|
Content
/ Colormap • Page 4594 • {1/95} (1)Monday, 26 June 2000 [Open session] [The witness entered court]
--- Upon commencing at 9.37 a.m. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Good morning to the technical booth, interpreters; they're here, I can see. Good morning, legal assistants, court reporters. Good morning, Madam Registrar. Good morning, Mr. Harmon and Mr. Cayley. Good (10)morning, Mr. Petrusic, Mr. Visnjic. Good morning, General Krstic. Good morning, Witness. We are here now to continue. Do you feel rested?
WITNESS: WITNESS BB
[Resumed] (15) THE WITNESS: [Int.] Yes, thank you. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I wish to remind you that you are continuing to testify under oath, answering questions which Mr. Harmon - I see him ready and prepared - is going to put to you. Mr. Harmon, your witness. You have the floor. (20) MR. HARMON: Thank you, Mr. President. Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning, counsel. • EXAMINED by Mr. Harmon: [Cont'd]
• Q.: Good morning, Witness BB. When we finished on Friday, we had
finished with our discussion of Prosecutor's Exhibit 343 which dealt with
(25)buses and trucks. Now I'd like to have the usher, please, show you
MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, notebook 285 is found at tab 7. Mr. Usher, if you would kindly show Witness BB the B/C/S version found at 359B. It's handwritten. In Prosecutor's 285, if you would turn to (5)page -- the last three digits in that are 990. I'm sorry. The last three digits are 789 and 790. Do you have that in front of him, Mr. Usher? Thank you. • Q.: Witness BB, would you take a look at the handwriting in Prosecutor's Exhibit 359B, and first of all, can you identify that (10)handwriting? • A.: Yes, this is my handwriting. • Q.: Now, would you turn to page -- the last three digits are 789 and 790 in Prosecutor's 285. Is that the same handwriting that appears before you and the same document that appears before you that's found in (15)Prosecutor's Exhibit 359? • A.: Yes, this is the same handwriting. • Q.: Now, this also is a conversation, and I'm referring to the conversation that was intercepted at 1200 hours, Witness BB, this is a conversation that you intercepted; isn't that correct? (20) • A.: Yes.
• Q.: Let me read this into the record, and then, Witness BB, we're
going to attempt, as we have in the past, to date this conversation. I
will start reading:
"785.000 MHz, Ch 11, 1200 hrs
(25)Participants X and Y
MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, could you assist him, please. • Q.: On the upper left-hand corner of 781, do you see a date on that? • A.: Yes, I can see the 12th of July, 1995. (25)
• Q.: Now, could you turn to page -- the last three digits are 800 in
• A.: Yes, I do. • Q.: What is that date? • A.: The 13th of July, 1995. (5) • Q.: Therefore, what is your conclusion as to the date when you intercepted the conversation that's reflected in Prosecutor's Exhibit 359? • A.: The 12th of July, 1995. • Q.: I'd like to turn to Prosecutor's Exhibit 359C which is a printout that is attached to the same exhibit. (10) MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, if you would kindly put 359C in front of the witness. • Q.: Witness BB, do you see that same conversation in the middle of the page on Prosecutor's Exhibit 359C? • A.: Yes, I can see it. (15) • Q.: Can you tell the Judges specifically, what is this printout? • A.: It is a document which the operator, the signalsman, typed from the notebook. After that, he encrypted it and forwarded it to the higher command. MR. HARMON: Mr. President, if I may go into private session for (20)two or three questions. It won't last more than a minute or two. I need to further explore this document.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes. Let's go into private
session.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Harmon, we're in public session. You may continue. MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, we're going to be using a different notebook for this exhibit, so it will be Prosecutor's Exhibit 280, and (10)that's found at tab 2, and the exhibit we're going to be using is Prosecutor's Exhibit 344. Now, Mr. Usher, if you'd put 344/1B, the B/C/S version of this exhibit, in front of this witness, please; and in Prosecutor's Exhibit 280, if you would turn to page 688 and 689, referring to the last three (15)digits in the ERN number. • Q.: Now, Witness BB, would you take a look at the text in Prosecutor's Exhibit 344 and turn your attention to the text that's found in Prosecutor's Exhibit 280 at pages 688 and 699 [sic], and tell us if the text is identical; that's the same conversation. (20) • A.: Yes, it is the same conversation. • Q.: And who -- is that your handwriting in Prosecutor's Exhibit 344? • A.: It is my handwriting. • Q.: And is this a conversation that you intercepted? • A.: It is. (25)
• Q.: I will read this conversation, and then we will attempt to date
(K.:) How many buses have started from up there? (S.:) Twenty. (K.:) (OK?) twenty. (10) (S.:) And the others are on the road someway. (K.:) Yes, on the road, OK. (S.:) ... (K.:) Put me back to the switchboard. Miss, put me through to the Vlasenica Brigade. (15) (C.:) Yes. (K.:) This is Krstic. (C.:) Can I help you, General? (K.:) Give me Kosoric. (C.:) He's not in... he went somewhere. (20) (K.:) Give me Savo, put me through to Savo (S.:) How are you General? This is Savo. (K.:) Srpski! /excellent/, fuck it, how else. (S.:) Congratulations, fuck...
