1 Friday, 4 May 2001

2 [Sentence hearing]

3 [Open session]

4 [The accused entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.00 a.m.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Will the Registrar call the case, please.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Case number IT-95-9/1-S, the Prosecutor versus

8 Stevan Todorovic.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: May we have the appearances.

10 MS. PATERSON: Yes, Your Honour. Nancy Paterson, representing the

11 Office of the Prosecutor. With me today is Gramsci Di Fazio.

12 Mr. Di Fazio will be taking over responsibility for this case when I leave

13 the Tribunal next week. Aisling Reidy is also an attorney working on this

14 case, and Diane Boles is the case manager.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Ms. Paterson.

16 MR. BRASHICH: Good morning, Your Honour. Deyan Brashich for the

17 Todorovic Defence. I am joined by Mr. Nikola Kostich of the Milwaukee,

18 Wisconsin, bar, and also I am joined by Mr. Zivan Blagojevic of the

19 Bosanski Samac bar. Good morning, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you very much, Mr. Brashich.

21 This is a hearing for the sentence of the accused Stevan

22 Todorovic. It arises out of the accused's plea of guilty on the 13th of

23 December, 2000, which itself derives from an agreement between the

24 Prosecution and the accused whereby he pleaded guilty to Count 1 of the

25 indictment, charging persecution on the basis that that count encompasses

1 all the crimes charged in the remaining counts.

2 I should say that the Chamber has received and has read the briefs

3 from both the Prosecution and the Defence. Included in the Defence brief

4 is a synopsis of 15 witness statements. The Defence is also relying on

5 ten statements by family members and friends as to the character of the

6 accused.

7 The Prosecution has filed a motion seeking to cross-examine the

8 Defence witnesses with a view to rebutting the evidence to be presented by

9 some of what it calls the factual witnesses of the Defence. The Defence

10 has responded with a motion that the Prosecution be precluded from calling

11 this witness or, alternatively, that it be granted seven days to rebut the

12 evidence to be presented by the Prosecution witness.

13 The Chamber has considered carefully these motions and their

14 accompanying submissions. This is a sentencing hearing. As such, the

15 evidence must be relevant to sentencing issues, including in particular to

16 the character of the accused. However, the guilty plea was based on an

17 agreement between the Prosecution and the Defence and an important element

18 of this agreement was an agreement as to the facts.

19 The Chamber's acceptance of the guilty plea was obviously informed

20 by this agreement. It would be wrong, therefore, for the Chamber to allow

21 evidence in the sentence proceedings which in any way puts in issue the

22 agreed facts, even if the evidence is relevant in that it goes to the

23 character of the accused.

24 In the light of those criteria, that the evidence must be relevant

25 to the sentence proceedings, in particular, to the character of the

1 accused, and that the evidence must not in any way put in issue the

2 agreement between the parties as to the facts; in the light of those

3 criteria, the Chamber makes the following determination as to the evidence

4 which it will hear in these proceedings, and those who wish to follow me

5 may turn to the witness statements set out at the back of the Defence

6 brief. It's page 1 of the witness statements.

7 The first statement is from the president of the circuit court of

8 Doboj in Republika Srpska, and that will be admitted with no

9 cross-examination.

10 The second is from the commander of the centre for public safety

11 of the Minister for Internal Affairs. That will be admitted with no

12 cross-examination.

13 The third is from the president of the criminal court of the

14 Bosanski Samac county. Although, Mr. Brashich, I think you have some

15 words omitted here.

16 MR. BRASHICH: I believe so. I keep forgetting, Your Honour. I

17 believe so.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Because we are not interested in whether he has

19 been charged or convicted, but I think we understand what is intended.

20 The fourth is from the director of the Zenit corporation, and that

21 will be admitted too without cross-examination.

22 And the fifth from the Nova Forma corporation, that too will be

23 admitted without cross-examination.

24 Those five statements deal with the criminal record of the accused

25 and his employment possibilities after release, so those will be admitted

1 without cross-examination.

2 We turn next to the statement number 6, Mr. Cedomir Borojevic. He

3 is a Serb national, and he is a person whom the Defence is seeking to call

4 as a witness, and he will say that Mr. Todorovic effected the release of a

5 Muslim in 1992. The Chamber will admit that with no cross-examination.

6 Number 7, Ms. Lepa Djuric, she is a Serb. The Defence is not

7 seeking to call her as a witness but, as I understand it, will in any

8 event rely on her statement. She's an employee at or was an employee at

9 the police station where the accused worked in Bosanski Samac, and she

10 speaks as to his kindness to his employees in the first period of the

11 conflict. This will be admitted without cross-examination.

12 Statement number 8, Mr. Marko Prgomet, whom the Defence is seeking

13 to call as a witness, he is a Croatian who on one occasion was beaten by

14 soldiers at the Samac police station, and when he was later confronted by

15 the same soldiers, Mr. Todorovic came to his rescue saying, "Nobody is

16 allowed to beat you," and chased the soldiers away. We will not admit

17 this statement because the beatings of the accused is one of the charges

18 in the indictment and also part of the agreed facts.

19 Statement number 9, Ms. Svetlana Bosic, whom the Defence is not

20 seeking to call as a witness, she's a Serb -- or he, rather -- she, she is

21 a Serb and will say how the accused helped a Bosniak couple and provided

22 safe passage for them after their house had been shelled and their son

23 killed. We will admit this without cross-examination.

24 Statement number 10, Ms. Velinka Alatovic, whom the Defence is not

25 seeking to call but on whose statement they will rely, she's a Serb.

1 Again, she worked at the Bosanski Samac police station where the accused

2 was employed, and she speaks of his good character and of his virtues as

3 an employer. We will admit this without cross-examination.

4 Statement number 11, Ms. Gordana Ninkovic, she's a Serb. Again,

5 she worked at Mr. Todorovic's police station in Bosanski Samac. She found

6 him decent, understanding, and humane. However, her view that he treated

7 everyone with respect and equally puts in issue what is the essential

8 basis for the agreed facts; that is, the charge of persecution whose main

9 feature is discriminatory practices, so this statement will not be

10 admitted.

11 Statement number 12, Mr. Bijeljic, whom the Defence is seeking to

12 call, he's a Serb, knew the accused Todorovic from childhood. They were

13 neighbours, and during the war, the accused helped his sick father, and he

14 knew that the accused had a good reputation in his village. We'll admit

15 this statement without cross-examination.

16 Number 13, Mr. Milan Petrovic, whom the Prosecution -- whom the

17 Defence is seeking to call as a witness, he's a Serb. He worked as

18 Todorovic's driver and Todorovic helped his family in particular in

19 securing medication for his sick father. However, he also speaks about

20 the accused's lack of control over the army units in Samac. We will not

21 admit this statement because the question of the accused's responsibility

22 and control is one of the issues covered in the agreement facts.

23 Statement number 14, Ms. Jasna Marosevic, whom the Prosecution

24 [sic] is seeking to call, she's Croatian, and she would say how the

25 accused helped her father. But we will not admit this statement because

1 of her reference in it to a notice that she saw when she visited her

2 father at the detention centre. That notice was signed by the accused and

3 stated that unauthorised personnel could not enter the detention centre

4 and beat inmates. Again, as beatings by the accused is covered by the

5 agreed facts, this statement will not be admitted.

6 Number 15, Mr. Ostoja Minic, whom the Defence is not seeking to

7 call but on whose statement they will rely, he was a Serb. He was a

8 police inspector in Tuzla and also in Republika Srpska. He will say how

9 the accused, at his request, helped a Croat police officer who had been

10 detained and how the accused cooperated in the arrest of two leaders of a

11 Serbian group responsible for a number of crimes in the Samac area. These

12 events do not go to the issues covered by the agreed facts, and we will

13 admit this statement without cross-examination.

14 I turn next to the statements under the heading "Personal and

15 Family Statements."

16 Jovanka Todorovic, a sister of the accused, and Mara Todorovic --

17 I pause here just to get a clarification from Mr. Brashich.

18 As I understand it, the intention is to call his mother, Mara.

19 MR. BRASHICH: That is correct, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: But there is a reference, I think, to Dijana.

21 MR. BRASHICH: That is the younger sister, Mr. Todorovic's younger

22 sister.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: We will allow the sister Jovanka and the mother,

24 Mara, to testify.

25 MR. BRASHICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: And the statements of other family members and

2 friends will be admitted without cross-examination.

3 I turn next to the psychiatric evidence. We will allow the

4 psychiatrist, Dr. Lecic-Tosevski, to testify.

5 Now, as to the motions to call witnesses as to certain facts, the

6 evidence from the proposed Prosecution witness would clearly collide with

7 the agreed facts. Its purpose is to rebut some of the statements as to

8 facts that the Defence was seeking to adduce. However, the Chamber has

9 disallowed all those statements from Defence witnesses that would in any

10 way put in issue the agreed facts. Accordingly, that motion is dismissed

11 and so too is the responsive motion of the Defence.

12 Mr. Brashich, I was going to say that we will -- the procedure we

13 will follow is that we will now hear the witnesses. If this was not

14 clear, the Prosecution would be allowed, will be allowed, to cross-examine

15 these three witnesses.

16 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, I think the Defence has to regroup. I

17 had anticipated --

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: It is the language of battle, Mr. Brashich.

19 MR. BRASHICH: I did not mean that way. Perhaps it is combat,

20 Your Honour.

21 We do need to regroup. Mr. Kostich and I had anticipated one

22 portion of Your Honours' ruling. I must admit that we did not anticipate

23 the majority of your ruling and we were prepared to go forward with a

24 number of live witnesses.

25 For clarification's sake, if we just would take the witness

1 number 8, Mr. Marko Prgomet. Your Honours' ruling was that since it

2 brought in issue certain of the facts that we agreed on with the

3 Prosecution, you would not allow the statement to be entered into

4 evidence.

