencil, The OTP thinks that this is the Major

17 Ljubo Bojanovic, the duty officer of the brigade. Obviously, I received

18 this piece of information after I finished my job. The OTP wasn't clear

19 on who this person was, and this is what I added afterwards and after I

20 submitted the text on the 18th of April.

21 Q. I just have a couple of more, I think maybe even one question.

22 In trying to determine whether the dialect -- or the conversations that

23 were captured purportedly relating to Mr. Beara and seeing whether we can

24 attribute that to Mr. Beara, we looked at the intercepts themselves. We

25 showed you, I think, although disclosed last month, the conversation that

Page 24749

1 the Prosecution had with Mr. Beara in October of 2004, so approximately

2 four years ago. You interviewed him, so we looked at his dialect after

3 the events. But we also showed you the audio and the transcripts of the

4 conversation that Mr. Beara had immediately prior to July 1995 and

5 immediately after August of 1995. Did you see any attempts by Mr. Beara

6 to either mask or to try to cover or hide his speech pattern or dialect?

7 A. No, I didn't notice any such thing.

8 Q. Okay. You told us in the beginning of your session on Monday

9 that there are basically three things that a person cannot hide, and that

10 is I think cough, love, and your dialect?

11 A. Yes, and the dialect.

12 Q. I remembered it. I remembered it. Now, did you find any

13 evidence at all in any of these conversations that you reviewed? Did you

14 find any evidence of anyone trying to hide or mask their dialect? I

15 won't ask you about the other two.

16 A. Can you please repeat the question. I'm already tired.

17 Q. It's the last question, and I truly -- we all appreciate it.

18 With respect -- did you find any evidence having looked at all the -- or

19 the documents that you reviewed, did you find any evidence of Mr. Beara

20 trying to hide or cover up his dialect?

21 A. Are you referring to the 18 transcripts or what I listened over

22 the weekend or all of that together?

23 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...

24 A. I could never trace any intentional attempt on his part to hide.

25 In the transcript that I heard, one of those here, for example, two

Page 24750

1 forms, like "sta se dogadja," were sufficient for me to link them to

2 Beara as I did with the one dated the 1st of August. And if you allow me

3 to say something at the end with relation to individual cases and words

4 that we spent most of the time on, practice and my personal experience

5 shows, both the one in my family and in my work, that people who are not

6 very literate and, also, people who are highly educated intellectuals,

7 after they have completed their military service they retain certain

8 forms and terms and words that they continue using throughout their

9 lives, even dating back to the era of Austria-Hungaria when they served

10 in the Austria-Hungarian army in the German language, they retained the

11 words such as "zuruck." Even from illiterate people, they would instead

12 of get up, say "steh auf," which is a German form, and this is what was

13 picked up during their military service.

14 I know of a case of the man when the US was providing aid to

15 Europe after the Second World War, and they sent aid per capita, and many

16 children were born in that period. And one man was giving the name of

17 his children, and when he came to the last or the tenth child he said

18 "fertig," which in German means "that's finished." Later on he was asked

19 when is Fertig starting school because he thought that "fertig" was the

20 name.

21 My father would always say turn to the left, which is something

22 remnant from his army days. So these details that come from the military

23 experience stay there forever, and I think that we wasted a lot of time

24 on them quite unnecessarily.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: I think so too. Is that the end of your redirect?

Page 24756

1 Nikolic, please introduce yourself in case you haven't met the witness

2 already.

3 MR. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

4 WITNESS: SVETLANA GAVRILOVIC

5 [Witness answered through interpreter]

6 Examination by Mr. Nikolic:

7 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mrs. Gavrilovic.

8 A. Good afternoon.

9 Q. We have already met, but this is the official part of your

10 testimony. I'm going to introduce myself and give you some guidelines

11 for today.

12 I'm Predrag Nikolic. I represent Mr. Ljubisa Beara, and I will

13 examine today on behalf of the Defence team. Before I ask you to

14 introduce yourself, I would like to tell you that we are both being

15 interpreted, and we would like to give the interpreters time to interpret

16 us correctly, which means that you should wait before providing your

17 answer to allow the interpreters to do their job properly. Could you

18 please introduce yourself for the record.