(K.:) Get in touch with these guys from the MUP /Ministry of the
(25)Interior/. That means you, your brigade and them.
(K.:) Wait, slow down, man, secure the road first, from the crossroad below, from where you are, 12 kilometres towards /?Drava/, and up to the tunnel. (5) (S.:) To the tunnel? (K.:) Of course! (S.:) OK. (K.:) That's where they'll be disembarking. (S.:) OK. (10) (K.:) Take care, nothing must happen to any of them. (S.:) OK. (K.:) Is that clear? (S.:) Yes, sir. (15) (K.:) Until further notice, secure that part of the road. (S.:) OK. (K.:) That's it chief, bye. (S.:) Bye." And that concludes the reading of this exhibit. (20)Now, Witness BB, I asked you to attempt to date this document as well in my office, so let me turn your attention first of all to page 683 in Prosecutor's Exhibit 280. Witness, do you see a date on page 683? • A.: Yes, the 12th of the July, 1995. • Q.: Now, the conversation that we're talking about -- (25)
MR. HARMON: In fact, Mr. Usher, would you kindly put the whole
• Q.: Now, Witness, the usher is going to still assist you, and if you would turn to page 726. (5) MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, help the witness, please, turn to page 726. It's the second to last page in the document. • Q.: Do you see a date on that page? • A.: Yes, I do. The 24th of July, 1995. • Q.: Now, do you remember when you and I went through this document, (10)attempting to find the closest dates around either side of your conversation that you intercepted that is the subject of this discussion, that was the date that was the latest date we could find on the -- I'm sorry, the earliest date we could find on the other side of the conversation that we've been talking about; isn't that correct? (15) • A.: Yes. • Q.: So based on the dates that are in the notebook, we can say that this conversation took place sometime between the 12th of July and the 24th of July, 1995; is that correct? • A.: It is. (20) • Q.: Can I ask you to further try to analyse the probable date of this conversation that's found in Prosecutor's Exhibit 344, and did you attempt to do so by looking at the times and the time sequence from the date of July the 12th that is found on page 683? • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: Were you able to conclude the probable date that this particular
• A.: Yes. • Q.: What is that date? If you need to, you can go back through the document, please, and inspect it. Witness BB, the date of July the 12th (5)is found on page 683 in that document, and the conversation that you intercepted is found on page 688. • A.: I concluded that the conversation took place on the 12th of July, 1995. • Q.: Thank you very much, Witness BB. We'll now turn to the next (10)exhibit which is Prosecutor's Exhibit 345, and we're going to turn, once again, our attention to Prosecutor's Exhibit 285 which is found at tab 7. MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, would you place Prosecutor's Exhibit 345/1C in front of the witness, please. It is the handwriting extract from the notebook. Would you turn to page 802 of Prosecutor's Exhibit (15)285. It's a multipage conversation, Mr. Usher, so you're going to have to -- if you'd place the whole notebook in front of the witness and he can turn and inspect pages 802 through 804. • Q.: Witness BB, is the conversation that you have before you in Prosecutor's Exhibit 345 the identical conversation that is found in (20)Prosecutor's Exhibit 285 at pages 802 to 804? • A.: Yes, it's the same conversation. • Q.: Whose handwriting is in both of those exhibits? • A.: This is my handwriting. • Q.: And this is a conversation that you intercepted. (25)
• A.: Yes.
