1 Wednesday, 25 July 2001

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.37 a.m.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Sir Ivan.

7 MR. LAWRENCE: May it please Your Honour. I wonder if this is an

8 opportune moment for me to seek a ruling from the Chamber on the matter of

9 disclosure. We, on behalf of Kolundzija, submit that not all the matters

10 which ought to have been disclosed to us have been disclosed. The rule is

11 set out in Rule 68 of the Rules, and reads that:

12 "The Prosecutor shall, as soon as practicable, disclose to the

13 Defence the existence of evidence known to the Prosecutor which in any way

14 tends to suggest the innocence or mitigate the guilt of the accused or may

15 affect the credibility of Prosecution witnesses."

16 We have reason to believe that the Prosecution has or may have

17 some such evidence which it hasn't disclosed. For example, evidence about

18 Keraterm, such as lists of personnel, their pay and their status; work

19 schedules from Prijedor II for 1991 as well as 1992; Crisis Staff

20 documents referring to Keraterm; military documents referring to Keraterm;

21 other police documents referring to Keraterm, especially documents signed

22 by Simo Drljaca in the Prosecution's possession; all statements from Room

23 3 detainees that they've taken; signed statements from possible

24 Prosecution witnesses of which we have so far received only unsigned

25 statements; evidence of another Dragan Kolundzija at Omarska, which might

1 conceivably have some bearing on the misidentification of Kole by the one

2 Keraterm witness who has alleged that Kolundzija was a party to beatings

3 and killings, Witness N; and there is other possible relevant information.

4 Your Honours, it's apparent from the evidence in the Omarska case,

5 which is the Prosecutor against Mikic and others, which we have now had

6 some limited opportunity to see, that there ought to be available for

7 Keraterm similar evidence as was available in that case about command

8 structure, and that if such evidence does not exist, then that of itself

9 may show that there was no similar command structure for Keraterm as with

10 Omarska and that the evidence adduced by the Prosecution against

11 Kolundzija may reveal no more than influence exerted by shift leaders,

12 falling short of command responsibility exerted by shift leaders, about

13 which this Chamber will need to be satisfied. And I'm not sure that the

14 point has yet got home to the Prosecution that the absence of a line of

15 evidence which they know has been adduceable in Omarska may itself have

16 significance for the case of Keraterm.

17 Furthermore, Your Honours, we now know that the Prosecution

18 considers that it may possibly have more evidence than it has revealed,

19 because my learned friend Mr. Ostojic yesterday saw the Prosecution team

20 and was told that an attempt would be made to look further for

21 information, provided that the Defence reciprocally hand to the

22 Prosecution any signed statements we may have of any witnesses --

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Sir Ivan, let me interrupt you. Is your

24 submission going to be very much longer?

25 MR. LAWRENCE: No.

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Because what I intend to do is not to call on the

2 Prosecutor at this stage, but at a more appropriate time during the day.

3 So if you're not going to be much longer, then --

4 MR. LAWRENCE: I will be very short, Your Honour. I've taken this

5 opportunity so that the Prosecution team can have, as it were, the rest of

6 the day, if they want to, to proceed on the matter, whereas if I had left

7 it until after the evidence, it might have been too late for that time to

8 have been used, and I have discussed this with my learned friends, whose

9 case is proceeding.

10 The point that I'm making is that the Prosecution, according to my

11 learned friend Mr. Ostojic, said they would be prepared to look further,

12 provided that the Defence showed the Prosecution any signed statements we

13 may have of any potential witnesses, whether or not we propose to call

14 them in this case, and instructions that we have received from our

15 client. That is his proof of evidence.

16 JUDGE MAY: The instructions that you have received from your

17 client?

18 MR. LAWRENCE: Certainly.

19 JUDGE MAY: They must be privileged.

20 MR. LAWRENCE: Precisely. The Rules of the Tribunal certainly do

21 not, we respectfully submit, require any such reciprocity, and we, as

22 common law lawyers, whose system the Tribunal's Rules largely draws upon,

23 are frankly astounded that such a request should be made in view of the

24 confidentiality, and we seek the Court's ruling upon that matter, in the

25 interests not only of this case but for the direction of future cases that

1 may come before the Tribunal, because if that is what the Prosecution

2 think, if I've understood it correctly, and my learned friend Mr. Ostojic

3 has understood it correctly, it must, in our respectful submission, be

4 wrong and be stamped on at the earliest possible moment.

5 Your Honours, we are serving, as soon as it can be typed up in the

6 forms required, a written motion pursuant to this application. We have

7 orally sought a response, upon at least two occasions, from my learned

8 friend Mr. Ryneveld, and if it is clear that from that, the response to

9 Mr. Ostojic yesterday that there may be outstanding material which there

10 is room for, the Prosecution yet to search out, then it's obviously

11 important that that act should be done.

12 Possibly exculpatory material is what we seek and in our

13 respectful submission, we must be the judges of whether it is likely to

14 assist the Defence, not the Prosecution, at the end of the day, because we

15 know exactly what our defence is and the Prosecution would be forgiven if

16 they didn't. If we've pointed out to them the areas where we would

17 require this exculpatory material, and we have a response from the

18 Prosecution that they are prepared to look further in the picture of the

19 comparison between Omarska and Keraterm, both of which camps came under

20 the control of one command organisation, in our respectful submission,

21 that should be allowed, and I take this opportunity to make that

22 application now.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Sir Ivan. I note that you have said

24 that this submission will be put in the form of a motion in writing. It

25 is only proper that it should. So I will not call on the Prosecution

1 now. When the motion has been submitted -- it is fairly long and does

2 deal with important areas of our work. When the motion has been received,

3 then we'll get a response from the Prosecutor, and the Chamber will rule

4 on it.

5 MR. LAWRENCE: It may be -- it may be that following the

6 intervention of His Honour Judge May just now, that the Prosecution may

7 respond even before the formalities are observed, which is one reason why

8 I raised it. But the other reason is that if there is any conceivable

9 doubt in the Prosecution's mind about what the law is and what the law

10 requires them to do, then obviously it's in the interests of everybody

11 working at the Tribunal to have that matter resolved.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. I would rather that the Prosecutor respond

13 when the motion has been received in writing.

14 Mr. Ryneveld?

15 MR. RYNEVELD: Yes. I'm mindful of what Your Honour has just

16 said. However, I can only say that I'm completely surprised that they

17 would bring on this application at this time after the lengthy meeting we

18 had yesterday in an attempt to continue with our ongoing obligations of

19 disclosure, but I want to say that the issue of section 66(B) triggering

20 section 67 came up but not in the context in which my friend has outlined.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Ryneveld.

22 Mr. Petrovic?

23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the next witness the

24 Defence intends to call is a witness, an expert witness, a psychologist, a

25 witness who will talk about details and facts before the Court which

1 pertain to the personality of the accused Damir Dosen, those details and

2 those circumstances which in their nature are quite intimate and the

3 possible revelation of which in public could, in the view of my client,

4 and also in our view, cause reactions that he would not wish. So in that

5 regard, I would like to ask the Court to grant closed session for the

6 testimony of this witness, in view of the kind of evidence that will be

7 brought before the Chamber. So before we start, I would like for the

8 Court to make its ruling, unless there are views by other parties in this

9 procedure.

10 [Trial Chamber confers]

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Petrovic, the Chamber considers this an

12 unusual request. If one looks at precedents from the work of other Trial

13 Chambers, expert evidence of this nature is always given in open court.

14 The Chamber cannot agree that this evidence be given in closed session.

15 It will be given in open court.

16 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Your

17 Honour before we begin, I think the witness needs to make the solemn

18 declaration.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness make the declaration.

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

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

22 WITNESS: ANA NAJMAN

23 [Witness answered through interpreter]

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: You may sit.