19 A. My name is Svetlana Gavrilovic. I was born in Belgrade, and I

20 reside in Belgrade. What else am I supposed to say to you?

21 Q. Let's take it slowly. It is customary for every witness to tell

22 us about their educational background.

23 A. I completed primary school, grammar school, and then I completed

24 my university education at the department of defectology,

25 oligophrenological department for mentally handicapped children, and

Page 24757

1 later it just so happened that I directed my profession towards beauty

2 treatments, cosmetics.

3 Q. Thank you. In the course of your profession, did you ever engage

4 in your profession at all?

5 A. Yes, for a year, and after that one year my husband signed a

6 contract with a Yugoslav company that had operations in Baghdad in Iraq.

7 He went there, and since it was difficult for me to engage my profession

8 proper because I did not speak the language, I decided to take up another

9 profession that would be marketable anywhere in the world. That's how I

10 became a beautician, and I continued doing that if even if -- after I

11 returned from Iraq.

12 Q. Mrs. Gavrilovic, when were you in Iraq?

13 A. We were in Iraq from the end of 1975 to 1980.

14 Q. Upon your return from Iraq, where did you reside?

15 A. We resided in Belgrade, and I continued working as a beautician

16 because I liked the job and I didn't want to change it.

17 Q. You know Ljubisa Beara and his family?

18 A. Yes, I know them. I've known them since 1992.

19 Q. Under what circumstances and how did you meet them?

20 A. My girlfriend from Belgrade socialized with the Beara family, and

21 since their younger son had problems with adolescent complexion she

22 called me one day and asked me if I could treat the son of her friends,

23 and that's how I first met the younger son who came to see me for his

24 problems, and then I met his father, mother, ie., Mr. Beara and his wife

25 Nada.

Page 24758

1 Q. How often did you visit each other, or rather, a chance

2 encounter, did it later on grow into a friendship?

3 A. Yes. It became a true friendship because my husband had a lot in

4 common with Mr. Beara. My husband was a keen model maker, and Mr.

5 Ljubisa Beara is also a model maker. He -- Mr. Beara made models of sail

6 ships, and they had a lot in common and they had a lot to talk about.

7 Both Mr. Beara and his wife are well educated people, and sometimes when

8 we would visit them and especially the first time we visited them, I saw

9 a library full of books. And since I am a keen reader, I asked them if I

10 could borrow one of their books to read and he said, yes, of course. I

11 chose a few books that I was interested in, and then he took a book from

12 a shelf with little cards, and then he said, okay, I have a list of all

13 of my books, I will make a note of your name and date so that you know

14 that you will return the books. I found this very surprising, but he

15 explained that he always does that with anybody who borrows his books.

16 In other words, we always had lot to talk about.

17 Q. So he was a good person for socialising. Can you tell me where

18 Mr. Ljubisa Beara's family reside?

19 A. They reside in Kosovska Street in Belgrade.

20 Q. You also mentioned their younger son?

21 A. Yes. His name is Branco, who was my client.

22 Q. And what was Mrs. Beara's name?

23 A. Nada.

24 Q. In addition to the issues that you had in common and topics that

25 you had in common, did you have any others that brought you closer

Page 24759

1 together?

2 A. Well, the children were very interesting children. The older

3 son, who is a teacher of English, and his wife, who is teacher of Serbian

4 in grammar school, we always joked around; our conversations were always

5 pleasant, and Nada is a good cook, and she always served good food, and

6 so on and so forth.

7 Q. You said just a moment ago that you met them towards the end of

8 1992?

9 A. Yes, thereabouts. The end of 1992 or the beginning of 1992. I

10 wouldn't be able to tell you correctly, but thereabouts.

11 Q. So if I'm not mistaken, this is when you started socialising?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. You know that at that time the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina was

14 already on?

15 A. Yes.

16 MR. McCLOSKEY: Objection. I think leading. On this topic, I

17 think, and these date issues, any sort of leading questions about dates

18 and times and places is absolutely off limits.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: That is understandable because at the end of the

20 day the bottom line in relation to the witness, the testimony of this

21 witness is what happened on a particular day. So no direct questions,

22 please. No leading questions.