(5) (X.:) Give me Nesipovic on ... (C.:) One moment, General, Sir. (C.:) Hello! (Y.:) Hello! (C.:) General, Sir, Nikolic hasn't arrived yet. (10) (Y.:) He hasn't arrived? (C.:) They're expecting him any minute. (Y.:) Give me somebody ... from his room. (C.:) From his office? (Y.:) Yes. (15) (C.:) Here's police commander Jankovic. (J.:) Yes? (Y.:) Good morning, Jankovic. (J.:) Good morning. (Y.:) What's new? (20) (J.:) Everything's fine. (Y.:) How many vehicles have arrived so far and how many ... Turks have to be transferred?
(J.:) About one third of them have probably been transferred,
about as many there are /as/ have arrived (now?)
(25)One third have been transferred, around 70 vehicles have left
(Y.:) Around 5,000? (J.:) Yes. (Y.:) And you'd say there's another ten? (5) (J.:) Two-thirds more. (Y.:) 10,000 more? (J.:) Yes. (Y.:) Are you ... personally? (J.:) Yes, personally. (10) (Y.:) And are they /?is the job/ being done? (J.:) What? (Y.:) Is that job being done? (J.:) It's being done. (Y.:) At full steam? (15) (J.:) At full steam, yes. ... (Y.:) When can the first vehicles be expected up here in this area? (J.:) I think in an hour or two, if all goes well. (20) (Y.:) Good, good. Where's Nikolic? (J.:) Nikolic went home this morning at half past three. (Y.:) Where's your commander? (J.:) What? (Y.:) Where's your superior? (25)
(J.:) Up there, with the men. From up there.
(J.:) Anything else, General? (Y.:) Where's my squad commander? (J.:) He's somewhere around. (5) (Y.:) Good, thanks. Listen, what is the man on your right-hand flank, the one towards (Budim?) recording about the situation? (J.:) Last night we were supposed to go with the blue one. They have something, they are working, it's going well. (10) (Y.:) What? (J.:) They are doing a good job, it's going well. (Y.:) Right, I'll check it out with him today. (J.:) Good ... (Y.:) All right, Jankovic, send what you have up here since the (15)Main Staff has been ... /to/ me every six minutes ... /as written/ (J.:) Very well. (Y.:) Good luck, take care!" And this is signed. That ends the reading of this particular (20)document. Now, once again, Witness BB, I had asked you previously in my office to attempt to date this. Let me direct you to certain pages in Prosecutor's Exhibit 285.
MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, if you would direct the witness to page
(25)800 in Prosecutor's Exhibit 285, your conversation starting at 802.
• A.: Yes, the 13th of July, 1995. • Q.: Do you recognise that handwriting? • A.: Yes, it's my handwriting. (5) MR. HARMON: Now, Mr. Usher, if you could direct the witness to page 818 in the same exhibit, 285. • Q.: Is that the first date that you could find after your conversation that we've been talking about? • A.: Yes. (10) • Q.: What is that date? • A.: The 17th of July, 1995. • Q.: So we can say that the conversations found in Prosecutor's Exhibit 345 occurred somewhere between the 13th of July and the 17th of July based on just the analysis of these two dates; is that correct? (15) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Now, did I ask you to, nevertheless, attempt to refine your analysis and attempt to narrow and actually find the actual date of this conversation? • A.: Yes. (20) MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, if you would kindly hand the witness Prosecutor's Exhibit 285 in toto so the witness can inspect the pages starting at page 800, where the date July 13th appears.
• Q.: The conversation we've been talking about, Witness BB, starts the
following page after the date of the 13th of July.
(25)Now, having looked at Prosecutor's Exhibit 285 both in my office
• A.: This conversation took place on the 13th of July, 1995. • Q.: On what do you base your conclusion? (5) • A.: I took over the shift, wrote in a new date, and continuously, all the time, I worked as the operator when this conversation took place which I intercepted. So that was in one period of time, one eight-hour period. • Q.: So your conclusion is that this conversation was intercepted on the 13th of July, 1995. (10) • A.: Yes. MR. HARMON: Lastly, in respect of this particular exhibit, Mr. Usher, if you would show Witness BB Prosecutor's Exhibit 345/2B bis. It's a typewritten B/C/S document. It should be two pages long. • Q.: Witness BB, do you see, starting at the bottom of the first page (15)and running over into the second page, a typewritten version of the same conversation? • A.: Yes, I can see that. • Q.: What is this document? Can you identify what this represents? • A.: This document represents the typed-out information from the (20)notebook, the data that I recorded in the notebook. • Q.: Thank you very much, Witness BB. We'll turn our attention to another exhibit.