25 Examined by Mr. Petrovic:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 Q. Could you please tell us your full name?

2 A. Ana Najman.

3 Q. Could you tell us what you are, what your specialty is?

4 A. I'm a specialist in medical clinical psychology and I am also a

5 court expert.

6 Q. Could you please tell us what your work experience is in this kind

7 of expert testimony that we are talking about today?

8 A. I have 20 years of work experience. I would like to note that I

9 have worked for ten years at the psychiatric department of the prison

10 hospital in Belgrade, where I mainly dealt with treatment of people who

11 committed grave crimes, and they were also ill, psychiatrically ill. I

12 also provided expert testimony in the territory of the former Yugoslavia

13 and the current Yugoslavia from 1986. Over the past five years, I have

14 also been working in the clinical hospital centre, Dr. Dragisa Misovic, at

15 the psychiatric clinic, where I have continued to work in the field of

16 forensic medicine. I have also worked with psychiatric patients, a little

17 less with adolescents, and also with people suffering from personality

18 disorders.

19 Q. Could you please tell us if you had the opportunity to testify

20 before this Tribunal before in other cases?

21 A. In 1998, I appeared before the Tribunal in the Dokmanovic case.

22 This was in 1998; then in the Radic case in the year 2000; and also in

23 2001 I testified in the Krnojelac case. This was all done on the basis of

24 a court decision. In the last two instances, in the Radic and Krnojelac

25 cases, I worked together -- in the Radic case I worked together with a

1 Dutch psychiatrist, Mr. Bernard van den Bussche, and also in the Krnojelac

2 case I worked together with Mrs. Vera Folnegovic, a psychiatrist from

3 Croatia.

4 Q. Could you please also explain to us who your colleagues were in

5 these previous two cases. Did you make joint reports, or also were these

6 people appointed by the Prosecution to work on these cases?

7 A. In the Radic case, Mr. van den Bussche, the Dutch psychiatrist,

8 and I as a psychologist, made a joint report. In the case of

9 Mr. Krnojelac, Mrs. Vera Folnegovic was appointed by the Prosecution.

10 Q. Did you have the opportunity to talk with the accused Damir Dosen

11 and to make a psychological profile?

12 A. Yes. I did that at the end of June of this year. I had three

13 opportunities to talk with him - on the 25th, the 26th of June, and also

14 on July 1st - and based on the examination carried out then, the

15 psychological examinations, and also diagnostic interviews, I made my

16 findings.

17 Q. Could you please tell us briefly what your expert report contains,

18 the one that has been submitted as evidence by the Defence to this

19 Tribunal, to the Court.

20 A. My expertise states details from the case history which I

21 considered relevant, which I felt needed to be pointed out in order to

22 interpret also the events and the time period until the accused was

23 detained, also his conduct and psychological characteristics during his

24 stay in detention. Amongst other things, I came to all of these things

25 based on the diagnostic interview; then I also applied certain

1 psychological diagnostic techniques which are standardly used in

2 psychology in order to test psychological potential, the personality

3 structure and dynamics; and then I also provided my psychological

4 interpretation based on all of this data.

5 Q. I would also like to turn to the case history of your report, so I

6 would like you to tell us the most important remarks regarding the

7 characteristics of the development, growing up, and the schooling of the

8 accused Damir Dosen from the standpoint of your expert knowledge.

9 A. I would not like to repeat whatever is set out in my finding, but

10 I would like to point out just the things that I think are the most

11 important in terms of his psychological development during his schooling

12 and later on during his adolescent period.

13 What I would point out, first off, is that Mr. Dosen grew up as a

14 protected or overprotected or sheltered child in a patriarchal family,

15 where the father had a leading role and continued to be respected as the

16 authority. In relation to his older brother, he was in a privileged

17 position which was reflected even later in his life.

18 His development was more or less normal, but I would like to point

19 out one episode. In his very early development, up to the age of 2, he

20 was separated from his parents. He lived with his grandmother, which in

21 psychology we consider to be one of the potential - just potential, I

22 say - factors that could later be reflected on his subsequent development.

23 His schooling was discontinued during his secondary schooling. In

24 his primary schooling it conformed to the requirements set out by his

25 family. Even though his father never made a requirement for him to finish

1 the school, he wanted his sons to be honest working men, and school was

2 not considered necessarily part of that criterium. So his secondary

3 school was somewhat interrupted, but he graduated finally by giving exams

4 outside of the regular curriculum and he became a metal worker.

5 Also I would like to point out that in his early adolescence,

6 which in psychological terms coincides with his secondary schooling, he

7 developed an interest in things mechanical, and also he was raising

8 pigeons, and there he funneled a lot of his love, emotions, and he himself

9 points out that he was not that motivated in school after that any longer.

10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone to the counsel, please.

11 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. How would you describe his profession curriculum vitae, in other

13 words, his work history during this period?

14 A. As I already stated, the imperative in this family - which, as I

15 said, was a patriarchal family, and I think we know what that

16 implies - the imperative was not the special effort to acquire titles or

17 any particular education. In the light of that, Damir Dosen would simply

18 seek work wherever his father would point him to, the various companies.

19 These were not highly trained jobs; these were menial jobs sometimes, and

20 he did not stay in these jobs very long. These were temporary jobs to

21 begin with, so they were not long-term career type jobs. So he frequently

22 changed them, but they were often unskilled and they were not jobs which

23 were in his place of residence. So he sometimes moved away and worked as

24 a seasonal worker, let's say. I think he went to Rijeka at one point.

25 And to these various job opportunities, I think he just simply responded

1 by accepting them, but I don't think that he took initiative to seek a

2 particular job for himself.

3 Q. Is there some kind of continuity to be identified in this, that

4 is, in his taking various jobs and leaving them? How would you describe

5 that?

6 A. I would rather say that this was a lack of initiative, sort of

7 more or less a spontaneous taking of jobs and leaving them, and we cannot

8 see any pronounced motivation in this and I think it reflects the way of

9 life of the entire family. I need to point out that this family lived a

10 very patriarchal kind of life and the father was the paterfamilias. He

11 provided for the entire family. When his older brother got married, he

12 stayed on in the house with his wife and later with the children that came

13 along, and so did Damir Dosen.

14 Q. Did these frequent job changes point to a certain lack of a

15 particular goal, objective, in terms of Damir Dosen's self-realisation in

16 terms of career?

17 A. Certainly, yes, it reflects. I wouldn't say that he was a person

18 who did not like to work. On the contrary, he did. However, the lack

19 of -- the lack of initiative and his own sort of path towards a career

20 are clearly discernible.

21 Q. From the evidence we have so far heard before this Trial Chamber,

22 and the information that you have from him, we know that he was married in

23 1991 and the marriage ended in 1998. Can you tell me something about the

24 nature of an enduring emotional relationship that may have had an effect

25 on this patient, of this subject?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 A. The information and data I acquired from interviews and the tests

2 I administered, his orientation towards the opposite sex was within the

3 normal, regular characteristics of his age and his environment. His

4 future wife, by her behaviour in his emotional world, stood out, and I

5 believe that that was the reason why relatively quickly, in time that is,

6 he decided to start life with him [sic]. This relationship provides

7 certain security that she provided to him, and also it conformed very

8 easily within the patriarchal style of life of the entire family. The two

9 of them very quickly fit into the pre-existing situation in his family.

10 And for Damir Dosen, that was very significant, because in that arena,

11 that is the relationship with his current wife, he had all the support he

12 needed.

13 Q. From what we have heard so far, and what you have gained from the

14 interviews with him, we learned that his first child died several days

15 after it was born, and this happened on the eve of the conflict that is

16 the background of this case. Can you tell us what were the reactions, the

17 responses, that this loss produced? And also, if you can give us a

18 perspective from this time, from this point?