23 MR. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I

24 thought that it was a generally -- or notorious fact what happened in

25 Yugoslavia and that we were all aware of that.

Page 24760

1 MR. McCLOSKEY: I object to these kind of things. What is and

2 what is not, this is -- I don't think counsel is doing it on purpose, but

3 I think we should ask -- encourage him not to.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: I also don't think counsel is doing it on purpose,

5 but I think he now understands. He has got to follow a certain practice,

6 a certain line, and we'll try to stick to that.

7 If you want to discuss further with Mr. Ostojic, we'll give you a

8 couple of minutes.

9 MR. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] No, thank you, Your Honour. I will

10 proceed.

11 Q. Madam, during that period of time or after your initial encounter

12 with the Beara family, how often did you see them?

13 A. I wouldn't be able to tell you exactly, but I would say that it

14 was always on the occasion of some celebration, an anniversary,

15 children's birthday parties, our own birthday parties, religious

16 holidays, mostly things of that kind.

17 Q. You mentioned birthday parties. Does this mean -- or rather, did

18 you know the birthdays of Ljubisa Beara and others?

19 A. I knew that he was born on the 14th of July because I was also

20 born in July, and we would very often joke about that, and we would say

21 that we were all -- both born under the same sign of Capricorn [as

22 interpreted] who looks strong from the outside, and that's how I know

23 when he was born.

24 Q. I apologise. What is the horoscope sign of you and Ljubisa

25 Beara?

Page 24761

1 A. Cancer.

2 Q. This was just for the transcript, to clarify a mistake in the

3 transcript.

4 Did you meet every year on his birthday or not?

5 A. It depended on when he was there, whether we were invited.

6 Whenever he was and we were invited, then we would go there.

7 Q. When was it the last time that you met for his birthday?

8 A. It was the 14th of July, 1995.

9 Q. How do you remember that it was in 1995?

10 A. I remember because it was a so-called silver wedding anniversary

11 of my husband and me. That's the 25th anniversary, which is a

12 significant anniversary in our country, the 25th anniversary of wedding.

13 This is something that you remember. We got married in 1970 on the 4th

14 of January, and we wanted to mark the 25th anniversary of our marriage by

15 taking a trip on the Orient Express. When the weather got better in the

16 spring or in the summer, when we inquired about the price of that

17 journey, unfortunately we had to give up on that idea because we had

18 realised that we wouldn't be able to finance that.

19 And on the 14th of July when the Bearas -- when -- Mira and Toma

20 actually invited us because Ljubisa Beara had come to their place. They

21 invited us, their place, and on that particular evening we spoke about

22 our 25th wedding anniversary and the journey that we were supposed to

23 take on the Orient Express that did not come through.

24 Q. Can you please slow down a little, and since we are talking about

25 this birthday party, you mentioned the names of the persons who invited

Page 24762

1 you. Could you please repeat those.

2 A. They were Toma Bozinovic and Mira.

3 Q. Where did you meet?

4 A. We met at Toma and Mira's house in Belgrade in Sumatovacka

5 Street. There's where they lived.

6 Q. Can you please tell me, who was there?

7 A. Obviously the host, Toma and Mira were there; my husband and I;

8 Ljubisa Beara and his wife Nada; and only briefly Dr. Djordje, who was

9 Toma's mother's personal physician. He dropped by to bring some

10 medicines. He only stayed for one drink. He was in a haste on a house

11 call to another visit. That's why he had to leave so early.

12 Q. When did you arrive at the house on that day, at Mira and Toma's

13 house?

14 A. It was in the evening. I had worked, and my husband, when they

15 invited us, went there around 8 o'clock, and I had some things to finish

16 because I had a complicated procedure and I could not leave earlier;

17 therefore, I left the office around 9, and that's when I went to their

18 house.

19 Q. Could you please remember, given the details that you mentioned

20 around your anniversary, was your anniversary a topic of the

21 conversation?