5 For clarification's sake, we had and have ready to testify

6 Mr. Prgomet. Am I to understand that the ruling by the Chamber would also

7 include his oral testimony which had been synopsised in this particular --

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

9 MR. BRASHICH: I think, Your Honour, we need -- Mr. Kostich and I

10 need about five minutes, because we had seven witnesses prepared to go,

11 with the last witness being the psychiatric expert. We're going to have

12 to scrap these plans and go forward with the two witnesses that the Court

13 has allowed us. So I would beg leave at this present point, if we

14 could --

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: We can give you ten minutes.

16 MR. BRASHICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Paterson, yes.

18 MS. PATERSON: Yes, just briefly, Your Honour, I would also take

19 this opportunity to remind Mr. Brashich that we had a discussion yesterday

20 concerning witness number 15, and I believe there was an agreement on the

21 part between us that some of the information provided in that statement

22 would be clarified by the Defence. I think that should --

23 MR. BRASHICH: That is correct.

24 MS. PATERSON: -- be brought to the Court's attention.

25 MR. BRASHICH: Thank you for reminding me. As I said --

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: That is a witness they are not seeking to call

2 but on whose statement they will rely.

3 MS. PATERSON: But what you have agreed to admit.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, yes. And there is to be a clarification?

5 MS. PATERSON: That is correct.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, fine.

7 MR. BRASHICH: As I said, I'm taking that back, so I'm regrouping,

8 so you are correct.

9 Your Honour, there is reference in the witness's statement, and

10 that is Ostoja Minic, that on one particular occasion he appeared at the

11 Bosanski Samac police station and met a person by the name of Lukac. Any

12 reference to that meeting with Mr. Lukac at the police station in 1992, it

13 is agreed by Ms. Paterson and myself, it is to be deleted from his

14 statement, and with respect, we would request that you do not consider

15 that in any way.

16 Am I correct, Ms. Paterson?

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is to be deleted? Let me get it clear.

18 Is --

19 MR. BRASHICH: Any reference that Mr. Ostoja Minic met Mr. Lukac,

20 Dragan, at the police station in April of 1992.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, very well. Well, we'll take -- do you have

22 another point?

23 MS. PATERSON: Just one other point, Your Honour. We do have a

24 joint stipulation that we'd like to submit. I don't know if you want me

25 to do that now or at another time; it's up to Your Honour.

1 And I just wanted to clarify, the three witnesses that you are

2 going to allow to testify, we will be permitted to cross-examine all three

3 of them?

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. I said so, yes, yes, yes.

5 Yes, we'll hear the joint submission.

6 MS. PATERSON: I'll just read it into the record and hand it up to

7 the clerk. It's entitled "Joint Stipulation."

8 It is stipulated between the Office of the Prosecutor and Defence

9 counsel for Stevan Todorovic that pursuant to the Plea and Cooperation

10 Agreement entered into between the parties on 28 November 2000, Stevan

11 Todorovic could --

12 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel please slow down. The

13 interpreters do not have a copy.

14 MS. PATERSON: Stevan Todorovic has been interviewed five times by

15 representatives from the Office of the Prosecutor.

16 It is further stipulated that the Office of the Prosecutor has

17 expressed a desire to conduct further interviews with Mr. Todorovic, and

18 he has agreed to that request.

19 Number 3: It is agreed by the parties that to date, Stevan

20 Todorovic has complied with the terms and spirit of the Plea and

21 Cooperation Agreement and has provided the Office of the Prosecutor with

22 the level of cooperation envisioned by the plea agreement.

23 And it's signed by myself and Mr. Kostich.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms. Paterson.

25 We now take the adjournment and return at 9.40, 20 minutes to 10:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

14 and the English transcripts.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 --- Break taken at 9.26 a.m.

2 --- On resuming at 9.40 a.m.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Kostich.

4 MR. KOSTICH: Your Honour, I just wanted to inquire of the Chamber

5 and make a request. It is based on your ruling, of course, and what we

6 did is because we anticipated some of the witnesses testifying, we had our

7 expert witness, Dr. Lecic, coming in at 10.00.

8 What I have done during the break is to call her. She's on her

9 way here, should be here very shortly, and I'm seeking this permission

10 from the Chamber: I've asked her to come upstairs because we haven't

11 quite arranged how she would come in, to just come in to the gallery, and

12 as soon as the short witnesses are finished, that she would then testify.

13 And I guess the Prosecutor has no objection. I'm not sure what your

14 practice is, and I'm asking for some direction on that.

15 JUDGE ROBINSON: We see no difficulty with that.

16 MR. KOSTICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

17 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, before we proceed, I just wanted to

18 finish some housekeeping matters.

19 What we propose to do, with the Chamber's leave, is that once we

20 finish with the expert witness, with regard to the Defence closing

21 argument, with your leave, we have broken the argument in two.

22 Mr. Kostich has taken a certain portion of the closing argument

23 and I have taken a certain portion of the closing argument. I wish to

24 assure the Court that it is not redundant, but we would ask leave that

25 once we go into the closing argument, the Defence be able to divide the

1 closing argument and to have Mr. Kostich address certain issues and myself

2 address certain issues.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: That's entirely a matter for you to decide.

4 MR. BRASHICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Provided, of course, that you do not repeat, as

6 you say.

7 MR. BRASHICH: Yes, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: And that it is not overly long.

9 MR. BRASHICH: We're going to try and be very short, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

11 MR. BRASHICH: May the Defence proceed, Your Honour?

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

13 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, at this present time, the Defence

14 would call Jovanka Todorovic. Your Honour, we don't have, apparently, the

15 ability to bring the witness from the witness room. May I do so, Your

16 Honour?

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: The usher will do that, Mr. Brashich.

18 MR. BRASHICH: Thank you.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Brashich, is your witness at hand? Is she in

20 Samac?

21 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, she is in the witness room, which is

22 about 100 feet away, 50 feet away, which is right next to the Defence

23 counsel's room. May I step outside, Your Honour?

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Perhaps you should, because you would be in a

25 better position to locate her.

1 [The witness entered court]

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness make the declaration.

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

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

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: You may be seated.

6 WITNESS: JOVANKA TODOROVIC

7 [Witness answered through interpreter]

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't hear anything.

9 MR. BRASHICH: May I proceed, Your Honour?

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Brashich.

11 Examined by Mr. Brashich:

12 Q. Mademoiselle, what is your name?

13 A. Jovanka Todorovic.

14 Q. Do you know Stevan Todorovic?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And are you related to him?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. You didn't expect to testify this morning, did you?

19 A. No.

20 Q. And how long have you known Mr. Todorovic?

21 A. Ever since my birth.

22 Q. He's your brother, right?

23 A. Yes, that's right.

24 Q. And until the war, the conflict in Bosnia, you lived together, did

25 you not?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Does Mr. Todorovic have any other brother or sister?

3 A. Yes, he does. He has one younger sister.

4 Q. And are you the oldest child of the family?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Tell us something about Mr. Todorovic's childhood, briefly.

7 A. My brother was always a very happy child. We were all very

8 pleased when he was born because he was the first male, and he was an

9 active child. He was a very good pupil and intelligent. He would always

10 win prizes at school. And when he lost prizes, he would lose them because

11 he was lively and would hit a window and would break a window with a ball,

12 for example, or he played with other children where he wasn't allowed to

13 play.

14 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... the college years, university

15 years, where did he go to school?

16 A. He went to primary school in our village, Donja Slatina, and

17 Obudovac Secondary School. He graduated from secondary school in Samac

18 and the mechanical engineering and technical school in Samac. He was a

19 good student there, except that his handwriting was very poor. He would

20 do graphic design and I would write them out.

21 Q. [Previous translation continues]...

22 A. When he graduated from the university in Sarajevo, he began

23 working in the wickerwork factory in Samac, first of all as a trainee and

24 later on as a technical director and finally as manager, bankruptcy

25 manager.

1 Q. [Previous translation continues]... bankruptcy manager?

2 A. Prior to the war, just before the war, companies in our town were

3 doing badly, doing business badly, and the workers in his particular

4 company voted a vote of no confidence to the previous director, and they

5 voted for him to try to get the firm back on its feet. And that was what

6 was referred to as a bankruptcy manager at the time.

7 Q. From your personal observation, was Mr. Todorovic well liked

8 before the conflict by all strata of Bosanski Samac society?

9 A. Yes, very much so. He had some exceptionally good friends amongst

10 all the ethnic groups, all the nationalities. They all liked him very

11 much, precisely because he was gay and lively. He liked music a great

12 deal, and he was very intelligent and diligent, very hard working.

13 Q. One last point, Ms. Todorovic: During the conflict, 1992 through

14 1995, were you living in Bosanski Samac?

15 A. Before the war and during the war I lived in Donja Slatina, a

16 village, a village of the Bosanski Samac municipality.

17 Q. How far is that from downtown, the centre of Bosanski Samac?

18 A. It's 11 kilometres from downtown Bosanski Samac.

19 Q. Could you tell us in this little village of Donja Slatina,

20 approximately how many houses are there in this village that you live in?

21 A. About 200 houses.

22 Q. Were you -- could you tell us in this little village --

23 MR. BRASHICH: Withdrawn, Your Honour. Could I make a

24 representation, Your Honour?

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Brashich.

1 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, I was going to ask three questions,

2 and I want to make it very clear that I am not in any way asserting that

3 there are other victims in Bosanski Samac. All I'm trying to get from

4 this witness is the war-like shelling, et cetera, that occurred during

5 that short period of time.

6 With that representation, Your Honour, I would only ask two or

7 three questions and be done with it.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, yes.

9 MR. BRASHICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

10 Q. Was the little village that you lived in shelled, granatiran?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Did you have electricity?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Were the conditions very hard?

15 A. Very hard --

16 Q. But are okay now?

17 A. -- extremely so. Yes.

18 MR. BRASHICH: I'm finished with this witness, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Brashich. Any cross-examination?

20 MS. PATERSON: No questions, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Todorovic, that concludes your testimony and

24 you may leave.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

1 MR. BRASHICH: Mr. Usher, with the Court's leave, the Defence

2 calls Mara Todorovic.