MR. HARMON: That Exhibit, Mr. Usher, will be Prosecutor's Exhibit
346, and it's found in Prosecutor's Exhibit 283, which is tab 5.
(25)Mr. Usher, if you would place 346, the B/C/S version, in front of the
• Q.: My first question, Witness BB, is, whose handwriting appears in Prosecutor's Exhibit 346? (5) • A.: This is my handwriting. • Q.: Do you see that identical conversation reproduced in Prosecutor's Exhibit 283 on page 830 -- I'm sorry, 847. 846, I'm sorry, and 847. • A.: Yes. • Q.: Now, let me read this conversation into the record, and then we (10)will continue with our exercise of dating. "785.000, channel 5, 1919. X - Y (inaudible) (X.:) Do you have any bus there? (Y.:) I have this one which is a reserve. (15) (X.:) Send it. Send that bus towards Visegrad, Podromanija, Rogatica and further. When he comes across a bus with a group of soldiers, those are the ones from Visegrad. Boban is their commander. (Y.:) Say again? (20) (X.:) Boban Indzic, and then bring them to the command in Bratunac. (Y.:) ... (X.:) Go ahead and send that driver immediately. Their vehicle broke down. They should have been here already. (25)
(Y.:) I'm sending the bus, immediately.
(Y.:) Bye. (X.:) Bye." And that concludes the reading of this exhibit. (5)Now, Witness, I'd like to go and try to date this conversation. If you would take Prosecutor's Exhibit 283 in front of you in toto, if you would, with the assistance of the usher, turn to page 836, you see a date on the upper left-hand corner of page 836? • A.: Yes. The 13th of July, 1995. (10) • Q.: Now, moving past your -- the conversation that you intercepted and turning to page 851, do you see a date? • A.: Yes. The 17th of July, 1995. • Q.: So based solely on the sequence of dates and the location of your conversation in respect of those dates, can we say that this conversation (15)that is in 346 was intercepted by you somewhere between the 13th of July and the 17th of July, 1995? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Witness, did I ask you now to -- in my office, to attempt to narrow down the date and the specific date when this conversation took (20)place, and did I do so by asking you to inspect the pages between 836 and 851? • A.: Yes. • Q.: And did you do so? • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: Would you take a look, then, once again at Prosecutor's Exhibit
• A.: This conversation was intercepted on the 13th of July, 1995. (5) • Q.: Thank you very much, Witness BB. We'll turn our attention to the next exhibit, and that exhibit is Prosecutor's Exhibit 347. MR. HARMON: We'll be using the same notebook, Mr. Usher, Prosecutor's Exhibit 283. For the record, Your Honours, the proper English translation of (10)this particular conversation is at -- is found on Prosecutor's Exhibit 347/1A bis. Now, Mr. Usher, kindly place the B/C/S version and place Prosecutor's Exhibit 283, page 847, in front of the witness, please. • Q.: Witness BB, inspecting Prosecutor's Exhibit 347, do you recognise (15)the handwriting in that exhibit? Do you recognise the handwriting in Prosecutor's Exhibit 347? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Whose handwriting is it? • A.: Yes, it's my handwriting. (20) • Q.: And could you compare the excerpt from the notebook in Prosecutor's Exhibit 347, and tell the Judges whether the excerpt is from Prosecutor's Exhibit 283 and is identical? • A.: Yes.
• Q.: I will read this transcript. I'm informed the correct English
(25)translation of this is not bis, it is 347/1A, so I apologise. I will
(Y.:) There is one bus Janja. (X.:) Well, that's a detachment, I mean, part of the Janja detachment. (Y.:) ... (10) (X.:) Is it ... from Bijeljina? (Y.:) Yes. (X.:) Is that right? (Y.:) Yes, yes. Those are from Janja are here. (X.:) OK. (15) (Y.:) And the ones from Doboj are supposed to arrive. (X.:) Yes. (Y.:) And now, what shall I do with them? (X.:) Well, you have to check about that with... (Y.:) ...because I have left it to, in fact, Ljubisa to plan it, (20)and so whenever I need to I can send it off in that direction ... (X.:) OK. (Y.:) That's it. (X.:) Have Ljubisa call me at General Krstic's. (25)
(Y.:) Okay.