22 A. Yes. We talked about the Orient Express, I about our wish to

23 take a journey on that train for our 25th anniversary, but we did not

24 have enough money. Yes, we spoke about that. Toma joked and said there

25 was a nearly opened newly opened restaurant in new Belgrade that looks

Page 24763

1 like a carriage of the Orient Express train, so you can go there and just

2 imagine that you are sitting on the actual train. I remember that remark

3 of his very well.

4 Q. Mrs. Gavrilovic, did you know that Ljubisa had come from the

5 frontline?

6 A. Yes, I knew that, but I did not know in what capacity. I never

7 asked him them that. I was not interested in that. I never wished to

8 know about that.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. McCloskey.

10 MR. McCLOSKEY: It's already there but --

11 JUDGE AGIUS: It's a classical, typical direct question, leading

12 question, that you should avoid.

13 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, can we also have one brief moment

14 outside the presence of the witness.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Madam Gavrilovic, do you speak English?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A bit, not well. No.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: No, I think she needs to --

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not sufficiently well enough.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: We'll have a break now. You can leave the

20 courtroom. We'll reconvene in 25 minutes' time. Madam usher, if you

21 could accompany the witness first, please.

22 [The witness stands down]

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. McCloskey.

24 MR. McCLOSKEY: I just want to give you an indication of what I

25 have on this witness in terms of a summary, that this witness knows Beara

Page 24773

1 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Nothing.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Sarapa.

3 MR. SARAPA: No questions, thank you.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. McCloskey.

5 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President.

6 Cross-examination by Mr. McCloskey:

7 Q. Good afternoon, Ms. Gavrilovic.

8 A. Good afternoon.

9 Q. My name is Peter McCloskey. I'm working for the Office of the

10 Prosecutor. Can you tell me when you first started thinking back about

11 this alleged birthday party?

12 A. Mr. Stanic contacted me in Belgrade. He introduced himself as a

13 lawyer on the Beara Defence team, and he asked me whether I would be

14 willing if I remembered the date, the 14th of July, whether I would be

15 able to talk to him, whether I would be willing to testify about that,

16 and since that moment I've been thinking about that. This was maybe two

17 months ago or thereabouts.

18 Q. Okay. So about two months ago Mr. Stanic came up to you and

19 asked you specifically about the 14th of July?

20 A. Yes. He asked me whether I remembered the 14th of July, 1995,

21 where I was, and what I did on that date, and that is when I remembered

22 precisely because of our wedding anniversary, Ljubisa's birthday, the

23 whole story. I did remember that on that evening I attended Ljubisa's

24 birthday party.

25 Q. So you told him that then and there in response to his question

Page 24774

1 about 14 July?

2 A. Yes, that's right.

3 Q. So after about 13 years' time, a person asks you a specific date

4 and you are able without talking to anyone, referring to anything,

5 remember a birthday party?

6 A. Yes, because of my silver wedding anniversary and the Orient

7 Express, because we joked about it and we discussed our failure to go on

8 this trip.

9 Q. I understand anyone would remember their 25th wedding anniversary

10 year and date, of course, and might, of course, remember any big plans

11 they had to take that date or year, certainly. But I don't see how you

12 having those memories can go back 13 years and remember off the top of

13 your head a conversation at a birthday party about the Orient Express;

14 but you did that, no problem, huh?

15 A. Yes, because I said to Ljubisa maybe too rashly without thinking

16 how handsome he looked, and then I apologized to Nada for saying that,

17 and that is how I remember it.

18 Q. What was his hair like, Mr. Beara's?

19 A. He had grey hair. Greyish hair, but he had more grey hairs than

20 dark hairs.

21 Q. Well, was it white or grey?

22 A. Perhaps greyish white.

23 Q. And how long was it?

24 A. Short. Normal short hair. I mean, it wasn't long. He wasn't

25 bald, but he had short hair.

Page 24775

1 Q. Can you see anybody here who -- can you just tell us roughly, and

2 I don't know want you to worry about Mr. Beara. We know time goes on for

3 all of us, but anybody here whose hair looks roughly the same length at

4 Mr. Beara's was at the time?

5 A. This gentleman over there.

6 Q. The fellow that's smiling, Mr. Krkvic?

7 A. Yes, yes.

8 Q. Okay. Thank you for that. And after 13 years you remember his

9 shirt?