19 A. This young family which had just started its life together, at the

20 very start suffered one of the most intense stress situations that can be

21 measured, which is the loss of a child. The pregnancy itself coincided

22 with the beginning of the war situation - not the armed conflict but the

23 tensions - so that the loss of a child, who I believe was born in -- on 4

24 April 1992, that child survived for several days, it was a premature baby,

25 this caused a stress which in a very -- which very strongly affected the

1 mother, and Damir, too. I need to point out the fact here that in this

2 situation, Damir Dosen evinced a very protective trait in relation to his

3 wife. He did everything himself in an attempt to spare her the trauma

4 that he assumed that she must have suffered as a mother.

5 He himself, and I think this is your question, he took it very

6 badly. He cried. He had a sense of -- terrible sense of loss. This was

7 at the start of their relationship. But he tried to strike a balance

8 between the feelings that his wife had at that time and his own feelings.

9 Q. How would such person as Damir Dosen respond to other stressful

10 situations, and that especially in light of the period in -- that we are

11 discussing, the wartime?

12 A. Such a person, on the basis of psychological examination which I

13 carried out and which I presented, has all the characteristics of an

14 emotional vulnerability and insecurity, passivity, low self-esteem,

15 self-respect, and in a situation of additional stress situation that come

16 from outside, or from within, all that I have listed is enhanced and

17 exacerbates the sense of depressiveness, helplessness and a sense of

18 inadequacy.

19 Damir Dosen demonstrated all that through these traumatic events,

20 and what is characteristic for him is the showing somatic reactions,

21 overreactions, overreactions in terms of the outside world. He had

22 gastrointestinal problems, nausea, insomnias, occasional indigestion. And

23 also what was coming from outside and which caused great stress did not

24 allow his character, which was somewhat immature, it did not enable him to

25 fully process it, and we call this -- in psychology, we call this that the

1 amount of the outside stress and inside stress situation are -- arises to

2 such a level that the -- are too much for him to be able to fully process

3 them in a socially acceptable way.

4 Q. Further on in your -- in the case history portion of your finding,

5 you also examined other periods of time that go outside of the indictment,

6 but that you believed may be relevant for the overall finding.

7 A. I believe that this would be a situation of his going to one of

8 the military exercises. Of course, I'm not an expert on military matters,

9 but he was anticipating something unpleasant which was awaiting him there,

10 and having had a previous bad experience in that, he resorted to alcohol

11 and he inflicted a wound on himself. I think a second episode was -- has

12 to do with the fighting which took place during one of his wartime

13 assignments, and due to the stress that he suffered and due to the scenes

14 of horror which he experienced there, all culminated in his loss of

15 control, so that all that I have stated before, I believe, manifested in

16 higher degree, psychologically speaking and perhaps even in psychiatric

17 sense, and it resulted in his hospitalisation for a period of time, and I

18 believe that he was treated with certain medication.

19 Q. You mentioned loss of control. What did you specifically mean by

20 that?

21 A. The loss of control was the loss of emotional control and finding

22 the balance between what the subject experiences and the capacity of his

23 overall personality, which needs to process all this. In Damir Dosen's

24 case, there was a pronounced discrepancy between the two because the

25 events were much more traumatic, both in terms of quantity and quality,

1 and his psychological ability were no match to that so that he could

2 keep -- he could compensate and keep it in balance. And I believe that

3 at that time, he was taking some medication. This is not my field of

4 expertise but I saw what it was. These were tranquilisers. These were --

5 this was medication that could result in a relatively -- return to a

6 relatively compensated -- compensatory -- compensated state, in

7 psychological terms.

8 Q. How would you describe Damir Dosen's psychological history between

9 the end of the war and the moment of his arrest, when he was brought to

10 The Hague? Just a moment. My question was about his -- Damir Dosen's

11 functionability between the end of the war and the arrest, when he was

12 brought to The Hague. Will you please address that?

13 A. I think that his functionality was -- let's say it jumped. It

14 wasn't stable. At moments, he did respond to the demands of his family

15 and also the minimal demands of the work that he was performing, and then

16 in a certain period, he was completely non-functional, passive. He

17 isolated himself, he was at home, and he was not capable of working. It

18 seems to me that this is information that I got and the last thing that I

19 said, and this relates to 1998, which was characteristic by the fact that

20 he was not able to work. In the psychological sense, he wasn't

21 motivated. He withdrew into a kind of family functionality of his own

22 kind.

23 Q. The accused has been in detention for 19 months. Could you please

24 tell us something about the characteristics and also the degree to which

25 the accused fits into the environment where he is right now and where he

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 has been for the past 19 months?

2 A. Of course, the very fact of his arrest was a shock for Damir

3 Dosen. We assume that. And that very act provoked certain psychological

4 characteristics that I have already mentioned. What I would like to note

5 is the following. The stay here, as far as I was able to ascertain during

6 the three meetings that I had with Damir Dosen, he was -- is apathetic,

7 tends towards depressive states. At times he cries frequently. At times

8 he manages to overcome these feelings of sadness. And what is

9 characteristic for him is that he does not have a vision that relates to

10 future activities. He does not undertake anything in the present moment.

11 He does not organise his life. He just allows himself to be in the

12 situation that he finds himself in.

13 His engagement, for example, in sports activities or all of those

14 things that are available to them in the prison conditions, is quite

15 intermittent. It's improvised and it relates to his moods. He is more

16 preoccupied with his somatics, his somatic difficulties, which change and

17 vary and take various forms. So he does not have the energy to conceive

18 his life here. He doesn't have the energy, for example, to read, to

19 persist in that, to learn the language, or to actively participate in any

20 sports. So I mean that he is not able to have any definite activities

21 that he would regularly carry out.

22 Q. The accused told you that he lost his father during his

23 detention. Could you please tell us something about his reaction to that

24 loss in the conditions that he is in right now.

25 A. I can say that the second very traumatic event that happened to

1 Damir Dosen is that loss. Particularly, it is important that he was not

2 present physically there and that he was not able to immediately share his

3 sadness relating to the loss of his father. In the situation here,

4 besides the fact that you see that he is sad and that he expresses this

5 sadness, at the same time he also denies it, because this quantity of

6 sadness is something that he cannot bear and he cannot process. So he is

7 partially suppressing it and partially denying it, as if he were saying

8 that he is leaving that for some other time when he will be in the

9 position to share that with them and to process it.

10 Q. The accused had a son a couple of months after he was detained.

11 How did he react to that or how did that affect him, as far as you were

12 able to note and report that in your expert report?

13 A. Everybody, of course, takes this to mean that this is an

14 exceptionally happy event. Of course, here I have to make a psychological

15 parallel. The first and the third pregnancy of his wife were under

16 traumatic circumstances. The first pregnancy occurred immediately prior

17 to the breakout of the war, so the birth and the loss of the

18 child -- which resulted in the loss of the child. The third pregnancy was

19 closely tied to the beginning of his detention, so that this pregnancy was

20 characterised by the separation of the couple. So it is to be assumed

21 that this was a high-risk and traumatic pregnancy. The event itself is

22 described by Damir with a lot of sadness, as well as satisfaction and

23 happiness. But what is characteristic of it is that he has a need, in

24 view of the fact that he is separated from his family, and particularly

25 from his children, he has the need not to bear it any more. This is

1 something that is emotionally impeding him. And I think at some point he

2 told his wife that in the foreseeable future he would not like her to

3 bring the children with her but to come and visit him by herself, because

4 he finds it very difficult, the fact that he is separated, the moment when

5 he is separated from his children, the fact that when he is separated from

6 his youngest child, which was born during his period of detention -- so he

7 is separated from that child, and in view of the pleasure that meeting the

8 child means and the suffering that the separation causes, he would prefer

9 not to be exposed to it, because he simply can't bear it.