3 [The witness withdrew]

4 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, just for the record, our expert

5 witness has arrived and is present in the audience, and as soon as we

6 finish with Mrs. Mara Todorovic, Mr. Kostich will take the witness.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

8 [The witness entered court]

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness make the declaration.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I forgot my glasses.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Are you in a position to read the statement? You

12 can proceed, yes.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can somehow. I solemnly

14 declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the

15 truth.

16 WITNESS: MARA TODOROVIC

17 [Witness answered through interpreter]

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: You may be seated.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20 MR. BRASHICH: May I proceed, Your Honour?

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Brashich.

22 Examined by Mr. Brashich:

23 Q. What is your name?

24 A. My name is Mara Todorovic. I'm from Donja Slatina, near Samac.

25 Q. Are you Stevan Todorovic's mother?

1 A. Yes, I am the mother of Stevan Todorovic.

2 Q. I will ask you only a number of very short questions, and just

3 calm yourself. Is that okay?

4 A. Yes. Yes.

5 Q. Why don't you just tell the Court about Stevan Todorovic's

6 childhood, but very briefly.

7 A. Stevan Todorovic was very nice. He was a good pupil. He was a

8 good son, a bit mischievous, but he had good company, good friends. He

9 was very kind to us as his parents.

10 Q. And after he finished the university, did he come back to Bosanski

11 Samac?

12 A. Yes, he returned to Bosanski Samac, and every weekend he would

13 come home to help us. As we live in the village and work the farm, he

14 would help us. He took care of us. And when his father died in 1994, he

15 took over care of me and my daughters. I have an old mother that no one

16 has -- can take care of except him, and he still does. He takes care of

17 all of us.

18 Q. When he came back to Bosanski Samac and started working, did he

19 live with and your husband?

20 A. Yes, he did, he lived with us in the house and he commuted, and

21 whenever he was home, after work, he would help us in every way and take

22 care of us.

23 Q. Was he well liked in Bosanski Samac before the conflict?

24 A. Yes. He had many friends. He was very popular among friends and

25 family. He behaved correctly, and he had no problems at all that I am

1 aware of.

2 Q. [Previous translation continues]...

3 A. Of course, I do. He's my only son. He takes care of all of us,

4 especially his parents. He had a big heart for everyone, for family

5 members and his friends, and he took care of everything.

6 MR. BRASHICH: [Previous translation continues]...

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Any cross-examination?

8 MS. PATERSON: No questions, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mrs. Todorovic, that concludes your testimony,

10 and you may now leave.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. Thank you.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Kostich.

13 MR. KOSTICH: Your Honour, Dr. Lecic is seated in the front row

14 here, and if I would be allowed, I could attempt to get her through the

15 door, if that would be something we could do, or I can wait until the

16 marshal gets back.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Paterson?

18 MS. PATERSON: I just have another point, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Why don't you just go for her? Yes, yes.

20 MS. PATERSON: Your Honour, I've just been asked by the

21 transcribers to please ask Mr. Brashich to pause between the questions and

22 the answers. They're not able to record the questions so that we're not

23 getting a full transcript.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, I did observe that on the screen.

25 Mr. Brashich, please take that into account, yes.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

14 and the English transcripts.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 MR. BRASHICH: Yes, Your Honour.

2 [The witness entered court]

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness make the declaration.

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

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

6 WITNESS: DUSICA LECIC-TOSEVSKI

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: You may be seated.

8 Yes, Mr. Kostich.

9 MR. KOSTICH: If I may, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

11 MR. KOSTICH: Your Honour, I am going to ask questions, obviously

12 in English, and our witness will be answering in English so that the

13 people upstairs understand how we would like to proceed.

14 Examined by Mr. Kostich:

15 Q. Would you please state your name for the record.

16 A. My name is Dusica Lecic-Tosevski.

17 Q. You are a medical doctor?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And are you also a psychiatrist?

20 A. I am a psychiatrist, too.

21 Q. How are you employed at the present time?

22 A. At the present time, I'm employed as the head of the stress clinic

23 at the institute of mental health in Belgrade, and I'm also an associate

24 professor of psychiatry at the school of medicine, University of Belgrade.

25 MR. KOSTICH: Your Honour, if I may, the -- obviously the report

1 is in the record and the doctor's resume or CV is in the record. I spoke

2 to Ms. Paterson and Mr. Di Fazio yesterday about the qualifications of

3 Dr. Lecic, and it is my understanding that they would have no objection to

4 the doctor testifying as an expert witness so that we would short-circuit

5 having the Defence go through the qualifications of this expert because it

6 is in front of you, so that is a stipulation. Obviously, Your Honour, if

7 the Chamber feels otherwise, I would take that directive.

8 [Trial Chamber confers]

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Kostich. Her curriculum vitae

10 qualifications are in the record, so we take note of that.

11 MR. KOSTICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

12 Q. Doctor, just one question in regard to the qualifications. You

13 have indicated that presently you have two places of work. One is the

14 stress clinic. Can you tell us again very briefly what your duties are

15 there?

16 A. In the stress clinic I lead or I'm head of -- is establish the

17 institute of mental health in 1994, and we deal with traumatised people,

18 with refugees, war veterans, ex-detainees, and also civilians who have

19 been traumatised in some other possible ways. I also work as a

20 coordinator at the Centre of Rehabilitation for Torture Victims in

21 Belgrade.

22 Q. Just to caution you, because you will be using a lot of technical

23 words and giving us an opinion, please make sure that you speak slowly so

24 that the interpreters can catch up with you, okay?

25 A. Okay.

1 Q. I cut you off, I'm sorry. You were also going to tell us about

2 the other function that you have, the other position. So you may

3 continue.

4 A. The other position is, as I said, the Centre for Rehabilitation of

5 Torture Victims, and is it maybe of any interest to say what I'm doing at

6 the World Psychiatric Association at the moment?

7 Q. That's fine. That's fine. Now, pursuant to the appointment by

8 the Registry here, you were asked to examine Stevan Todorovic, were you

9 not?

10 A. Yes, I was.

11 Q. You also filed a written report, did you not?

12 A. I did.

13 Q. And you're mindful, as you testify today, that the report is now

14 in the possession of both the Prosecution and more importantly of the

15 Trial Chamber?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. The -- in order to explain a little bit about what you did in this

18 case, again briefly tell us what you did in order to prepare this

19 particular report. In other words, what type of an examination did you

20 perform?

21 A. My examination is based on a few things. First, I read the

22 documents of the Tribunal which are the indictment, the plea of

23 agreement. Then I read some reports of the witnesses. I have also talked

24 to co-counsel. Then I've done clinical interview and also few -- a

25 battery of tests for assessing personality and stress disorders.

1 Q. In regard to the clinical interview and the tests, what amount of

2 time did you actually spend with Stevan Todorovic?

3 A. I spent 12 hours with Stevan Todorovic.

4 Q. You indicated that you did a clinical interview. How important is

5 a clinical interview in order to render an opinion?

6 A. A clinical interview is very important, and it is called in

7 contemporary psychiatry a golden standard regarding the diagnostics of the

8 patient.

9 Q. Incidentally, when you communicated with Mr. Todorovic, what

10 language did you use?

11 A. I used Serbian language.

12 Q. Now, you also mentioned that you administered a number of tests;

13 is that correct?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Why did you administer those tests?

16 A. I used those tests in order to make the diagnostics more reliable

17 and more exact, more precise.

18 Q. You know, of course, that your report has a summary of the tests

19 that you used; is that correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. I have a couple of short questions about the tests. Some of the

22 tests - and you correct me if I'm wrong - that you used are tests that are

23 used internationally and they're widely accepted; is that correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Which ones are those?

1 A. These tests are -- belong to two groups. First group are the test

2 for assessing stress syndromes like Impact of Events Scale, then Symptom

3 Checklist - Revised having 90 questions. Then I have also used test for

4 assessing personality such as MCMI or Millon Clinical Multiaxial

5 Inventory, and NEO-P-R, test for -- Big Five test for assessing

6 personality dimensions. And lastly, regarding personality, I've used

7 Defense Style Questionnaire for assessing defence mechanisms.

8 Q. Is there an interplay between the clinical interview and the tests

9 that you administer?

10 A. Yes, very much so. They interconnected or, rather, clinical

11 interview is in accordance with the tests. Perhaps I should say the other

12 way round. The tests were in accordance with the results of the clinical

13 interview.

14 Q. In your practice -- and you've been a, I think, psychiatrist for

15 perhaps 20 years; is that right?

16 A. Yes. Twenty-one years.

17 Q. There is, I'm assuming occasionally, a test subject or patient who

18 you think may wish to give you information in order to get a particular

19 diagnosis. In other words, the person is not as candid or honest as they

20 can be. Does that happen from time to time?

21 A. Yes, it does happen.

22 Q. Is there any type of a process or a method in the tests that you

23 administer which would in some way give you a strong idea or an indication

24 that a patient is trying to in some way be dishonest with you?

25 A. Yes. There is so-called lie scale which is being used at the

1 beginning of assessing the test.

2 Q. And this is something that you've used hundreds or thousands of

3 times?

4 A. Yes, I have.

5 Q. One thing that I wanted to ask you is that in addition to the

6 tests that you've administered, did you consult with any other

7 professional, in other words, any other doctor or psychiatrist in regard

8 to Stevan Todorovic?

9 A. Yes. I have consulted the prison psychiatrist, Dr. Petrovic.

10 Q. And just so that the Chamber knows, can you tell them who

11 Dr. Petrovic is and what her role is?

12 A. Dr. Petrovic is a psychiatrist who is employed at the Detention

13 Unit, and she's treating and helping in many other ways the prisoners

14 there.

15 Q. And it is my understanding that she had seen Mr. Todorovic in the

16 past?

17 A. Yes. She has been seeing him quite often during his detention

18 years or months.

19 Q. Now, Doctor, on the basis of the clinical interview, the review of

20 the documents, the tests that you've administered, did you reach a

21 diagnosis to a reasonable degree of medical certainty?