(Y.:) I know." And it's signed, and I will not read into the record the name that's on it. (5)Now, let's go through the same exercise. If we could turn to page 836 in Prosecutor's Exhibit 283. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Harmon, do we have to repeat this whole voyage once that the transcript follows on, one after another? MR. HARMON: I think it's important to attempt to narrow the dates (10)on these, and for the record, I think it's important on each of these. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well, then, please go ahead. It's your work, yes. MR. HARMON: I'll try to be faster if I can. • Q.: Witness, on page 836, does the date July the 13th appear? I'm (15)referring to Prosecutor's Exhibit 283. • A.: Yes. • Q.: Going past your conversation to page 851, does the date July the 17th appear? • A.: Yes. (20) • Q.: So based on just the dates of these two -- just these two dates and the location of your conversation in respect of those dates, this conversation was intercepted by you sometime between the 13th and the 17th of July, 1995. • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: Could you inspect, then, Prosecutor's 283 and attempt to narrow
• A.: The 13th of July, 1995. • Q.: I've concluded with this exhibit, then. Thank you very much, (5)Witness BB. MR. HARMON: Now we're going to go through a series of documents, starting with Prosecutor's Exhibits 354 and 355, Mr. Usher. If you would place the B/C/S typewritten version in front of the witness. Your Honours, the typewritten version in 354 and 355 is (10)identical. These are two separate conversations that are recorded on a single typewritten sheet of paper, so I will only refer to one of the B/C/S versions. • Q.: Witness BB, could you tell us what the typewritten version that records two conversations is? (15) • A.: It is a conversation which was typed out from the notebook. The operator typed it; this is his version. He encrypted it and then forwarded it to the higher command. MR. HARMON: This, for the record, Your Honours, is a conversation that was given to the SDB, downloaded, and this is the conversation that (20)was transcribed by the army.
• Q.: Now, at the bottom of both of these conversations, there appear to
be initials. We discussed these initials in a closed session. Do these
initials represent what you've testified to previously during the closed
session, during the private session, as to who intercepted and who
(25)transmitted both of these conversations?
• Q.: Let me read both of these conversations into the record, then, if I may, starting with Prosecutor's Exhibit 354. "Date: 13 July 1995 (5)785.000 MHz, Channel 5, 2040 hours Participants: General Krstic - X (Borovcanin from the specials) (K.:) Hello, this is Krstic. (X.:) Hello, this is Borovcanin, General. How are you? (10) (K.:) Well, where are you, fuck it? (X.:) I'm here at the command post. (K.:) How's it going? (X.:) It's going well. (K.:) Don't tell me you have problems. (15) (X.:) I don't, I don't. (K.:) ... went somewhere towards you. (X.:) That's exactly what I want to know. (K.:) ... (X.:) Is there anything special for us from you? (20) (K.:) Working on this part ... (X.:) Yes. (K.:) ... (X.:) At the moment. (K.:) ... (25)
(X.:) We'll continue that tomorrow.
(X.:) All right, man. (K.:) ... (K.:) OK, we'll be in touch." (5)And that concludes the reading of 354. Turning to 355, I'll commence the reading [as read]: "785.000 MHz, Channel 5, Time: 2100 hrs Direction - JI Participants: Krsmanovic Milan - Viskovic Goran. (10) (K.:) Hey, Viskovic, this is correct information, 700 people are in the village of Sandici. (V.:) Yes. (K.:) That's from the intersection towards you, it is necessary to stop the buses at that place, to load 10 of them (15)immediately and to bring them over here to me. (V.:) Listen. (K.:) Yes. (V.:) You go over there, it is anyhow Bratunac check-point, make them get on board and come here. I don't have contact (20)with check-point from here. (K.:) OK, that's fine. (X.:) /as printed/ - Come on." That concludes these two exhibits. We'll now move to the next exhibit, Prosecutor's Exhibit 360. (25)
MR. HARMON: If you could show the witness 360B, Mr. Usher.