10 A. Yes. I am a very perceptive person.

11 Q. How do you know his birthday was on the specific date of 14 July?

12 I'm told Cancer is between June 22nd and July 22nd, but you remembered

13 that right off. Is that right?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Were you told that was his birthday before you said it, or did

16 you say it first?

17 A. No. I said it because the 14th of July is the date of the fall

18 of Bastille. My husband finished his secondary school in France, and he

19 always used to tell us how in France this date is celebrated, and every

20 14th of July I would tease him by saying, oh, this is one of your youth

21 holidays and celebrations. Probably, that's what prompted my memory.

22 Q. Well, I think -- I don't know about Serbia, but certainly

23 Bastille Day is remembered. But the 14th of July, how is it you connect

24 the 14th of July to Mr. Beara, 13 years after the fact or before?

25 A. I made a connection earlier because as I said, every 14th of July

Page 24776

1 ever since I married my husband I used to tease him on that day by saying

2 that that was his holiday, so we joked about this, and the coincidence

3 was that it was Ljubisa's birthday on the same date.

4 Q. And what other birthday parties had you been to about -- to

5 Mr. Beara?

6 A. That was the last one. I may have been on one occasion before

7 that.

8 Q. Tell us about that one before that.

9 A. Well, it was in their house. Their children came too. We were

10 sitting and talking. We talked about various things, mostly about the

11 books we read because my husband and Mr. Beara were involved in a

12 discussion about their hobbies, about the material, where they could

13 purchase it, et cetera, so basically this is what we talked about.

14 Q. And what year was that?

15 A. It may have been in 1993.

16 Q. You don't know?

17 A. Well, we met in 1992, in late 1992, early 1993, so that was the

18 first year of our acquaintanceship.

19 Q. So you are not sure about that birthday. What date was that

20 party for that other birthday, the one previous?

21 A. Probably the 14th when his birthday was.

22 Q. So you don't know the date?

23 A. The 14th. The 14th of July. That's his birthday, on the 14th of

24 July.

25 Q. Well, ma'am, you said probably the 14th of July. Now you are

Page 24777

1 sure it was the 14th of July?

2 A. No. What I'm saying is that his birthday is on the 14th of July.

3 Whether it was in -- whether in 1993 it was celebrated precisely on the

4 14th of July, I cannot remember exactly, but that was the reason for us

5 to get together and celebrate his birthday with a couple of drinks.

6 Q. And that's the same for 1995, isn't it? You remember getting

7 together for a birthday, but you don't remember what date in particular?

8 A. I remember exactly that in 1995 it was the 14th of July, and the

9 reason for me to remember that is my wedding anniversary, and what my

10 husband and I wanted to give to each other as a present, that is, a trip

11 on the Orient Express, and that is why I remember that it was on the 14th

12 of July in 1995.

13 Q. What was the date of your wedding anniversary?

14 A. Our wedding anniversary was on the 4th of January, but on the

15 14th of July we discussed our 25th anniversary. That evening, we talked

16 about the Orient Express and the 25th wedding anniversary.

17 Q. The fact that you had a wedding anniversary on the -- January

18 somehow makes you connect with precisely the 14th of July?

19 A. Yes, because when I noticed that Ljubisa was looking handsome and

20 well dressed, we started making jokes about that. Then we started

21 talking about marriages, about their wedding, about Ljubisa's and Nada

22 wedding. Then we moved to our wedding, and that is brought to the

23 subject of our 25th anniversary and how we had wanted to go, of course,

24 not in January. We wanted to go when the weather got better, and that is

25 how this conversation started.

Page 24778

1 Q. And what conversations did you have on the previous birthday, the

2 one that you think might be 1992 or 1993?

3 A. It was in 1993.

4 Q. Now, you are sure?

5 A. Well, I cannot remember any specific topic. I cannot remember

6 exactly. We talked about general topics that we always discussed. We

7 made jokes, told jokes, how life was passing, how we were getting older,

8 and just the usual stuff.