22 A. Yes, I did.

23 Q. And you've couched the diagnosis in terms of what is commonly

24 referred to as a DSM-IV, which is a diagnostic manual; is that not

25 correct?

1 A. Yes, it is a diagnostic and statistical manual of mental

2 disorders.

3 Q. And that's published by the American Psychiatric Association?

4 A. It is published by APA, American Psychiatric Association.

5 Q. And are you familiar with DSM-IV and also its counterpart that's

6 used in -- on this side of the ocean, so to speak?

7 A. Its counterpart is called ICD-10, International Classification of

8 Diseases, and it is published by World Health Organisation in 1992.

9 Q. And are you familiar or have you done any work on these tests?

10 A. Actually, I've translated ICD-10 into Serbian, part of it dealing

11 with personality disorders, and I was one of the editors of the translated

12 book.

13 Q. Going back to the diagnosis, I've asked you, of course, whether

14 you've set a diagnosis and you said that you did. Can you tell me now

15 what your diagnosis is?

16 A. My diagnosis are following, and I will go axis by axis, which is

17 how the disorders are diagnosed in DSM-IV.

18 Mr. Todorovic manifests post-traumatic stress disorder which is in

19 Axis I of DSM-IV, and he also fulfilled all criteria for previous

20 alcoholic intoxication.

21 Regarding Axis II of personality disorders, he doesn't have

22 personality disorder, but he does have specific primary personality traits

23 which I might explain if you ask me to.

24 Then he also has so-called psychosomatic disorders or

25 psychophysiological disorders which have been the result of his intense

1 stress that he has experienced and these are diabetes mellitus and

2 essential hypertension. He also has some other somatic condition like

3 such enlarged liver and hiatus hernia. And he has experienced a lot of

4 intense stressors which are diagnosed on the Axis IV and which have been

5 diagnosed by the questionnaires that I have been using.

6 Q. Obviously the diagnosis is in your report.

7 A. Yes, it is.

8 Q. But I wouldn't want to be blamed for not letting you explain some

9 of the things that you mentioned that you wanted to explain, and that has

10 to do with the personality traits; is that right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Why don't you tell the Court what it is that you want to explain

13 to them about that issue?

14 A. Mr. Todorovic has dependent personality traits together with

15 extrovert or histrionic personality traits and conforming life-style,

16 which means that he is depending on others' decision. He does things,

17 many things, to please others in order to be liked. He's rather passive.

18 He is even -- he's complying to the decision of others, especially to the

19 decision of authorities towards him. He feels ambivalence. He fears them

20 but he also respects them, and he manifests passive and obedient behaviour

21 also in order to be accepted and to please the others.

22 Q. I'm also thinking that what you may want to explain to the Court

23 is the interplay or the connection of your diagnosis with his activities

24 back in 1992. Can you do that?

25 A. Yes. Back in 1992 he had full-blown or developed post-traumatic

1 stress disorder, and he also had, as I said, frequent alcohol

2 intoxication because he used to consume alcohol. And these two

3 conditions, after he had been exposed to many severe traumas and

4 stressors, it reduced his capability to control his conduct and to

5 understand the consequences of his conduct.

6 Q. Is it my understanding of your report that the condition that

7 you've just described occurred or began occurring a month or more after

8 the war?

9 A. Yes, but before that, he also had acute stress reaction, which is

10 an introduction into the post-traumatic stress disorder and which

11 manifests with similar symptoms like post-traumatic stress disorders,

12 which are avoidance of painful stimuli, hyperarousal, or nervousness,

13 intense effective tension, inability to sleep, feeling jumpy, and many

14 other things. And I have to point out that he had experienced very many

15 intense stressors like witnessing death of other people, witnessing

16 killing, seeing dead bodies, being under the daily destruction of bombing,

17 witnessing destruction of houses, poverty, being himself detained for two

18 days, and many other stressors which were objectively listed in the

19 questionnaire for assessing the stressors.

20 Q. Doctor, I want to go into another area, and beginning to get

21 towards the end of our discussion, at least from my side.

22 I would be interested, and I think the Chamber would, in knowing

23 what are generally the prospects for the rehabilitation of Mr. Todorovic?

24 A. Mr. Todorovic was a healthy personality, normally functioning

25 personality before the war, and he had no criminal disposition whatsoever.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

14 and the English transcripts.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 He has returned to his normal level of personality functioning now while

2 in prison, and I think that prospects of his rehabilitation are quite

3 good. I believe that he is going to -- he will be able to lead a creative

4 and productive life and to reintegrate into the social community.

5 Q. You sort of anticipated one of my questions, which is okay, but I

6 just wanted to make sure that, that I understand you, and that is the

7 issue of reintegration back into the society and into the community where

8 he came from. And I guess what I'm trying to do is -- maybe it's not fair

9 to you, but I'm sort of asking for a prognosis, whether that is possible,

10 and I wanted for you to give me an answer to that, if you could.

11 A. It depends on the prospects of his future and on the time that he

12 has to be imprisoned. If the prospects of his future are favourable for

13 him, I believe that he will be using his mature defence mechanisms that he

14 has, which I described in the report, and that he will be able to

15 reintegrate all traumas that he has experienced into his personality.

16 But if those prospects are unfavourable, he might go on developing

17 more severe types of psychosomatic disorders which he already has, and

18 these are, as I said, diabetes mellitus, which from latent turn into

19 manifest disorder now and he's being treated at the Detention Unit for

20 this disorder; and also for also some hypertension which might get worse.

21 He's also getting drugs, medication for this disorder. And also I

22 observed some problems with his heart, so he might develop cardiac

23 decompensations in the future if the prospects are not favourable for him.

24 Q. One other question: During your clinical interview, and perhaps

25 in your -- during your testing, did you discuss with him, and did he in

1 any way express to you his feelings about what had happened in 1992, and

2 whether or not he had any remorse for the activities and actions that he

3 was involved in?

4 A. Yes, he did. And while doing it, he was very excited, which has

5 been shown by his autonomous reaction, or should I say it plainly, with

6 redness in his face, with disturbance at the moment of that interview, and

7 with sighing. He told me that he feels remorse, guilt, and humiliated for

8 what he has been happening in 1992.

9 Q. Thank you very much.

10 MR. KOSTICH: I have no further questions, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Cross-examination.

12 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please --

13 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

14 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm not sure of the status of the report of

15 Dr. Lecic-Tosevski. I understand it has been filed by the Court. I want

16 to ask some questions based on the contents of that document.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, you're perfectly free to do that.

18 Cross-examined by Mr. Di Fazio:

19 MR. DI FAZIO:

20 Q. Dr. Lecic, do you have a copy of your psychiatric report?

21 A. Yes, I do.

22 Q. Is it fair to say that you comment upon two psychiatric

23 disturbances or illnesses that Mr. Todorovic has suffered from: Firstly,

24 a reactive depression when he first arrived in prison, and secondly, this

25 diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. That is the sum total of his psychiatric disorders that you are

3 able to discover?

4 A. Yes. I haven't discovered reactive depression. I was told by the

5 prison psychiatrist that he had it here.

6 Q. Reactive depression, perhaps in layman's terms, is simply a

7 reaction to his situation?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. The other matter that I want to ask you about is the -- your

10 diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder. That diagnosis is, in large

11 part, entirely dependent upon the history that he provides to you?

12 A. In a large part, but I've also used tests for assessing

13 post-traumatic stress disorder.

14 Q. The history of the order interests me. You said that back in

15 1992, he had a fall-blown post-traumatic stress disorder. How can you

16 conclude that?

17 A. By careful history taking and by using the operational criteria

18 which are given in DSM-4.

19 Q. Essentially, you ask him questions about his condition, how he

20 felt, what he experienced back in 1992?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. He responds, and then from those responses, you make -- you draw

23 your conclusions?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. In your report, you, towards the end of the report, you refer to

1 three factors that are important in an assessment of post-traumatic stress

2 disorders, and they are biological factors, personality factors, and

3 social factors. That's correct, isn't it?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And when you discuss personality factors, you say, and I quote

6 from your report, "Retrospective diagnostics is difficult, but it seems

7 that he had a fully-developed post-traumatic stress disorder during the

8 war." Why do you say that retrospective diagnostics is difficult?

9 A. It is an idiom of psychiatry.

10 Q. I'm not sure what you mean by that. Can you explain that, please.

11 A. When we think or talk about the things that we are not witnessing

12 right now as psychiatrist, we can't be hundred per cent sure. That's why

13 we say retrospective diagnostics is not -- can't be hundred per cent

14 certain. But there are some other tests that are used, and I've used two

15 or three tests for assessing stress syndromes which help me make reliable

16 diagnosis.

17 Q. It's the retrospectivity of the diagnosis that I'm interested in.

18 How can you be sure by the administration of these tests just how far

19 back --

20 A. No, a test assess the current condition.

21 Q. That's what I mean. How can you, from using these tests and

22 administering these tests, can you conclude as to how far back the

23 condition goes, how far back in time?

24 A. Because the tests can't make scores reliable for assessing

25 post-traumatic stress disorder now when he's not exposed to severe

1 stresses. The tests are also assessing chronicity of disorder.

2 Q. That brings me to another issue. You say in your report that the

3 post-traumatic stress disorder is chronic in nature. That is a reference

4 to the degree of longstanding, not intensity, of the disorder?

5 A. Yes, regarding current condition of Mr. Todorovic.

6 Q. Can you tell us if post-traumatic stress disorders vary in

7 intensity, in other words, how severe the condition is from individual to

8 individual.

9 A. It is -- when it is accurate [sic], it is always severe. When it

10 is chronic, of course, the symptoms become somewhat reduced.

11 Q. Somewhat, sorry?

12 A. Reduced --

13 Q. Reduced.

14 A. -- in intensity.

15 Q. The onset of post-traumatic stress disorders, can that be a matter

16 that occurs over a period of time; in other words, can one acquire it

17 gradually?