• A.: Yes. • Q.: Can you tell us what this document represents? • A.: This document is the typed version of the intercepted conversation intercepted at the time. Therefore, it is the document which the (10)operator, the signalsman, retyped from the notebook in order to encrypt it and later forward it to the higher command. • Q.: This conversation was intercepted and transmitted from Okresanica; is that correct? • A.: Yes. (15) MR. HARMON: Can we go into private session for just one or two questions, Mr. President.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes, let's go into private
session, please.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] We are in public session, Mr. Harmon. MR. HARMON: (10) • Q.: I will read this conversation into the record. I'll start reading: "254.300, 1015 hrs Participants: Beara - Lucic and Zoka (barely audible) (B.:) Beara speaking. Hello, Signor Lucic. How are you? (15) (L.:) ... (inaudible) (B.:) Do you hear me? Do you know that 400 Balijas /derogatory for Bosnian Muslim/ have shown up in Konjevic Polje? (L.:) I know. (B.:) Where are they now? (20) (L.:) They came down. (B.:) And they've been rounded up, disarmed, everything? (L.:) ... (B.:) Excellent, excellent, great! And there is someone to guard them, huh? (25)
(L.:) There is, there is.
(L.:) ... here we have ... over here there's this huge group ... (B.:) Yeah, well, you can also those 20 /as written/, so that the forces are not dispersed. Shove them all on the (5)playground, who gives a fuck about them? (L.:) OK, then ... (B.:) They're locked up, right? (L.:) ... (B.:) Do you have enough room over there? (10) (L.:) Well ... (B.:) Well, it's not really a detention there at your place, it's just - like that. (L.:) There's room. (B.:) Yeah. Well line them up in 4-5 rows. (15) (L.:) ... (B.:) OK. (L.:) ... (B.:) Let me talk to him. (Z.:) Yes? (20) (B.:) Hi, Zoka. (Z.:) ... (B.:) What's new? (Z.:) Well ... easy ... there are about 500. (B.:) Uh-huh. (25)
(Z.:) ...
(Z.:) ... at least ... 20 ... one group got through during the night up there, behind /our/ backs. (B.:) Uh-huh. (5) (Z.:) ... forces to come, so we could resolve this problem ... (B.:) Yes, yes. /passage missing/ (Z.:) ... (B.:) Uh-huh. (Z.:) ... they're killing ... (10) (B.:) Well, excellent. Just let them continue, fuck it. (Z.:) That's it, that's the situation, I am ... (B.:) Bye, honey. (Z.:) ... (B.:) Hey! (15) (Z.:) ... Konjevic Polje. (B.:) Yes, yes. (Z.:) ... they're, close to 200 ... (B.:) Yes. (Z.:) ... should ... over there ... (20) (B.:) About 200, right? Got through? (Z.:) Yes, yes. And it's like they are in groups of 5 to 6, or 4. (B.:) Uh-huh. OK. (Z.:) They should go and check it out on that ... (25)
(B.:) OK. I'll call them in Zvornik now.
(B.:) OK, excellent. Hey, listen bud, Grga called. (Z.:) ... (B.:) Grga, your colleague. (5) (Z.:) ... (B.:) They're supposed to be at his place by noon. (Z.:) ... (B.:) The Frenchman and the Russian, they want to go to Potocari this afternoon to the command of their battalion. (10) (Z.:) Yes. (B.:) To visit them and to give Janvier's letter to the commander. (Z.:) Yes ... cargo. B. Well, there's been no feedback now, fuck it. (15) (Z.:) We should see ... (B.:) Well, I can't find him. Where the fuck is he? (Z.:) He was in ... (B.:) Well, he went to Rogatica last night. (Z.:) He didn't ... (20) (B.:) Well, there isn't. This guy doesn't know. From Vlasenica ... (Z.:) ... (B.:) From Vlasenica he went to Rogatica to meet those hillbillies. (25)
(Z.:) ...