10 Q. I would now like to move to the second part of your report, so I

11 would like to ask you to tell us a few words about your psychological

12 examination and also what were the results of it.

13 A. Mr. Dosen was informed that I would be there. He was prepared to

14 do some tests and to talk with an expert witness. This, however, did not

15 alleviate his level of anxiety and insecurity at the very beginning of the

16 examination. He constantly sought support, confirmation of what he was

17 doing, and occasionally showed weaknesses in the sense that he won't be

18 able to make it until the end, that he's tired - psychologically tired,

19 not physically tired - and that these were expectations that he would not

20 be able to meet.

21 The entire examination, and I'm talking about the interview here,

22 was accompanied by outpourings of sadness and tears when he spoke about

23 these traumatic events that we mentioned and which I would not talk about

24 any more. During work on the test material, his cooperation was

25 satisfactory. We did everything that is planned for situations like

1 this. The motivation oscillated, in a way. However, in response to

2 direct stimulation or suggestions that we need to complete this, that he

3 did carry out some tasks successfully, he would continue with the tests.

4 Q. On the basis of the methods that you implemented, what would you

5 stress as the basic personality traits of the accused Damir Dosen?

6 A. Based on the psychodiagnostic interview and the test results, I

7 can say Damir Dosen is primarily a personality with neurotic traits, with

8 a pronounced domination of hypochondriac tendencies, depression, and also

9 compensational symptoms. At the moment, his defence threshold is very

10 low, because of which he is hypersensitive, suspicious, emotionally

11 vulnerable, and to a certain degree cognitively disorganised, as well as

12 anxious, and this does come to the surface. It's elevated anxiety.

13 Besides the test results that I am talking about now, and this is

14 the MMPI-201 Machover test, the drawing of the human figure and the

15 drawing of a tree, as well as the Rorschach test, this also is evident

16 based on observation alone of Damir Dosen. His somatisation and

17 preoccupation with somatic difficulties is so pronounced, which scored 106

18 on the MMPI scale, which is considered very high compared to the 70 figure

19 which is the threshold of tolerance, that he is left over with very little

20 psychic energy to be able to deal with any kind of constructive things or

21 experiences. This is something that overwhelms him, which is the reason

22 why - I will express myself in lay terms now - he is constantly

23 complaining about something, and these complaints do have a basis in

24 objective findings, such as, for example, was the case with certain

25 infections, as well as also in vomiting, stomachaches, anxiety, feeling

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 disturbed, emotionally vulnerable, which were also evident by observation

2 alone.

3 I would also like to talk about the pronounced depressive trait

4 which is accompanied by frequent outpourings or crying fits in reaction to

5 all traumatic events, and it makes it difficult for him to distance

6 himself from these traumatic events and to establish some kind of

7 balance. Depression on the MMPI was also very pronounced. It was 112 on

8 the scale of a possible 70, which is a very high score. However, what is

9 significant, psychologically significant here, is the fact that on the

10 projective material, on the Rorschach test, which disturbed him to such a

11 degree -- but we did manage to complete it. However, I would like to

12 state in just one sentence that the Rorschach confirmed the quantity of

13 hopelessness, the feelings of sadness, loss, how prevalent that is right

14 now, as well as the low self-esteem and self-worth that he feels.

15 Q. In the examination of the accused, did you find any indications of

16 the presence of aggressiveness in certain situations, or not?

17 A. I did not, but on the MMPI test there is an aggression scale which

18 would objectively be higher, as well as impulsivity, which would have

19 shown high results had this been the case.

20 Q. What are you able to say about the organisational abilities of the

21 accused personally as well as on the external aspect?

22 A. My psychological assessment on the basis of what I have presented

23 here is that Damir Dosen has been preoccupied with his somatic problems

24 and is coping with them and is -- that are overwhelming him, so that he

25 does not have enough energy potential to organise himself in a

1 constructive way. When I say this, I mean that his cognitive

2 organisation, to a large degree, has been compromised by all these

3 personality factors that I have enumerated.

4 Q. Could we say that this is a person who is following a certain idea

5 or that he has been following a certain concept in life even before he

6 found himself in this situation?

7 A. What the tests show to me and what my psychological assessment is,

8 and of course what the longitudinal analysis of his life history has

9 shown, is that he does not have such a guiding idea or any clearly stated

10 goals in life. He is more preoccupied with himself than he is preoccupied

11 with any outside imperative, either in terms of his profession or family

12 goals.

13 Q. How does Mr. Dosen respond to authority?

14 A. I have already pointed out that he has grown up in a patriarchal

15 family and he was brought up to respect authority, which breeds a

16 characteristic of passivity, low self-esteem and uncertainty, and we could

17 even say certain emotional inferiority. He accepts authority and complies

18 to it.

19 Q. Can you now tell us about your assessment, whether this type of

20 personality of this structure has any leadership quality, something that

21 would be pronounced in him?

22 A. I would reiterate what I have already said. The longitudinal

23 analysis of his life history and what we all could observe and what

24 clinically could be established is that there are very few, if any,

25 elements, maybe no elements, for him to take over any leadership role, any

1 initiative, or to step forward. And as a small illustration, a

2 personality with these characteristics and with this personality structure

3 would -- means that he would -- had he had any of these characteristics

4 when he got married, he would probably leave his parents' house, he would

5 probably try to set up his own place, and he would try to pursue a way of

6 life that he wanted. And this is just in a way of a very small

7 illustration, what I mean.

8 Q. Please, if we could start summing up what you have said, how would

9 you describe and define the personality of Damir Dosen, based on your

10 overall analysis?

11 A. Damir Dosen is a person with dominant passive characteristics,

12 primary neurotic, with hypersensitive level of adaptation and actively

13 dominant depressiveness, sense of sorrow, insecurity, low self-esteem and

14 self-valuation, and with a very compromised cognitive organisation, which

15 can be seen in his daily activities in the circumstances in which he finds

16 himself today. These are reflected -- this is a reflection of his

17 cognitive capacity and his personality. We also should not underestimate

18 the accumulation of traumatic experiences that he has had, and which he

19 has not been able to fully process to date. And because of that, I

20 believe that his active depression is still on the increase.

21 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I have no

22 further questions. I would only like to tender the report as a Defence

23 Exhibit.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. May it be given a number?

25 THE REGISTRAR: Defence Exhibit D19/2.

1 MR. RYNEVELD: Does my friend intend to attach the CV to that as

2 well? Because I don't believe it was filed. The witness's CV. I have a

3 copy of it. It says it was attached but it wasn't attached to mine so

4 I'm -- I'm not sure. I'm only raising it. If my friend intends to put

5 it in, then I just want to make a note that I don't think it's been filed

6 because it wasn't attached to my copy of the filing.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the position, Mr. Petrovic?

8 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, yes, of course, the CV

9 would also be tendered. If it was not attached, I apologise. It may have

10 just happened that in the process of distribution of documents, it went

11 missing. But Mr. Londrovic is just pointing to me that in his copy, there

12 is the attached CV.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: The CV should be attached to the exhibit, yes.

14 Any cross-examination, Mr. Londrovic?

15 MR. LONDROVIC: [Interpretation] No questions, Your Honour.

16 MR. LAWRENCE: No questions, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Ryneveld?

18 MR. RYNEVELD: A few, if I may.

19 Cross-examined by Mr. Ryneveld:

20 Q. Now, witness, I understand that you describe yourself as a

21 psychologist and you call yourself a court expert. Do I take it that

22 means that you have an experience with forensic psychology? Do I

23 understand you to say that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And as I understand, you've been doing that for quite some years

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 and you've testified in quite a few cases, both outside this Tribunal, in

2 the former Yugoslavia, and this is now your fourth time giving evidence

3 before this Tribunal; is that correct?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Now, is it doctor? Is it Dr. Najman?