18 A. Yes, one can. I give it within the first month or within three

19 months when it is acute post-traumatic stress disorder, or there is also

20 so-called delayed type of post-traumatic stress disorder which might

21 manifest later.

22 Q. Can you comment upon the onset of Mr. Todorovic's post-traumatic

23 stress disorder; in other words, can you say whether it came on suddenly

24 or over a period of time or whether it was delayed, as you say?

25 A. No, it was acute post-traumatic stress disorder.

1 Q. How do you know that?

2 A. Because of the symptoms which appeared within the first month

3 after the exposition [sic] to traumatic experiences.

4 Q. The part of your report beginning from the paragraph headed "Case

5 History --"

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Page?

7 MR. DI FAZIO: Your Honours, my copy is unpaginated. I'm looking

8 at the, essentially the second page of the report. It begins "Content,"

9 and deals with psychiatric assessment, case history.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, yes. We have it.

11 MR. DI FAZIO: And I'm going to ask a question about the body of

12 the document. In fact, I can tell the Court that my next series of

13 questions would be on the part that -- what ensues in the report up to and

14 including psychiatric assessment and diagnostic consideration, so the next

15 ten pages or so.

16 Q. Dr. Lecic-Tosevski, I want to ask you about your report and the

17 case history and the material that follows right up until the point where

18 you discuss your assessment and your diagnostic consideration. Is it fair

19 to say that that's really the history that you took from this particular

20 defendant, Mr. Todorovic?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. It's the result of information provided to you in the main from

23 him, Mr. Todorovic?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. It also has, I believe, some information given to you by

1 Dr. Petrovic?

2 A. Yes, and by co-counsels.

3 Q. I'm sorry?

4 A. By the counsels.

5 Q. Yes. Incidentally, that information provided to you by counsel

6 were some Court documents, an indictment?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And also included a number of witness statements?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Were those, were those witness statements, statements of victims?

11 A. Yes, they were.

12 Q. How many victim statements were you able to look at?

13 A. Several.

14 Q. Can you recall how many, give us an order of numbers; one or two,

15 10 or 12?

16 A. I think three statements about sexual offences, and one statement

17 or two about the beatings.

18 Q. Thank you. Did you ever have an opportunity to speak to any of

19 the victims?

20 A. No, I didn't.

21 Q. In the report, you -- in this section of the report, you refer to

22 his childhood, schooling, his sexuality, interpersonal relationships, and

23 work. Is it fair to say that they reveal a fairly unexceptional, ordinary

24 upbringing?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. There's nothing there that would lead you to conclude that you

2 could see the beginnings of any psychiatric disorder?

3 A. No, nothing.

4 Q. How did you actually obtain this history relating to matters such

5 as schooling, sexuality, interpersonal relationships, work?

6 A. By structured clinical interview.

7 Q. Would it be fair to say by questioning him?

8 A. By questioning him, and also by using structured questions,

9 questions regarding his previous history which I use for war veterans and

10 traumatised persons at my clinic.

11 Q. Am I correct that you led him to the various topics that you were

12 seeking information on?

13 A. His psychiatric history has to fulfil a certain number of

14 questions.

15 Q. It may well do, but am I correct in saying that it was you who led

16 him to the, by questioning, to the various topics such as schooling, work,

17 and so on?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. In the section that deals with interpersonal relationships --

20 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours, please, that's at page 3. It's

21 unpaginated, as I said, but the third page of the body of the report.

22 Q. In the section where you deal with interpersonal relationships,

23 there's a statement to the effect that 90 per cent of his friends were of

24 different ethnic origin and yet he had never discriminated people because

25 of their nationality. Do you recall that?

1 A. Yes, I do.

2 Q. Was that information volunteered to you by Mr. Todorovic, or was

3 it the result of your direct inquiry on that topic?

4 A. It was volunteered information, given when he was describing his

5 student years.

6 Q. Again, in the next section there's a paragraph dealing with his

7 work history, and there is a reference to a desire amongst Croats and

8 Muslims at a factory in which he worked to have him as a director.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Was that volunteered to you?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. The history that you obtained from him dealt with, dealt with his

13 involvement in politics and his position as police chief in Bosanski

14 Samac. He told you, did he not, that he accepted a position as president

15 of the local committee of the Serbian Democratic Party unwillingly?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Again, did he tell you that; in other words, did he volunteer

18 that, or did you ask him about how willing or otherwise he was to be -- to

19 accept such a position?

20 A. I asked him how he felt in that position.

21 Q. He told you on a number of occasions, didn't he, that he felt an

22 aversion to politics?

23 A. Yes, he has.

24 Q. He told you that he was always against politics, and I'm quoting

25 from your report.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

14 and the English transcripts.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. How do his utterances that he was against politics and had an

3 aversion against politics sit with his assertion to you, his telling you

4 that he became involved in politics?

5 A. He wasn't involved in politics because all of his family wasn't

6 dealing with politics and actually was anti-communist oriented.

7 Q. Another matter that you -- he raised or that was raised during the

8 history taking is his desire or otherwise to be involved in the police.

9 He made it clear to you that he never wanted to be a policeman?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Again, did he volunteer that, or did you ask him about that?

12 A. I asked him the circumstances of him becoming the head of police.

13 Q. In other words, how it came to be --

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. -- that he was a policeman?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And in the context -- in answering that, he told you that he

18 didn't want to be a policeman?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. That assertion that he didn't want to be a policeman really paints

21 the picture of a man thrust into the position against his wishes, doesn't

22 it?

23 A. Yes, yes, it does.

24 Q. It was clear to you, when you were taking the history, that from

25 having got his background, his work history, that sort thing, that he was

1 a man who had no prior experience as a policeman?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And it was clear to you that he was a man who did not wish to

4 be --

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. -- a policeman?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Did that give rise to any skepticism about his assertion that he

9 did not want to be a policeman?

10 A. No, because he has explained -- he explained to me why he didn't

11 want it.

12 Q. What was the explanation?

13 A. The explanation was that he didn't feel competent for the position

14 and that he was always -- always against a leading position. He said even

15 that he always liked to be at the second row.

16 Q. Yes, I understand that. I understand that that's his explanation,

17 but what I'm asking is that given his explanation that he didn't want to

18 be in a leading position and that he liked to be in the second row, does

19 that give rise to -- and the fact that he ultimately accepted the position

20 as chief of police, does that give rise to any skepticism about his

21 assertion that "I did not want to be a policeman"?

22 A. It gives rise to a wish of a psychiatrist to assess the

23 personality underlying such decision or acceptance of such positions

24 without opposition.

25 Q. Have you any reason to doubt his assertion that he did not want to

1 be a policeman?

2 A. I don't.

3 Q. Can I ask you some questions about the -- some of the more

4 traumatic events that he referred to?

5 MR. DI FAZIO: And if Your Honours please, I'm referring to the

6 sixth page of the report. Again, it's unpaginated.

7 Q. He described to you experiences of being unable to recall in full

8 some of the important parts of the traumas he experienced.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. He told you that he couldn't recall a lot of events.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. He told you that he couldn't recall hitting a person on the head,

13 a person who later died.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. That's all, of course, consistent with heavy drinking and amnesia

16 caused by heavy drinking?

17 A. It is.

18 Q. Is it also consistent with someone who does not wish to accept

19 responsibility for his actions?

20 A. Yes, but under the circumstances of his heavy drinking and having

21 previously even before the war amnesic episodes or blackouts, it's

22 consistent with his heavy drinking and intense stresses that he has

23 experienced.

24 Q. There's nothing to suggest that Mr. Todorovic is an alcoholic, is

25 there?

1 A. One can't say that he's alcoholic because he did not manifest any

2 problems for alcohol dependence now in prison, but he did drink heavily

3 during his student years.

4 JUDGE MAY: Well, Mr. Di Fazio, it's going to be no mitigation

5 that he was drinking at this time. It can't be mitigation that these

6 offences were committed in drink. It could never be such mitigation, and

7 it must have been very common at this period.

8 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honour pleases, my point and my object is

9 not to attack that as a possible mitigatory factor, it's a question of

10 responsibility and acceptance of responsibility that I'm primarily

11 interested in, not the -- not any fear on my part that heavy drinking

12 might be in any way a mitigating factor in itself. It's a question of

13 responsibility and acceptance that I'm interested in and that's the reason

14 why I ask these questions.

15 Q. He also has no recollection of ordering any sexual offences.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. I'll get straight to the point. The reason I'm asking you these

18 questions is that he paints the picture of a man who just can't remember

19 much of the more severe aspects of his behaviour, does he not?

20 A. More severe aspects of his behaviour, of his criminal action.

21 Q. Yes. I'm referring to the beatings and the sexual attacks and so

22 on.

23 A. He had some problems with recollecting these events, as I've noted

24 in the report, but it's also in accordance with post-traumatic stress

25 disorder.

1 Q. What I'm interested in is, is his claim to be unable to remember

2 significant aspects of these events only possibly due to alcoholic amnesia

3 or is it possibly due --

4 A. No.

5 Q. -- to a reluctance on his part to accept responsibility for what's

6 done?

7 A. On the human memory, and memorising is a complex phenomenon, but

8 one can say that he didn't -- can't recollect some of the events due to

9 so-called dissociative amnesia, which is a part of post-traumatic stress

10 disorder.

11 Q. And as far as the inability to recollect the specific things, the

12 beatings, ordering of sexual attacks is concerned, you are entirely

13 dependent on what he tells you in concluding whether or not that's true?

14 A. Yes, and upon the observation and conclusion of certain techniques

15 that psychiatry uses when communicating with a patient.

16 Q. And in addition, when giving the history, he -- you asked him

17 about his physical -- past physical ailments and he described to you an

18 episode where he broke his arm in an automobile accident. Do you recall

19 that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And you pointed out that -- he pointed, rather, to that injury as

22 evidence that he could not beat people intensely with a broken and

23 immobilised arm. Again, did he volunteer that?