(Z.:) ... commander. (B.:) Uh-huh, OK. (5) (Z.:) ... passed the list to Gvero. (B.:) Uh-huh, OK man, bye." And then there are some initials that I will not read into the record. That concludes my reading of this exhibit. MR. HARMON: Mr. President, I notice the time but I have only two (10)brief exhibits to go. If you wish me to proceed, I'm happy to do that. Mr. Usher, if you would kindly show the witness Prosecutor's Exhibit 361. Mr. Usher, if you would place the B/C/S version before the witness, please. • Q.: Now, Witness BB, I'd like you to take a look at this page, that (15)is, 361B. Do you see initials on this page similar to initials that you have seen in the previous exhibits? • A.: Yes. • Q.: What does this page represent? • A.: This page is taken from the notebook, or rather, typed from the (20)notebook, a conversation that was typed out by the operator, the signalsman. • Q.: Now, on my copy of 361/B there are two sets of initials that appear. One appears at the end of the small page that has -- should be the second page. The next page, Witness. (25)
MR. HARMON: Could I see that exhibit, please, Mr. Usher?
• A.: Yes. • Q.: Are those the initials of people who were working with you at Okresanica? (10) • A.: Yes. MR. HARMON: I won't read this conversation into the record, Mr. President. I'll turn to the next exhibit, if I could, which is the last exhibit. It's Prosecutor's Exhibit 362. • Q.: Turning to the B/C/S version of this, is this also a transcription (15)of intercepted communications from Okresanica, Witness? • A.: Yes. • Q.: And the two sets of initials that appear at the end of these conversations, are these initials of people who worked with you at Okresanica? (20) • A.: Yes.
MR. HARMON: I won't read this exhibit into the record either,
Mr. President. I've concluded my examination, thank you very much.
Thank you very much, Witness BB. We're going to take a recess, I
believe, and then the Defence will have an opportunity to cross-examine
(25)you.
--- Recess taken at 10.58 a.m. (5) --- On resuming at 11.26 a.m. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Witness BB, you are now going to answer questions put to you by Mr. Visnjic. Mr. Visnjic, your witness. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. President. (10) • CROSS-EXAMINED by Mr. Visnjic: • Q.: Witness BB, good morning. • A.: Good morning. MR. VISNJIC: Could I ask the usher to show you Exhibit 283 on page 836. (15) • Q.: Witness BB, on this page the date 13th of July is indicated; is that correct? • A.: Yes. • Q.: My question is -- or rather, the Prosecutor during his examination-in-chief asked you whether you had written that date, and you (20)said "yes"? • A.: Yes. • Q.: My question is, did you just recognise your handwriting, or do you actually remember the moment when you wrote down that date? • A.: I recognise my handwriting. (25)
• Q.: Does that also apply to all the other dates that you have
• A.: Yes. • Q.: Can I then conclude that with respect to all the dates that you said you had written, you actually recognised your handwriting without (5)remembering the moment when you did it? • A.: Yes. • Q.: When you were authenticating the conversation shown to you by the Prosecutor during your testimony, did you just recognise your handwriting, or do you actually remember the contents of those conversations? (10) • A.: Mostly my handwriting, but I do remember the contents of some conversations. • Q.: When you say that you remember the contents of only some conversations, do you remember them in detail or just in general terms? • A.: Just limited portions of those conversations. (15) • Q.: Thank you. My next question relates to the type of equipment used by your unit for monitoring. The Prosecutor showed the Chamber and the Defence a large number of notebooks, and on the first page, among other things, it said "RRU100 and RRU800". Is this the type -- the model of the device that transmitted signals and which you used for interception? (20) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Is there a difference in the frequency of transmission between these devices? • A.: Yes.
• Q.: Can you tell us which frequencies are used by RRU100 and which by
(25)RRU800?
• Q.: When you say RRU1, you're actually referring to RRU100, are you not? (5) • A.: Yes. • Q.: So it is the same device, but only two different names are used? • A.: I know it as RRU1. • Q.: When you were monitoring conversations transmitted by the device RRU1, in addition to the frequency, did you write down the channels on (10)which the conversation was being conducted? • A.: No. It is a single-channel transmitter. • Q.: Does it follow from that that the conversations next to which the channels were noted are the conversations that were intercepted on the transmitter RRU800? (15) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Is it technically possible for the same conversation to be transmitted simultaneously on RRU1 and RRU800? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Was that practised? Did you come across such cases during your (20)work? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Witness BB, you had an interview with the Office of the Prosecutor, and you made a statement on the 12th and the 13th of May, 1999; is that correct? (25)
• A.: I don't remember the date, but the year, yes.