6 A. No. I'm not a physician. I'm a psychologist.

7 Q. Yes. All right. I'm going to ask you, ma'am, whether you would

8 agree with me that, in general, from a professional point of view, that

9 you most often work with or in consultation with a psychiatrist and

10 perhaps other professionals to get a complete history of a subject. Is

11 that so?

12 A. Excuse me, did you mean in relation to the work I conducted before

13 this Honourable Court or in general?

14 Q. No, no. In general, in a perfect situation, you would try to get

15 as many health care professionals as possible to prepare reports, to have

16 interviews over a lengthy period of time and perhaps compare results.

17 A. Probably.

18 Q. And would you also agree with me that the more comprehensive the

19 package of information you have available, the more, shall we say -- the

20 better the quality of the information you have, the better the quality of

21 the report that you can produce at the end of that exercise? Would you

22 agree with me with that as a general principle?

23 A. As a general principle, yes.

24 Q. And so, for example, if you had the option, you would like to, I

25 take it, interview family members, workmates, previous employers, school

1 teachers, and get a sort of a social profile of a subject before

2 completing a report; is that fair to say?

3 A. These are the so-called heterodata. This is what they are called

4 in psychology, and they are welcome if they exist, if they are available,

5 but they are not the necessary requirements for producing a psychological

6 profile.

7 Q. Do I take it from your evidence, and from your answer to the last

8 question, that you did not have that data or additional information

9 available to you in this case?

10 A. I don't know what additional information you have in mind

11 specifically.

12 Q. Then I'll ask specifics. For example, did you have an opportunity

13 to speak to any of Mr. Dosen's family members?

14 A. No. Yesterday I spoke for about 15, 20 minutes with Mr. Dosen's

15 brother, but this -- that is subsequent and does not affect the written

16 finding which I presented here.

17 Q. Did you speak, for example, to former teachers or classmates?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Did you speak to any person with whom he may have had former

20 relationships?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Did you speak to former employers?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Did you speak to anybody who may have been his superior or

25 subordinate in the military?

1 A. No, no.

2 Q. So rather than continue with the list, I think you got the idea of

3 what I'm getting at. The source of your information primarily was the

4 reporting by the subject, Mr. Dosen; correct?

5 A. Yes, it was.

6 Q. He is the single source of information upon which you have

7 prepared your report?

8 A. No, not in such a direct way. He -- this is why it says here that

9 this is the data from the case history, which we receive from the examinee

10 in all situations. Then these data are fit into what we call

11 psychodiagnostic clinical evaluation, what we receive through the results

12 of psychological examination and what we had gathered through our own

13 knowledge, professional experience, and to which we can -- and things that

14 we can resort to from various literature.

15 Q. Witness, I'm acutely aware of the fact that there is a process

16 that you adopt and there are recognised, standardised tests, with which I

17 have some familiarity, and I'm not questioning that process. What I'm

18 asking you is whether or not the source of the information, either by way

19 of reporting or by way of testing, has been the subject in this case,

20 Mr. Dosen. You have had no external, corroborative information; correct?

21 A. Correct. I had no external information.

22 Q. Now, would you also agree with me, doctor, that over the years of

23 your experience, that subjects who are in a forensic situation, who are

24 charged with, say, serious criminal offences, are aware of the fact that

25 you are a psychologist and you are about to prepare a report which will be

1 given to the Court? They are acutely aware of that, are they not? We

2 have to get an audible response.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And is it fair to say that Mr. Dosen in this particular instance

5 knew who you were and what it was you were there for?

6 A. Yes, he knew who I was and he knew why I was there, in his own

7 way. He had an idea, his own idea, about it.

8 Q. Is it your experience that in those situations, subjects often

9 tend to present themselves in the most favourable light that they possibly

10 can? It's a natural thing, is it not?

11 A. Yes, it is. It is natural. However, there are certain techniques

12 which guide us to see whether that was the case in any particular case,

13 and let me be very specific. On an MMPA scale, there is a lie scale, as

14 it is called, which does not really tell us whether the subject is really

15 lying but whether the profile that we received is valid; in other words,

16 whether he presents himself in the real light or an embellished light, or

17 whether, in a third -- as a third possibility, has been intensified this

18 pathological aspect. In this particular case, I concluded that this lie

19 scale was valid and so I dismissed the other two possibilities. Also, the

20 behaviour he evinced during the three days of examination did not fit with

21 what you have mentioned today. So that was another sign that this was not

22 the case.

23 Q. But, witness, I take it that, despite these built-in tests within

24 tests that would allow you to try to determine whether or not there are

25 consistencies or inconsistencies in the information that the subject is

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 reporting, nevertheless, I'm sure you would allow that there have been

2 times when the subject has been able to deceive you. Is that not so on

3 previous occasions? Psychologists are sometimes deceived by the reporting

4 process, are they not? Are we waiting for interpretation or ...

5 A. I did not fully understand exactly what you meant.

6 Q. Well, I'm noting the time. I'm going to ask that one question

7 and, subject to the Court, will continue later. But what I wanted to ask

8 you is: Is it not your experience, and in your practice, that although

9 you use your best information and you have these tests, that nevertheless

10 there are times when a subject is able to deceive the interviewer with

11 respect to the information he reports?

12 A. Generally speaking, it is always possible, but I would not apply

13 it to this specific case. If your question is a general one ...

14 Q. My questions have been general. And another general one, before

15 I'm sure His Honour will ask us to break, is: Would you agree with me

16 that psychology is not, shall we say, a precise science, like physics or

17 mathematics, but is a somewhat imprecise art?

18 A. I wouldn't say imprecise, but in any event, psychology is not

19 mathematics nor physics. But based on a number of verification processes,

20 identification processes, experience, authorities, we can talk about a

21 very, very high degree of probability. It is the same case with

22 psychiatry. These are just such disciplines, if you will.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Ryneveld. We are going to take

24 the break now.

25 Before we do, Mr. Petrovic, we had asked yesterday that you give

1 us a list of your remaining witnesses.

2 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, that document was

3 filed in the Registry as a second revised witness list. I'm surprised

4 that it hasn't reached Your Honours. I myself, for instance, found it in

5 my locker with the registry number.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: How many witnesses do you have?

7 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, another expert

8 tomorrow; and Monday a psychiatrist, another expert witness, and one,

9 perhaps two fact witnesses; I believe only one. So I believe that we may

10 be able to finish on Monday.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: The Chamber is anxious to ensure that all the

12 time available to it is utilised. We do not want lapses between the

13 witnesses. Today, for example, if we conclude with this witness, then we

14 should make the best use of the time. Would you have another witness

15 following this witness for today?

16 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, taking into account

17 that today we only work until the lunch break, we plan to complete Madam

18 Najman's testimony. We have designated tomorrow for the police expert,

19 and I believe that that will take a full day, because we ourselves have a

20 lot of questions for him. And then on Monday we think that we can

21 conclude the witness which is arriving on Saturday and the fact witness.

22 I don't know how long the cross-examination by my learned colleague will

23 take, but we believe that perhaps we may be half an hour short of the full

24 session in the morning. It really depends on the length of the

25 cross-examination.

1 [Trial Chamber confers]

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: And is that the full list of witnesses that you

3 have, those that you have --

4 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: You're quite sure of that?