24 A. Yes, he did.

25 Q. That piece of information follows shortly after the -- your report

1 of the -- his inability to recall significant aspects of the beatings and

2 sexual attacks. Is it fair to conclude that he told you about his

3 inability to beat intensely soon after you asked him about his

4 recollection of the beatings and sexual attacks?

5 A. He told me about his broken arm when I asked him about his body

6 condition, somatic condition, but when we are talking about actual

7 criminal behaviour, then he repeated this thing.

8 MR. DI FAZIO: Would Your Honours just bear with me for one

9 moment.

10 [Prosecution counsel confer]

11 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. I have no further questions.

12 Questioned by the Court:

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Doctor, it's of some importance to the Chamber to

14 know when this condition first -- first started. When was the onset of

15 the condition, the stress?

16 You have read the indictment and you are familiar with the facts.

17 The indictment covers a period from roughly the 17th of April, 1992 to

18 December 1993. From the familiarity that you have developed with the

19 case, when would you say was the onset of this disorder in relation to

20 this period?

21 A. The onset of this disorder, I would say, was within the first

22 month after they entered Samac, but I think that he also manifested acute

23 stress reaction which was -- which happened before April 1992 due to many

24 stressors that were happening at the area.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: What precise events would you identify as the

1 cause of that stress at that period?

2 A. Confusion, uncertainty, news that were arriving from the army

3 places, lack of sleep, lack of concentration, and many other things that

4 he manifested at the time. We are speaking about --

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Those are the symptoms. I'm asking you what

6 actual events would have brought this stress on. Presumably this stress

7 arises from certain events.

8 A. Yes.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: So I'm asking you what events within the first

10 month would have brought on this stress?

11 A. That area he was living in was heavily bombed, almost every day,

12 and houses were destroyed, according to the information I was given.

13 There were about 400 dead people due to the bombing and about 1.500

14 wounded people, many of them massacred due to the bombs. And he was

15 seeing this, bodies, and witnessed some of the killings. He also attended

16 some of the mass funerals. Many of his known people were killed, even

17 some of his relatives and some of his good friends. He also was a few

18 times at the front line -- front line, delivering food and cigarettes to

19 the soldiers, when his life was in danger. Then he also was detain for

20 two days by the Serbian forces and was severely beaten there.

21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Do you make a distinction between the effect

22 which his drinking would have had on his conduct, on the one hand, and

23 the -- what you call the post-traumatic stress, or are the two things

24 intertwined?

25 A. I think the primary disorder was post-traumatic stress disorder,

1 and it usually complicates or its usual common complication is alcoholic

2 intoxication.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: You're saying the condition is aggravated by

4 alcohol?

5 A. No. I said his primary problem or primary disturbance was

6 post-traumatic stress disorder.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: I ask that because in your report, and counsel

8 asked you about this, on the page dealing with the questioning relating to

9 whether he remembered hitting the head of the person who died afterwards,

10 you say: "During that time he was often, severely drunk, as he was always

11 tempore criminis," meaning, I take it, that he was always drunk at the

12 time of the commission of the crimes. Could you explain that?

13 A. Yes, but his drinking was reactive drinking, and he had an

14 autotherapeutic effect because he wanted to, as most people do, people who

15 drink, to neutralise his high anxiety due to the stresses that he has

16 experienced.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: But was he drunk at the time of the commission of

18 these crimes?

19 A. Yes. He told me so.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

21 JUDGE MAY: Doctor, we've got a report. This is a report which

22 the court ordered from Dr. Soyka from Munich. Let me just put part of it

23 to you. This is pages 10 and 11 of the report.

24 "Mr. Todorovic repeated that during the relevant period," this is

25 1992, "he experienced only small mood changes. He was affected by the war

1 in which several of his cousins were killed and by the many funerals he

2 attended. Otherwise, his family and private life was not affected ...

3 Mr. Todorovic did not report any other psychiatric/psychological

4 complaints or abnormalities during the war period, including

5 hallucinations, severe sleep disorders, or phases of extensive tension,

6 fear, or mood disorders. Mr. Todorovic reported that from summer 1992 he

7 occasionally felt tired but otherwise healthy. He had a car accident," in

8 June 1992, "in which his right arm was injured."

9 And then as to the alcohol history:

10 "Mr. Todorovic reported not to drink alcohol on a daily basis,

11 but occasionally. As a director of the factory, he had visitors from time

12 to time with whom he drank alcohol ... He once lost his driving licence

13 because of alcohol. He denies any serious drug or alcohol problems."

14 It may not be that you can comment on that passage, but it appears

15 that the reports that you receive are rather different to those reports.

16 A. Have you got any question?

17 JUDGE MAY: Yes, that.

18 A. I read carefully the report of my colleague, and it differs only

19 in conclusion. And if I may say, my colleague used few words like

20 "Mr. Todorovic reports," or always says "he reported," "he reports." I'm

21 afraid that my colleague didn't ask questions regarding his personality

22 and his experience of stress, because if you don't ask those questions,

23 the patient won't report. We don't have to wait for report; we have to

24 ask questions. Because excluded in his conclusion, which I read

25 carefully, major psychiatric disorders such as major depression and

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

14 and the English transcripts.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 psychosis, and that will be all. But he didn't deal with his stress

2 experience, neither did he deal with his personality.

3 JUDGE MAY: We have his report, and we will obviously have to

4 consider the evidence and your evidence. Thank you.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Any re-examination, Mr. Kostich?

6 MR. KOSTICH: Your Honour, I may have only one question.

7 Re-examined by Mr. Kostich:

8 Q. Dr. Lecic, you have reviewed Dr. Soyka's report. Is there any

9 indication in the report that you reviewed that Dr. Soyka administered any

10 of the tests that you administered or any other tests or questionnaires?

11 A. No, there is no indication.

12 MR. KOSTICH: I have nothing further. Thank you.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Kostich.

14 Doctor, that concludes your testimony, and you may now leave.

15 [The witness withdrew]

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Now, Mr. Brashich, how long will your submissions

17 be?

18 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, with regard to the -- before -- it

19 will be a submission of approximately five minutes and then closing

20 argument, and I would perhaps suggest respectfully, Your Honour, that this

21 would be a good time to break.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we are going to break. But I want to get an

23 idea of the length of the submissions.

24 MR. BRASHICH: Altogether and all told, Your Honour, I would say

25 35 minutes at the most, 40 minutes.

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Ms. Paterson.

2 MS. PATERSON: Your Honour, my statement should take about 10

3 minutes.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Brashich, do I take it that this concludes

5 the evidence that you are going to present?

6 MR. BRASHICH: Yes, Your Honour. There will be a statement by the

7 accused and closing argument on behalf of the accused, a very brief

8 statement to the Court.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, that would come before your submissions.

10 MR. BRASHICH: Yes, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: All right. We'll take a break and resume at

12 11.35.

13 MR. BRASHICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

14 --- Recess taken at 11.05 a.m.

15 --- On resuming at 11.39 a.m.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Brashich.

17 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, during the break, I've consulted with

18 Ms. Featherstone -- or Mr. Kostich has consulted with Ms. Featherstone,

19 and what I would propose, with Your Honours' leave, would be to perhaps

20 suggest that Ms. Paterson makes her closing argument, that Mr. Todorovic

21 makes a very brief statement, that Mr. Kostich takes one-half of the

22 closing argument, and that I finish.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: So you're suggesting that he be interposed.

24 MR. BRASHICH: Yes, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, yes.

1 MR. BRASHICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: So we start with Ms. Paterson.

3 [Prosecution Closing Statement]

4 MS. PATERSON: Your Honours are fully aware of the charges against

5 Stevan Todorovic and the circumstances leading up to his plea of guilty.

6 As you know, he has pleaded guilty to the crime of persecutions which is a

7 crime against humanity. The crime against humanity is one of the most

8 serious crimes that a human being can commit, and the sentence imposed for

9 such a crime must reflect the gravity of that offence. As we noted in our

10 sentencing brief, the Appeals Chamber has stated that the Tribunal has an

11 obligation to show that the international community --

12 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel slow down, please.

13 MS. PATERSON: -- will not tolerate such crimes.

14 Having said that, the Prosecution also does not in any way mean to

15 minimise the fact that as a result of the Plea and Cooperation Agreement

16 negotiated between the Office of the Prosecutor and Stevan Todorovic,

17 Mr. Todorovic agreed to cooperate with the OTP and to provide significant

18 information. I can confirm that Mr. Todorovic has spoken with

19 representatives of our office on multiple occasions, and on each occasion

20 he has participated in a fully cooperative and forthright manner. Some of

21 the information he has provided might not have been accessible to the

22 Prosecution but for his cooperation. Mr. Todorovic has agreed to continue

23 his cooperation, and there are plans to interview him on future

24 occasions. In addition, he has agreed to testify at the trial in this

25 case and in other cases in which his assistance might be useful. Quite

1 simply, to date, he has upheld his part of the bargain.

2 But the point is, whether we like the word and its implications or

3 not, his plea was part of a bargain, and he has already received the most

4 significant benefit from that bargain: an agreement on the part of the

5 officer of the Prosecutor to ask for a sentence of no more than 12 years.

6 Had he gone to trial and been convicted, he would in all probability have

7 faced a sentence in the range of 15 to 25 years or more. We have no

8 intention of not abiding by our promise, and I do not ask you to sentence

9 him to more than 12 years, but a sentence of less than 12 years would be

10 inappropriate in light of the many factors the Trial Chamber should take

11 into consideration.

12 In our written submission, we have made reference to several

13 important considerations that should be weighed when determining the

14 appropriate sentence. It is significant that Stevan Todorovic was a

15 direct participant in the crimes with which he was charged and that he

16 committed the heinous crime of murder and the humiliating crimes of sexual

17 assaults. He was notorious in the police station and the other camps in

18 Bosanski Samac for the viciousness of his beatings. His participation in

19 the acts of deportation, forced labour, and other serious violations of

20 the human rights of the Muslim and Croat residents of Bosanski Samac was a

21 crucial element in the successful campaign of ethnic cleansing waged in

22 that municipality.