9 Q. What was Mr. Beara wearing during that first birthday?

10 A. Since it was in their house, he was casually dressed in a

11 T-shirt. It was warm. We were sitting on the balcony, and he had a

12 T-shirt and a pair of jeans or some casual trousers.

13 Q. Sleeveless T-shirt or one with sleeves?

14 A. The one with sleeves.

15 Q. What colour?

16 A. White one with some logo on it. I don't remember what it read,

17 but there was something written on it.

18 Q. And was it one of those V-necks or --

19 A. It was close to his neck.

20 Q. How about his shoes?

21 A. Slippers. Slippers. Summer slippers.

22 Q. What kind of slippers? What colour?

23 A. Dark blue.

24 Q. How about on his birthday on the 14th of July, 1995? What kind

25 of shoes was he wearing?

Page 24779

1 A. He had dark shoes, black shoes.

2 Q. When was the first time that Ljubisa Beara came over to your

3 house to fix something after your husband died?

4 A. I can't give you the exact date, but this may have been maybe

5 three or four months later. I don't know exactly.

6 Q. And what did he do?

7 A. He fixed my iron.

8 Q. And what was he wearing then?

9 A. He was wearing a navy coat that he took off, and then he remained

10 wearing a shirt, a sweater on top of the shirt.

11 Q. And the 1995 birthday, what day of the week was that?

12 A. I don't remember. I don't know what day it was.

13 Q. Do you work on Sunday? Did you work on Sunday in July?

14 A. Yes. Since my salon is in my house, in my apartment, I will

15 work. If I have cases that require daily therapy, then I will work even

16 on Sundays.

17 Q. So did you work on the Sunday before or after the -- well, the

18 birthday? Before, after, or on the birthday?

19 A. On the day of the birthday I did work, but I can't remember

20 whether it was Sunday or what other day, and I did work both the Sunday

21 before and the Sunday after that.

22 Q. How about Saturday?

23 A. Well, again, yes, if the therapy so requires. If you have to see

24 a person for ten consecutive days, and there are such treatments, then

25 yes.

Page 24780

1 Q. I think -- I'm told that the 14th of July, 1995, was on a Friday,

2 but you didn't know that?

3 A. No, I didn't, no. I didn't know that it was Friday. I didn't

4 know that.

5 Q. So you told us that you had a big job that day at your beauty

6 shop. How about that Saturday? Did you work in your beauty shop the

7 Saturday after the party?

8 A. Yes. Again, that was a treatment that finished on the Saturday.

9 That was a treatment that went from the previous Saturday to the Saturday

10 next week. It's a treatment with antibiotics and some other agents that

11 have to be applied every day if you want them to work.

12 Q. And where had Mr. Beara been prior to you seeing him at this

13 party?

14 A. I don't know where he was. I know that on that day when Mira and

15 Toma had invited us that he was at their place. They told us he would be

16 there, and he indeed was, and I don't know about the day before.

17 Q. Well, what did Mr. Stanic tell you about that?

18 A. Mr. Stanic just asked me if I could remember the 14th of July,

19 1995, what I did on that day, and then I told him what I did. I told him

20 that in the evening of that day Mira and Toma had invited us to come to

21 their place because Nada and Ljubisa were there. It was Ljubisa's

22 birthday, and they invited us to celebrate Ljubisa birthday together with

23 them.

24 Q. How long did you spend with Mr. Stanic a couple of months ago?

25 A. Maybe half an hour, 40 minutes, not more than that. He contacted

Page 24781

1 me first, asked me whether he could come to my place to talk to me. He

2 came. This is what he asked me. I told him what I knew, and that's all.

3 Q. When was the next time you spoke to anybody from the Beara team?

4 A. It was again Mr. Stanic who called me and asked me if I would be

5 willing to repeat my story publicly in court, everything that I had

6 previously told him, and I said that I would, why not, and that was that.

7 Q. When was that that he contacted you?

8 A. You mean the second time around when he asked me --

9 Q. Yes.

10 A. That was a month ago, roughly.

11 Q. And after speaking to him the first time a couple of months ago,

12 can you give us a date when you actually first spoke to him?

13 A. No, I can't. I can't give you the date. I can't remember. I

14 don't know the date.