6 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. My apologies

7 about the changes in the witness list, but they came in the light of our

8 re-evaluation of the entire case, and also we had some logistical problems

9 with bringing certain witnesses. In other words, it was conditioned by

10 some of the outside circumstances too.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... haven't seen

12 the list. Let me be frank and say: If, for example, it was your

13 intention to have the accused give evidence, that would call for a

14 complete re-evaluation of the schedule.

15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. Your Honour, that

16 is not our intention. Had we had that intention, we would have indicated

17 it. So you can be rest assured that that is not our intention.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Petrovic.

19 Ms. Najman, we are going to take an adjournment until 11.30.

20 During the adjournment, you are not to discuss your evidence with anybody,

21 and that includes the members of the Defence.

22 We'll resume at 11.35, 11.35.

23 --- Recess taken at 11.06 a.m.

24 --- On resuming at 11.40 a.m.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Ryneveld.

1 MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour.

2 Q. Now, witness, I don't intend to be too long. I just have a couple

3 of questions for clarification. When I asked you a little earlier about

4 no external sources of information to -- that you relied upon, I had been

5 talking about individuals. Let me just focus. Did you have any records

6 that you had the opportunity to consult? Are we waiting for translation?

7 A. Yes. I mentioned that on the first page of my report, that I had

8 access to certain medical records, medical documentation. I have it here,

9 and it's in Serbo-Croatian. It's a finding by a psychologist of -- from

10 the 31st of October 1995. It's also a discharge note.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Petrovic?

12 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise. We have

13 a translation of those documents, and if the Prosecutor wants those

14 documents and feels that this is important, we can present the documents

15 to the Chamber and also to the Prosecution, if they wish.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

17 MR. RYNEVELD: By way of clarification of that, is my friend

18 saying that there are documents which are not in evidence at the moment,

19 that are not part of the report? I just need to know what's in and what

20 isn't and what's translated and what I have and what I don't.

21 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, Your Honours. The

22 evidence used by the expert witness exists. They have been translated and

23 they can be made available to the sides, even though they are not an

24 integral part of the report, and we thought that we would submit them with

25 the evidence of the psychiatrist. But if there is need, we can also

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 submit those documents today. We did intend to introduce those documents

2 through the testimony of the expert witness psychiatrist, because we felt

3 that they were more relevant and more important for that evidence than for

4 this one, because it's a different kind of expertise that relates to

5 psychiatric illnesses rather than to a psychological evaluation. That's

6 what our intentions were, but we can also submit these documents today.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, we don't think it is absolutely essential

8 for this to go in as evidence, but if the Prosecutor wishes to see it,

9 then you can make it available to him.

10 MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour. Actually, all I really

11 want is for the witness to indicate what information she had available to

12 her upon which she based her opinion. If that fact is recorded in the

13 document which is now before you, and if those documents will form part of

14 the record through the psychiatrist, I'm going to move on, if that's -- if

15 that's my friend's intention. He's going to put those records in through

16 the psychiatrist to be called next?

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Petrovic?

18 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. And if the

19 Prosecutor wishes, we can do it now, or immediately at the end of this

20 session, I will make it possible for him to have a copy of those so that

21 he can, if he wishes, prepare himself for the testimony on Monday.

22 MR. RYNEVELD: That would be helpful, thank you.

23 Q. Now, witness, I don't want to belabour this point, so I'm going to

24 move on. The responses that you got from this particular test subject

25 were quite clearly over a three-day period, which you've indicated, both

1 in evidence in-chief and in the record, and that -- they were all in 2001,

2 some nine or ten years after the traumatic events of the war and the loss

3 of his premature son; is that correct?

4 A. Yes. The psychological exam carried out in June 2001, the death

5 of the child occurred in 1992, and the other medical records relate to

6 1995 and 1996.

7 Q. Right. Now, witness, would you agree that it's experiences,

8 especially traumatic ones, can shape subsequent personality traits, or the

9 expression or the exhibition of those traits? In other words, we are part

10 of what we have been. Is that a fair thing to say?

11 A. Yes. Our primary structure exists and is reflected throughout our

12 entire life. Traumatic events can accentuate something of the traits of

13 the personality or bring about a type of psychological decompensation of a

14 person, so this can cause -- can be caused by trauma, relating to trauma

15 and the length of the trauma. This is an area dealt by psychiatry, but if

16 I may say, there is an acute reaction and there is an extended, long-term

17 reaction. That's as much as I can say as a psychologist. But I think

18 that this is a domain more in psychiatry. But I believe that the basic

19 personality traits, the basic structure of the personality is something

20 that dominates during one's lifetime.

21 Q. Yes. I don't know whether we need to get into a huge

22 psychological debate on the issue but let me just see if I can focus why

23 I'm asking these questions. You have told us, and I'm sure you will

24 agree, that you have stressed that the way in which Mr. Dosen was raised

25 in a patriarchal sort of system would have left a lasting effect on his

1 development and the building of his character traits. I mean, I

2 understood that evidence correctly, I hope, that that helped shape his

3 personality. Is that correct?

4 A. The way a person grows up is one of the segments or one of the

5 parts which, to a large extent, shape each one of us. I accentuated the

6 patriarchal type of family linked with the attitude towards authority or

7 the position taken towards elders and the way it functions. But certainly

8 the family is something that conditions and marks the way in which each

9 one of us develops, including Mr. Dosen.

10 Q. Well, you thought it important or you wouldn't have raised it as

11 an example; right?

12 A. Of course, of course.

13 Q. And I believe you give that as an example as to why it is, for

14 example, that such a person in later life might be compliant. I take it

15 he was a good soldier, I believe that's in your report; is that right?

16 We'll just wait for the translation. Yes?

17 A. I don't have information on whether there were any problems during

18 his military term, so that I assume that there were no problems.

19 Q. There's one line -- again, I don't think you and I are at odds on

20 anything, but, for example, I recall one line in your report that talked

21 about - I think it was 1987 or 1988 - where you said that he reported that

22 he was a good soldier. Let me just see --

23 A. Ninety-eight [as interpreted]. This is on page 3 in my copy, in

24 the Serbo-Croat version.

25 Q. Sorry. I didn't make many notes here, but I did recall that it

1 was in your report. But anyway, I don't need to find it. But you accept

2 the fact that you did report that, did you not?

3 A. Yes. I think that in your copy it's on page 3, at the end of the

4 page. The sentence says: "In the course of 1987 until March 1988, he had

5 served his entire military term," if that is the sentence that you meant.

6 This is in English, on page 3.

7 Q. Did you ask him any questions about his army experience or whether

8 he was a good soldier? Didn't you think that was important to know?

9 A. His answers were not -- I did ask him that, but his answers were

10 not unusual so that I would need to take note of that in any particular

11 way, except for the fact that he had served his entire military term. In

12 case he did not, then that would have been a reason to probe further, to

13 say: Why? Were there any problems? What happened? And so on. But

14 since his response was that he had served his entire obligatory military

15 service in a satisfactory way and that there were no problems, I didn't go

16 beyond that.

17 Q. Now, would you agree with me that the period of time contained in

18 our indictment, i.e., the period of, say, May to August of 1992, would

19 have been --

20 MR. RYNEVELD: Sorry. I was getting some external noises.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Try again.

22 MR. RYNEVELD: I was wondering where that was coming from.

23 Q. Would you agree that that period of time would have had a

24 profound -- I'll just wait. Would you agree that that period of time and

25 the conditions at Keraterm would have had a profound effect on someone,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 such as Mr. Dosen, with respect to his later reporting and testing in

2 2001? Would that be one of the things to help shape the characteristics

3 of the person?