23 Particularly disturbing is the fact that he was the police chief

24 of Bosanski Samac at the time he committed the crimes charged. He should

25 have been the man all the citizens, regardless of their ethnic background,

1 went to for help and assistance. Instead, he became one of the most

2 feared people in town, and he did nothing to stop his subordinates and

3 others who were waging a reign of terror on the innocent non-Serb

4 residents of Bosanski Samac.

5 The Defence argues in its submission that it should somehow be a

6 factor in his favour that he was the head of a lawfully existing police

7 department rather than the commander of an illegal defence centre when, in

8 fact, the opposite is true. Rather than enforcing the rule of law and

9 bringing some stability in a time of great turmoil, he breached the public

10 trust that is imbued in the police and allowed brutal crimes to occur;

11 except in a few rare circumstances, he did nothing to intervene.

12 Your Honours have heard the testimony of the psychiatrist and read

13 the two reports. As Judge May himself pointed out, there are some

14 differences in the content of the reports, but there is one factor on

15 which both psychiatrists agree: There is no evidence whatsoever that

16 Mr. Todorovic has any diminished capacity or lack of mental capacity.

17 And that brings us to perhaps the most important factor to be

18 considered in sentencing, that being the effect of the crime on the

19 victims. We must not lose sight of why we are here today; to bring

20 justice to those who were the victims of these terrible crimes. The

21 hundreds of families forced to leave Bosanski Samac against their will,

22 whose lives were changed forever, need to know that Stevan Todorovic is

23 appropriately punished for his role in those expulsions. The men and

24 women who toiled on forced labour projects under brutal conditions need to

25 know that their unfair treatment has not gone unnoticed.

1 The hundreds of men and some women detained under inhumane

2 conditions at the different detention camps in Bosanski Samac, people who

3 were beaten, tortured, starved, and denied the most basic human amenities

4 need to know that their suffering is being acknowledged. The men beaten

5 personally by Stevan Todorovic, Enver Ibralic, Hasan Jasarevic, Omer

6 Nalic, (redacted), Silvester Antunovic, Hasan Bicic, Kemal

7 Bobic, (redacted), Abdulah Drljacic, Zlatko Dubric, (redacted), and

8 Hasan Subasic, need to know that the physical and mental suffering they

9 endured has been appropriately sanctioned.

10 Those men, whose names will remain private, who were forced to

11 perform embarrassing sexual acts need to know that their humiliation is

12 recognised by this Court. And finally, the family and friends of Anto

13 Brandic, known to them as Antesa, need to know that his senseless death at

14 the hands of Stevan Todorovic and others has been adequately punished.

15 Stevan Todorovic has made a bargain and has lived up to his part

16 of the bargain. He claims that he feels remorse for his actions and we

17 certainly hope that that is true, but Stevan Todorovic committed many

18 terrible crimes and should receive a sentence commensurate with those

19 acts.

20 Nine years ago, in April 1992, the lives of all the residents of

21 Bosanski Samac changed forever. For the majority of the victims and

22 witnesses in this case, nine years later they still are not able to return

23 home and they continue to pay the price for the actions of Stevan

24 Todorovic and his associates.

25 No sentence, however long, will undo the harm he has done nor give

1 back those years to the victims, but under the circumstances, a sentence

2 of 12 years is clearly appropriate. I therefore respectfully request that

3 this Trial Chamber sentence Stevan Todorovic to a term of 12 years in

4 prison. Thank you.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Paterson, may I ask you, you have

6 acknowledged that, had the matter gone to trial, the range of punishment

7 would have been somewhere between 15 and 25 years. Are you saying that it

8 would be appropriate in the circumstances to recognise the substantial

9 cooperation that the accused has rendered by reducing his sentence to what

10 would be in effect almost a half of that maximum range?

11 MS. PATERSON: What I am saying is that he should get the benefit

12 of the bargain that the Prosecution agreed to, that is, that we're asking

13 for a reduced sentence of no more than 12 years. I don't believe he

14 should get a sentence of less than 12 years, but at the same time, as we

15 promised, we are not asking for more than 12 years. Whether or not that

16 is half of what he might have received, one-third, is not the issue. The

17 issue is he has already received a substantial benefit by pleading guilty

18 and getting, if Your Honours abide by our recommendation, a substantially

19 reduced sentence.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Ms. Paterson.

21 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, I would ask leave for Mr. Todorovic to

22 make his statement from the accused's box or block.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, he may do that.

24 MR. BRASHICH: Mr. Todorovic, do you wish to address the Court?

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.

1 MR. BRASHICH: Please do so.

2 [Statement by the Accused]

3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Honours, never in my life did

4 I want to be the chief of police, but perhaps destiny or a set of

5 unfortunate circumstances put me in that position, and at the worst

6 possible time, the time of war, and here I am today standing before you,

7 before world public opinion, and before God.

8 War is hell. The town of Bosanski Samac, as well as the police

9 station, throughout the war were actually on the very front line.

10 Artillery shells were falling almost daily on the town, as well as

11 throughout the territory of the municipality. Frequent deaths, the

12 wounding of soldiers, civilians, and children occurred. Attending the

13 funerals of my relatives, friends, and acquaintances was frequent.

14 The testimony of Serbs who came from Odzak and Orasje through a

15 process of exchange, events followed one another at great speed, and at

16 times, it was very difficult to act wisely. A great deal of fear, panic,

17 fatigue, stress, and at times alcohol, too, influenced my actions. Under

18 those circumstances, I made erroneous decisions and I committed erroneous

19 acts. At the time, I didn't have sufficient courage or determination to

20 prevent volunteers and local criminals from committing evil and plundering

21 the non-Serb population, and for this I feel great remorse.

22 Before the war, I had not planned ethnic cleansing or persecution,

23 nor was I aware of any such plan. Two weeks into the war, I realised that

24 a large number of non-Serbs had left and were continuing to leave the

25 territory of Samac municipality. I realised but I lacked courage to

1 prevent the illegal and inhuman activities that were going on and that --

2 such treatment of non-Serbs, due to which those people left the territory

3 of Samac municipality.

4 Some of them left out of fear even before the conflict, some via

5 Yugoslavia to western European countries, while a certain number left

6 through the exchanges and against their own will. Those exchanges in

7 those days seemed to me as a temporary solution. I realise today that

8 those exchanges were unfair and unjust.

9 In the autumn of 1992, I realised that the volunteers from Serbia

10 had done more harm and evil than good. As I was still afraid of them,

11 secretly we undertook to get rid of them and to expel them into Serbia.

12 After that, they were arrested and transferred to the military prison in

13 Banja Luka. And during that year, the year of 1992, I became aware that

14 Croats and Muslims had suffered a great deal, to my great regret. That is

15 why I feel very profound repentance and remorse. I pray to God every day

16 for forgiveness for my sins.

17 I have cooperated fully with this Tribunal, and I'm ready to

18 continue to do so. I am ready to testify, to cooperate, and to say

19 everything I know in the interests of truth and justice.

20 My wish and hope is, and that depends on you, Your Honours, to go

21 back to the wonderful prewar times that we had when all the people of

22 Bosnia lived in unity and happily together. Unfortunately, I cannot

23 change history. I would wish and am ready, if you give me such a chance,

24 to try and improve the future.

25 If fate gives me such a chance, I will dedicate myself to my

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

14 and the English transcripts.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 family and my children. I'm also ready to invest every effort in the new

2 multi-ethnic Bosnia, to have a positive effect on the surroundings so that

3 the inter-ethnic wounds should heal as soon as possible and that peoples

4 and nations should live in mutual respect and harmony and thereby to atone

5 for my sins up to a point, my sins towards men and to God.

6 Though I stand before you, Your Honours, as the accused, I do

7 thank you very much for your attention, for your reasoning, and for your

8 protection of my rights. Thank you, Your Honours.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Todorovic. You may sit.

10 Mr. Brashich.

11 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, I would call upon my colleague and

12 friend Mr. Kostich to give the first half of the closing argument.

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Mr. Kostich.

14 [Defence Closing Statement]

15 MR. KOSTICH: Your Honours, Ms. Paterson, Mr. Di Fazio,

16 colleagues.

17 Until the plea agreement in this case was signed by the parties

18 and filed, all issues in this case were open and my colleague Mr. Brashich

19 was contesting a number of motions and so on. The plea bargain was struck

20 sometime in late October, early November, and I think it's important to

21 reflect on the fact that there was a timing that was appropriate and

22 important.

23 At that time, the request by Mr. Brashich for the rendition [sic]

24 of Mr. Todorovic back to the country of the arrest had some, I think,

25 interest by the Tribunal. There were certain motions that were granted,

1 and I think at that time there was preparation to go into an appellate

2 phase. The conditions in Yugoslavia were different than they are now.

3 The government in power at that time was different than it is now.

4 By reaching the plea bargain, I think that there were substantial

5 factors and gains by both parties. For that matter, there were, I think,

6 benefits to other segments of the judicial process. Most importantly, I

7 think, in these plea bargain situations, pleas, I think, is the benefit

8 that victims do not have to come in and testify and relive the tragedies

9 and the awful and terrible things that may have occurred to them. There

10 is a saving of resources both by the courts and the court system, as well

11 as the Prosecutor's office.

12 And since I'm a lawyer from a common law country and I do

13 recognise, and I say this most respectfully, that at least two-thirds of

14 the Trial Chamber I think has some similar backgrounds, the plea bargains

15 and plea negotiations are recognised and used in those jurisdictions, and

16 so the Judges are familiar with them, and I shan't go any further than

17 that.

18 In regard to Mr. Todorovic, he made a number of decisions. Both

19 parties were represented by able lawyers and a plea bargain was struck.

20 And the timing was important, as I indicated, because the appellate

21 litigation did not continue, the cooperation between the Office of the

22 Prosecutor and SFOR and all the somewhat meticulous questions and some of

23 the issues that arose from the -- from those issues and arguments did not

24 have to be litigated, and I think that's a benefit to the Prosecutor in

25 addition.