15 Q. Do you know the month?

16 A. Well, it may have been in April, in the month of April, March or

17 April when I met with Mr. Stanic, thereabouts.

18 Q. What day?

19 A. I don't know. I really don't. I did not consider this date

20 worth retaining, remembering at all.

21 Q. Well, I know in answering that question you kind of looked at me

22 and smiled as if, how am I going -- supposed to remember that date,

23 right?

24 A. Yes, right. I really don't remember that date.

25 Q. Did Mr. Stanic tell you what your testimony was going to be

Page 24782

1 about? I mean, what Mr. Beara's case was about?

2 A. No. He asked me specifically whether I remembered what I had

3 done on the 14th of July, on that day, that evening in 1995, and I told

4 him what I have just repeated to you here, and he never told me anything

5 about Mr. Beara or anything to that effect. Mr. Stanic never mentioned

6 anything to that effect. He only asked me if I remembered anything that

7 happened on the 14th of July, and if I did, what it was. And he also

8 told me that he was on Beara's defence team. That's how he introduced

9 himself, and then he asked me about the 14th of July. I told him what I

10 did, and he said, very well, then, and then he asked me whether I would

11 be willing to repeat that if necessary, and I said that I would. There

12 you go. That was that.

13 Q. What did you think he meant when he said the Beara Defence team?

14 Defence for what, as far as you knew?

15 A. I didn't know anything at all, but I assumed that that date must

16 be important for Ljubisa Beara's defence.

17 Q. Defence of what?

18 A. I don't know. I knew that Ljubisa Beara was here in The Hague.

19 I knew that, so I assumed that it was to defend him against some charges,

20 and I really don't know what charges have been brought against him. I

21 don't know this to this very day.

22 Q. Mass murder, genocide? Doesn't ring a bell?

23 A. Well, I know that. I know that from the media, but I don't know

24 that Beara participated in that. I really don't know because we never

25 discussed that. Whenever we got together before the event, after the

Page 24783

1 event, during that time, we never talked about that, or at least this was

2 not something that came up in the presence of us women. We never spoke

3 about that.

4 Q. So this July 14th, 1995, alleged party, this subject of

5 Srebrenica never showed up despite it being blasted all over the

6 airwaves, all over Belgrade, and everywhere else?

7 A. No. If any of the men wanted to raise the issue, Beara would

8 always be the one to say, please, let's not discuss that; we are here to

9 party, to celebrate my birthday; don't ask me about that. So we never

10 discussed it.

11 Q. Well, who brought it up?

12 A. My husband was prone to asking questions of this sort, but

13 Ljubisa Beara never wanted to discuss that or at least not when I was

14 present. I don't know what men discussed in private, but in front of us

15 women they never brought up the issue because Ljubisa would not allow

16 anybody to bring up the matter in front of us women.

17 Q. So what was brought up about it by anybody, women to women, man

18 to women, without Beara, about Srebrenica that night?

19 A. Nothing on that particular day or on that particular evening. It

20 never came up. The issue of war never came up.

21 Q. What about having to go back to the war? Sometimes that gets

22 mentioned during these times.

23 A. You are asking me about that particular evening, the 14th of

24 July, or in general terms?

25 Q. 14th July, 1995.

Page 24784

1 A. No, no. Nothing was said about that on that particular evening.

2 Q. So a couple of months ago, maybe March or April, Mr. Stanic comes

3 up to you and asks you about these -- this important topic; you know that

4 Mr. Beara is in The Hague; you know about genocide and mass murder, but

5 you cannot tell me the date of this -- that he contacted you, Stanic?

6 You can't even tell me the month?

7 A. No, I can't. I really can't.

8 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, I'm almost through, but if I could

9 review my materials and see if I have any other questions. I notice it's

10 break time.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. No, no, I was going to invite you to finish,

12 but having heard that I will give you the opportunity, obviously.

13 Madam, we haven't finished. You will need to return again

14 tomorrow. It will be for a short time, and then you will be free to go.

15 So madam usher can escort you out of the courtroom.

16 We stand adjourned until tomorrow morning at 9.00. Thank you.

17 [The witness stands down]

18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at

19 1.46 p.m. to be reconvened on the Thursday, the 28th day of

20 August 2008, at 9.00 a.m.