4 A. We call that retraumatisation in psychology, which means that each

5 time an examinee talks about traumatic events which happened before, in

6 another time interval, if the person with a certain personality structure

7 the way I had described, that person has a psychological experience of

8 reliving that event. He suffers because of it emotionally and he can't

9 stand it. So everything that is connected to that period of remembering

10 again, to put it more precisely, is followed by this emotional state that

11 I have just described.

12 Q. And during this reliving or retraumatisation process, did you have

13 an extensive discussion with the subject about the period of time in the

14 indictment? Did you go into those details with him?

15 A. I think I mentioned that in my findings, the way he described

16 those events. His emotions were quite turbulent, accompanied by tears

17 from time to time, anxiety, and also the inability to bear that whole

18 experience to the end, to go through it, and I think I quoted that in my

19 findings, his immediate reliving of one of the sequences or one of the

20 images that he had experienced there.

21 Q. Yes. You're focusing on his reactions, his observable reactions.

22 My question was more geared to whether or not you were able to discuss the

23 details of what occurred with him which prompted these observable

24 reactions. Did you spend a lot of time dealing with the subject of what

25 went on at Keraterm?

1 A. We did talk about it; however, just like that psychological

2 mechanism of negation and suppression of an unpleasant event was evident,

3 then it was also evident again when he was remembering that event. The

4 examinee, Mr. Dosen's, focus during his story can be described as the

5 horrible things that he saw and his reactions, such as vomiting, feeling

6 sick, inability to watch, and I think I mentioned that on page 4. So this

7 was the essence of his psychological mechanism and his basic attitude

8 towards that event.

9 Q. Would you describe his behaviour as being avoidance of those

10 unpleasant topics at all?

11 A. Evasion is a conscious mechanism, but here we're talking about an

12 unconscious mechanism which belongs to the subconscious mind. So it does

13 not arise from the way of thinking rationally: I do not wish to face that

14 and I will not think about it. It's more of an internal defence

15 mechanism; in this case, denial of the unpleasant, negating it, because of

16 the person's inability to overcome such an experience.

17 Q. Perhaps I should rephrase my question this way: Regardless of

18 whether it was overt, intentional, or subconscious, is it fair to say that

19 there was not a lot of discussion about events that occurred between May

20 and August at Keraterm?

21 A. I would not categorise that as a lot or a little. I have the

22 impression that, as the person who conducted the examination, it was

23 enough, it was sufficient for me. In view of the amount of his suffering,

24 I had the impression that he too did not have the capacity to say much

25 more.

1 Q. One more question in this area and then I'll move on to a new

2 topic. Did you, for example, discuss with him what his role was or why he

3 stayed until the end of the camp closure? You don't have to tell us what

4 the answers were, but was that topic discussed? It was discussed?

5 A. Yes. We talked as part of the entire case history information, so

6 when we touched upon that period, we talked also about the way he found

7 himself there. So as part of that, he also talked about this point.

8 Q. Now, as I understand your evidence, this is an individual that you

9 talked about neurotic traits, a pronounced hypochondriac, compensational

10 symptoms, et cetera, et cetera, and I'm not going to go through the list.

11 But did I understand you correctly to be saying that this is an individual

12 who tended at times to be exaggerating his symptoms? Is that the effect

13 of what you're saying in psychological terms?

14 A. Not in the sense of exaggeration in order to gain some secondary

15 benefits, but these symptoms become so intense in their quantity and

16 quality that he is unable to cope with them. He doesn't know what to do

17 with them. He recognises them but he doesn't know where to place them.

18 Not just him but this type of personality, which is why they become

19 dominant and clearly visible and also very measurable by tests, and it is

20 what predominates.

21 Q. Did I understand you to say that he constantly complained? I

22 believe I heard that in your evidence. I may have noted it down

23 incorrectly. Your answer, if the translation is complete?

24 A. He constantly complains. He feels these things within, and he

25 cannot keep it in. The capacity of his personality is unable to process

1 it internally, so he externalises it. He has to talk about it. He is

2 seeking some kind of sympathy, help, things like that, because, as I said

3 in my finding, he recognises it at a level of symptoms, and I think I

4 mentioned that he does not have enough of introspection in a sense of

5 listening to his inner self. He just sees a discrepancy, discord, and

6 this is why he is seeking help. This is why his complaints tend to be

7 numerous, because nothing is resolved within himself, if you understand

8 what I'm saying.

9 Q. I do. And would it also be fair to say that the people who suffer

10 from this kind of a situation would also have a tendency to find reasons

11 to blame for these kinds of feelings that they have? These complaints,

12 they are looking for excuses or reasons to blame others for their

13 problems?

14 A. In the case of this subject, I would not be able to confirm that

15 theory.

16 Q. Okay. Well, let's at least see if we can agree on the fact that

17 this subject, Mr. Dosen, appeared then to have no difficulty in expressing

18 his complaints. He could verbalise, and did so on a regular basis, at

19 least during your examination? He's capable of expressing his complaints;

20 correct? I'm sorry, we need an audible answer. I don't know whether I'm

21 waiting for translation or you're waiting for a further question.

22 A. Yes, I'm just waiting for the interpretation. So the answer is

23 yes.

24 Q. Okay. Thank you. And this would be a general personality trait,

25 so would it also be fair to say that you would expect that that ability to

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 verbalise complaints would also be prevalent with respect to his

2 superiors? Is that true?

3 A. I wouldn't be able to draw such a parallel. Complaints and

4 dysfunctionality experienced by this type of personality are part and

5 parcel of their inner experience of unpleasant situations, and if we are

6 talking about the authority, which is what you just mentioned, I did not

7 gain the impression that his passivity, and even inertia of certain kind,

8 that he was capable of overcoming this inner dysfunctional feeling, and to

9 address it to someone else, like an authority, for instance.

10 Q. Did I understand your evidence to be that this was an individual

11 who, in layman's terms, could be described as someone who feels sorry for

12 himself?

13 A. It wouldn't be the exact description, sorry for himself. Not

14 exactly. He suffers a lot emotionally, and a surplus of stress that he

15 himself experiences as such, as stress, be it internal or external, in

16 other words on -- either coming in his internal sense of loss, suffering,

17 or something that he encounters outside, all this is something that he

18 himself is unable to process, and this is a discrepancy, a discord, if

19 you will.

20 Q. Now, I just have a few more questions. Would you agree that this

21 is -- this individual is one who is likely to conform or comply with

22 authority?

23 A. He has a trait, and I think that I have stated it somewhere, of --

24 a trait of obedience. However, it is not emphasised in an absolute

25 sense. It is part of a passive structure of personality. It is expected

1 of a passive personality to also show obedience and compliance. We cannot

2 say of someone that is passive and disobedient because these are the two

3 opposites, and in that sense, yes.

4 Q. And would it also be fair to say that someone with those traits

5 would expect others subordinate to them to show obedience to authority in

6 a like manner? Not only would it apply to him but it would apply to

7 others around him and under him; right?

8 A. Probably, but I don't think that that is something that was

9 dominant in his case.

10 Q. Did you inquire as to why he resorted to drinking or heavy

11 drinking at various stages of his life?

12 A. Yes. We talked about it a little bit, and alcohol, so far as I

13 understood him, and I think that this also falls within the parameter of

14 his personality, that was a reinforcement of the basic sense of

15 insecurity, lack of self-esteem. It was a crutch, a crutch that helped

16 him. Of course, the fact that he did not always resort to it says that,

17 depending on the level of vulnerability of a situation, he would resort to

18 it more than in some other situations.

19 Q. Did you discuss with him whether or not he participated in bouts

20 of heavy drinking during the time of the indictment, i.e., May to August

21 of 1992? You did not inquire?

22 A. He did not mention that to me.

23 Q. Now, at the time you conducted your interview, were you familiar

24 with the allegations that were being made in the indictment against

25 Mr. Dosen? Were you privy to the allegations of conduct with which he was

1 charged?