1 So I think it's important to look at that and look at the timing.

2 Mr. Todorovic gave up significant rights at that time - you know what

3 those rights are - and went on into a cooperation agreement.

4 Ms. Paterson, I think, was very good in outlining for the Court, both in

5 her stipulation and her closing argument, the level. In other words, not

6 only the quantity but the quality of the cooperation. For obvious

7 reasons, we do not want to go into, at least we shouldn't, perhaps, go

8 into too much detail on the cooperation, because I think the Trial Chamber

9 has a transcript of one of the debriefings and so you know the quantity

10 and quality of the cooperation and you know the number of debriefings.

11 One thing that I found interesting, because there is some

12 comparison to another case, which I think is precedental and I think has

13 been cited here at times in the Tribunal, is the case of Erdemovic, which

14 was the only, I would say, other plea bargain of the nature that we have

15 here, in other words, a signed agreement that was filed with the Court

16 suggesting a sentence.

17 One of the reasons that the Court, the Trial Chamber, was

18 impressed in that particular case was the fact, as Ms. Paterson stated in

19 this particular case - I want to be just careful - I think she indicated

20 that there was information that was gained by the interviews of

21 Mr. Todorovic that was otherwise not accessible.

22 In the Erdemovic case, we had a similar situation of the

23 information that was gained by his cooperation, and therefore there is a

24 similarity here as to the quality of the cooperation.

25 JUDGE MAY: The sentence in that case was one of five years.

1 MR. KOSTICH: It was five years, Your Honour, yes.

2 JUDGE MAY: So your argument, if I follow it, is that the sentence

3 should be discounted, first of all because there is a guilty plea which

4 has resulted in a saving of public resources and court time, and most

5 substantially because of the cooperation which your client has given. Is

6 that right?

7 MR. KOSTICH: Yes, sir. Other factors, also, Judge, but yes.

8 JUDGE MAY: Apart -- yes, well, of course, which we will hear

9 about, but I just want to make sure I have the argument so far.

10 Apart from the case of Erdemovic, do you know of any other cases

11 in the Tribunal's history, apart from this one and Erdemovic, in which

12 there has been substantial cooperation by an accused after a plea of

13 guilty? I think at the moment, I'll be advised if I'm wrong, but this is

14 only the second case in which this has occurred.

15 MR. KOSTICH: Your Honour, I agree with you.

16 JUDGE MAY: The sentence in that case was one of five years.

17 MR. KOSTICH: Yes, sir.

18 JUDGE MAY: Though he was involved in a number of crimes,

19 shootings, his argument was that he acted under duress, which wasn't

20 regarded as a defence but was regarded as mitigation. He was, of course,

21 not a commander, and again, through the various factors which might be in

22 mind. But your argument is: However serious the offences were, and they

23 undoubtedly are in this case, that the sentence should reflect

24 substantially these matters, particularly that of cooperation and the plea

25 of guilty?

1 MR. KOSTICH: Yes, Your Honour. If I may follow on the comments,

2 the Court may not know, I was one of the two co-counsel representing

3 Mr. Erdemovic, and the only thing I would add is that the number of

4 offences in terms of the -- this is somewhat sensitive for us, for me to

5 throw numbers around about human beings, and so I do it with just the fact

6 that I want to answer your question, is that there was testimony and

7 admissions by Mr. Erdemovic that he was involved in the neighbourhood of

8 70, seven zero, killings. That was from his own testimony.

9 So, yes, sir, that is part of the argument. One of the things

10 that is sometimes difficult, one of the things that is somewhat

11 difficult --

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Kostich --

13 MR. KOSTICH: Yes, sir.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: -- was Erdemovic actively charged with killings?

15 MR. KOSTICH: Yes.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: He was, okay. Thank you.

17 MR. KOSTICH: Your Honour, what happened in that case, that he

18 was, he was charged with the killings and he entered a plea to the

19 killings.

20 Your Honour, I'm pretty much close to the closing of my remarks.

21 I do think that that is of precedental value. The only other case, Your

22 Honours, that -- I'm not suggesting it is directly on all fours with

23 Mr. Todorovic's case. I did note that in the Celebici case that an

24 accused by the name of Music received a seven-year sentence, and he was

25 the alleged -- or I shouldn't say alleged. He was the one who was

1 convicted of being the camp commander, but the facts of his involvement

2 and Todorovic would have to be looked at. But that is another -- again,

3 if I'm bold enough to put numbers, that is another number that is out

4 there.

5 In closing, in closing, my remarks would end with this particular

6 idea, and it's based on the fact that I've been coming to The Hague for

7 approximately six years now, since 1995. I know why this particular

8 Tribunal was created, and I'm not about to tell a distinguished court as

9 to the reasons why it was founded. But what struck me is that the

10 Tribunal is a vehicle to in some way, amongst other things -- in other

11 words, punishing and assigning guilt, that that will all in some way

12 assist the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina to come together, to heal the

13 wounds of the civil war.

14 What I find interesting is that with the exception of

15 Mr. Erdemovic, who is a very -- who was a very young individual when he

16 committed the crime and pled guilty, the only other individual who has

17 come in to a public forum, whether it's a courtroom or someplace else, and

18 said I was involved; I'm guilty; I did awful things; I feel sorry; I feel

19 remorse; I want to move ahead; I want to move ahead and help resurrect the

20 old times, as he says. And what's interesting is that nobody else out

21 there has the courage to do that. And I don't care whether the person has

22 been accused of a crime, has not been accused of a crime, but no political

23 leader in Bosnia-Herzegovina has come forward and said that. They have

24 been working on a truth and reconciliation commission now for umpteen --

25 seven years which has not been established. And I think there is some

1 courage that Stevan Todorovic has to come into this court, in front of

2 you, enter the plea of guilty, and literally -- and I think literally ask

3 you to make a sentencing judgement on the basis of everything that's been

4 provided to you.

5 And I think there is some -- I'm not asking you to award him for

6 doing that, but I think it would be proper to at least recognise that he's

7 one of the few human beings coming out of that awful war to have the

8 courage to stand up and admit what he did.

9 Thank you very much.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Kostich. Mr. Brashich.

11 MR. BRASHICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

12 I am privileged today to stand for Stevan Todorovic before you.

13 I'm privileged to be his attorney, and I'm privileged to have practiced

14 before this Court. However, I am standing here before you not only as an

15 attorney; I'm standing before you from a very different perspective. I am

16 standing before you as a child of war.

17 I have been bombed by both the Americans, my people now, and by

18 the Germans. I have been a refugee. I have lived in refugee camps. I

19 have lost a country, gained another; lost houses, gained others. So I am

20 a child of war and I speak to you from such a vantage point and

21 perspective.

22 In my country's civil war - and when I say "my country," I say

23 proudly the United States - which was far more bloody than Bosnia, and a

24 man who had to live through that war, a famous general, General Tecumseh

25 Sherman, said it first, "War is hell."

1 Mr. Todorovic spoke those words first here, but I'm sure that he's

2 not or does not know that those words were attributable to

3 General Sherman, the general who marched through Georgia, who left a

4 40-mile swath which is still seen today some 150 years later.

5 So as a child of war, I speak to you on behalf of Stevan

6 Todorovic. I was reluctant to take this case, yet two and a half years

7 later, I believe that of anybody in this court, including Dr. Lecic,

8 including Stevan Todorovic's mother and sister, I know him best. I have

9 learned of his youth. I have travelled to Bosanski Samac. I have spoken

10 to people who knew him in the good times. I have also spoken to people

11 who knew him in the bad times. I have also spoken to him on a daily

12 basis. I don't think a day has gone by - perhaps a Saturday or a

13 Sunday - that I have not spoken with Stevan Todorovic. I know him. I

14 believe in him.

15 My colleague Mr. Kostich speaks about courage. I agree with him.

16 Now, Mr. Kostich and I have a very long-term, distant but close

17 relationship, and we work in very strange ways. He ain't telling me what

18 he's going to say and I ain't telling him what I'm going to say. So it's

19 a nice play of dividing the very difficult representation of an individual

20 I believe in.

21 I had assured the Court that we would not be redundant. I hope

22 that we are not. And the only reason that I raise an issue that he has

23 raised is because I believe in Stevan Todorovic's courage.

24 I also believe in his remorse. It's very hard, when you're

25 sitting in that small, airless room in Scheveningen - it's no more than

1 three feet by four feet - that somebody can fabricate remorse. I've been

2 there. I've spent the time.

3 Ms. Paterson said that one of the issues before this court is

4 victims. She's right. But I speak to you as a victim of another war.

5 Another factor that this Court, in its majesty, has to consider is

6 rehabilitation and "Is this man worth saving?"

7 He's worth saving. He's worth a second chance. I believe in

8 him. I believe that if you mellow justice with some compassion, my Stevan

9 Todorovic, the new Stevan Todorovic, the courageous Stevan Todorovic, can

10 go back to Bosanski Samac and be a factor in helping to change for the

11 better Bosanski Samac in the future.

12 I have been privileged to represent him. I have been privileged

13 to appear before this Chamber. Mr. Todorovic alluded to this Chamber's

14 protection of his rights. I concur. I thank you. It has been a

15 privilege to appear before you, and I ask, on behalf of my client, a

16 second chance.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Brashich.

18 MR. BRASHICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll take time to deliberate on this matter and

20 give our decision shortly.

21 Before we adjourn, Ms. Paterson, you did say that you were leaving

22 the Tribunal.

23 MS. PATERSON: Yes, Judge. Next Friday will be my last day at the

24 Tribunal.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Well, I'd like to thank you for the work

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

14 and the English transcripts.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 that you have done in this case and for your cooperation.

2 MR. BRASHICH: Your Honour, at this present time, I had forgotten

3 at the beginning of my address to thank Ms. Paterson for the courtesies

4 extended. It is greatly appreciated.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: We stand adjourned.

6 --- Whereupon the Sentencing Hearing adjourned

7 at 12.25 p.m.

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25