2 A. Yes. I received -- and I think that I have also mentioned that I

3 had a copy of the indictment. I think that it's in the first page of my

4 finding. Yes, both the indictment and the other materials that you

5 mention.

6 Q. I accept that. It was basically a lead-in to my next question and

7 I perhaps should have just gone to the next question, which is: Were you

8 also aware at the time of your interview with Mr. Dosen over those three

9 days, were you aware of any of the evidence that has been lead in this

10 courtroom concerning the allegations by others of his participation in

11 certain events? Did you have any witness statements or any precis of

12 evidence as to the alleged conduct?

13 A. No, no, none.

14 Q. So your opinion, then, is -- does not factor in any evidence, if

15 found to be credible, of what Mr. Dosen is alleged to have done during the

16 relevant time period? You are not factoring that into your opinion?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Would you also agree with me that your opinion is only as good as

19 the information you have received? I think we've hit that topic earlier

20 on and you've agreed with that in general principle.

21 A. This is not an easy question to answer because I would be put in a

22 position to disqualify myself, but my opinion is worth, as much as it is

23 possible in psychology, on the basis of available information, on the

24 basis of available instruments, and the clinical assessment that one is

25 able to do in order to produce a relevant conclusion.

1 Q. But, witness, surely, that if your opinion is based on a wrong

2 premise, then, if the premise changes, so would your opinion, would it

3 not?

4 A. Then perhaps we have to do some supplementary work, if something

5 crucial has changed. However, that would not change the structure of his

6 personality. That would not change his personality profile. You see,

7 that would stay the same.

8 Q. But witness - and this could be among my final questions - you've

9 given us a conclusion or an opinion that you've drawn with respect to his

10 leadership potential or his leadership role, and I believe it is your

11 opinion that this man would not be able to take a leadership role; is

12 that -- based on his personality. Did I understand your evidence to be

13 correct? Is that a correct understanding of what you want to share with

14 the Court? Nodding your head?

15 A. Yes, it is.

16 Q. Ma'am, would you agree with me that even if you're correct about

17 his personality, that doesn't mean that an individual with those

18 personality traits could not accept a leadership role if it were thrust

19 upon him? He could.

20 A. Generally, I believe not, because if we are talking of outside of

21 Mr. Dosen's case now, a person with passive personality characteristics,

22 with hypersensitivity, with this kind of emotional vulnerability, and the

23 somatisation that takes away a large portion of the psychological

24 potential and energy, I think that very little is left for the

25 constructive aspect that is needed for a leadership role.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 Q. I believe you indicated in your evidence that this is a man who

2 was well-liked by his peers and associates. Girls were attracted to him.

3 He was a popular young man; is that fair to say?

4 A. Yes. At the time of adolescence, which was much earlier. That

5 was the period when he was going to the secondary school, when he

6 socialised with his peers, and that is the period that kind of implies the

7 possession of such characteristics in order to fit in the world of his

8 peers, which is very important at that stage.

9 Q. Would it not be safe to say, Witness, that Mr. Dosen was likely

10 also well-liked and respected by his peers during the relevant period, in

11 May of 1992 through to August 1992, by his fellow guards or subordinates

12 or superiors? There's nothing to suggest that something changed there;

13 correct?

14 A. I did not receive such information from him. Now, for me to be

15 able to forecast that, I'm unable to do that, but he was not a person who

16 was negative in that sense.

17 Q. Well, I realise this isn't a psychological term, but it is sort of

18 a common layman's expression that a leopard doesn't change his spots.

19 Would you agree with that in general terms? I don't know if that

20 translates into a similar idiom, but what I'm trying to say is that isn't

21 it reasonable to expect that a likeable, popular, respected adolescent,

22 unless there is some intervening episode, would likely be a likeable,

23 well-respected young man in his 20s? Is that fair to say?

24 A. You can say so, unless something else intervenes or happens. But

25 I believe that this period was characteristic for him -- was mostly

1 characterised by some family events. I don't think that he went out to

2 develop social contacts, so that it doesn't allow us to know enough what

3 happened in April of 1992. But what he reported and what my assessment

4 was that he was more preoccupied with that rather than that he was engaged

5 in trying to become more socially likeable.

6 Q. Witness, nothing that you know about would prevent him from being

7 a leader, being accepted by his subordinates as being their leader, is

8 there? There's nothing that you know about that would prevent him from

9 taking that role.

10 A. Probably. I wouldn't ...

11 Q. Sorry. I am going to have to wait -- "Probably I wouldn't ..." is

12 all I've got. Probably you wouldn't know of anything to prevent that: Is

13 that your answer?

14 A. I said that in general when we spoke about that type of

15 personality. I believe that at the beginning I mentioned that.

16 MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Witness.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Ryneveld.

18 Mr. Petrovic.

19 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just a few

20 questions.

21 Re-examined by Mr. Petrovic:

22 Q. [Interpretation] Will you please tell me: In your practice, is it

23 usual to get the information from case history from the subject and the

24 rest of the work is your own expertise in the assessment of personality?

25 A. The information based on case history, whenever possible, that is,

1 if the subject is aware of it, is usually received from him, and that is

2 also of assistance to us, because from the information given by the

3 subject, we see a number of factors of his own personality: what he tries

4 to avoid, what he tries to emphasise, and so on, and evaluate. Also, if

5 it is possible to get hetero-anamnestic information, that is of

6 assistance, but the ones received directly from the subject are crucial.

7 Q. In other words, the information that is reported by the subject

8 about his case history is not the truth; it is just the raw material,

9 which is then subject to your expert analysis?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Does the information received by you about his case history

12 deviate significantly or is it in great discord with the information and

13 the findings that you came to through your examination of this subject?

14 A. No, it is not at odds, and in working with any subject, this is

15 the procedure that we follow. The information about the case history is

16 evaluated and fitted and clinically analysed within the context of all

17 other material that is available to us.

18 Q. Excuse me. Is part of your job precisely to distinguish the

19 images that the subject has of himself and what is a more objective view

20 of the subject?

21 A. Of course.

22 Q. Taking into account that Mr. Dosen, at the time when he was part

23 of the Keraterm security, was only 25 years of age, he was a young man

24 with very limited life experience, that he was facing situations which

25 were unprecedented in his and in other people's who surrounded him

1 experience, what effects could such a situation have on him, on his

2 personality, the personality of a person such as Damir Dosen was?

3 A. I believe that today we have already touched on that, but let me

4 re-emphasise it. This personality structure, with such character traits

5 as hypersensitivity, passivity, a certain kind of dependence and emotional

6 vulnerability and instability, additional stress experiences and

7 unpleasant experiences could only exacerbate his sense of insecurity,

8 inadequacy, depression, and low self-esteem.

9 Q. A number of witnesses appeared before this Trial Chamber who said

10 that, for instance, Damir Dosen talked to the detained persons, that he

11 explained to the detained persons that he was not responsible for what was

12 going on there, that he even offered to give them weapons so that they

13 could judge him, that at one point he threw to the ground his belt with a

14 pistol, that he could not take it any more, and things like that. Does

15 all such information comply with the perception that you gained of this

16 subject?

17 A. I believe that it does comply. As I said today, the amount of the

18 unpleasant and other things that exert pressure on him which he cannot

19 take, and he finds ways out, either in somatic symptoms or in a sense of

20 helplessness, and that is part of -- that I could put -- everything that

21 you just said I could put under that rubric. He simply cannot find a way

22 out of his passive situation.

23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. No more

24 questions.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Petrovic.

1 Ms. Najman, that concludes your testimony. You are released.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

3 [The witness withdrew]

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: We will adjourn until tomorrow morning at 9.30.

5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.26 p.m.,

6 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 26th day of July,

7 2001, at 9.30 a.m.

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25