• Q.: Witness BB, is that the statement you gave to the office of the Prosecutor on the 12th and 13th of May, 1999? • A.: I don't remember. (5) MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Could the usher please show the witness the English version of the statement. • Q.: Witness BB, is this your signature on the first and other pages of the statement in English? • A.: Yes. (10) • Q.: Witness BB, do you now recollect signing the statement in English that you gave to the Office of the Prosecutor? • A.: Yes, I do remember. • Q.: This version that is unsigned is the version in Serbo-Croatian which is a translation of your statement in English. (15) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Before the 12th and 13th of May, 1999, did anyone talk with you regarding these notebooks and intercepted conversations? • A.: No. • Q.: Am I right in saying that from July 1995 until the 12th and 13th (20)of May, 1999, no one interviewed you regarding the intercepted conversations? • A.: Yes.
• Q.: Did you tell the investigators of the Tribunal everything that you
could recollect in connection with these conversations and the
(25)circumstances and conditions under which these conversations were
• A.: Yes. But I mostly answered questions. • Q.: On page 4 of your statement in the Serbo-Croatian language, it is page 3 of the English version, the first paragraph of page 4 in the (5)Serbo-Croatian version and the last paragraph on page 3 of the English version, and these have been highlighted in yellow for ease, you stated that you noted down the counter readings, is that correct, on the tape. • A.: Yes. • Q.: Can you tell Their Honours where you took note of the tape-counter (10)readings? • A.: I cannot remember. • Q.: Can you tell the Trial Chamber or show to the Trial Chamber on any of the exhibits shown to you by the Prosecutor, for example, Exhibit 283, where the tape-counter reading is indicated? Is it indicated anywhere? (15) • A.: No, it is not. • Q.: You know that without looking? • A.: I have reviewed these conversations that I intercepted and I didn't note anywhere that this reading had been noted down. • Q.: Do you know what the procedure was with the tapes once you'd (20)finished with them? • A.: Not exactly. • Q.: How much do you know about it; could you tell us?
• A.: All I know is that the tapes went to the higher command where the
typed reports were sent, and from them we received empty tapes, unrecorded
(25)tapes.
• A.: That depended on the intensity of radio communication, that is, what we were monitoring and what was interesting for monitoring and (5)interception on the basis of orders we received. • Q.: How many messages could be taped on one tape? What was its time availability? • A.: Several hours. • Q.: The tapes were such that you could record on both sides of the (10)tapes; is that correct? • A.: Actually, the head of the tape recorder had two channels so that it was possible to tape on one side twice, and it was also possible to tape on both sides. • Q.: I assume that due to all this it was quite logical for you to take (15)down the counter readings. • A.: Yes. • Q.: But you don't know where you wrote that down. • A.: I cannot remember exactly. But the counter readings were more of an internal nature; they were used internally. Sometimes when important (20)information was taped, then, together with the tape, it would be forwarded to the higher command. • Q.: When you say that the counters were of an internal nature, can you explain what you really mean?
• A.: When we tape several conversations consecutively in one shift or
(25)one working hours and we listen to the tape and transcribe it into the
• Q.: If I understand you correctly, when you say "internally," you mean for your own use; is that what you mean? (5) • A.: Yes. • Q.: I should like to draw your attention to page 5 of your statement, paragraph 6; in the English version, page 5, paragraph 5. • A.: Yes. • Q.: In your statement to the investigators of the Tribunal, you stated (10)that the notebooks were merely internal working documents; is that correct? Bearing in mind your previous answer and your explanation of the word "internal," does that mean that these notebooks also were designed to be used internally, only within the framework of your group, your group of operators? (15) • A.: The notebooks were mostly a means to transcribe information from the tape to the operator who would encrypt the information and forward it to the higher command. • Q.: Were they still only for internal use; is that correct? • A.: As far as I know, we used them for that purpose, and I have no (20)knowledge as to whether anyone used those notebooks as a source of information. • Q.: Thank you. While you were working on encryption, your main job was to copy out the text from the notebook; is that correct? • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: Did you change or amend the text in the notebook in any way?
• Q.: Did you nevertheless sometimes make some changes; is that correct? • A.: On my own initiative, no; but, if there was something illogical or not clear, I would call the operator who had intercepted the conversation (5)and noted it down in the notebook to explain it to me. And if when we discussed it, and possibly relistened to the tape, discovered some errors, then corrections were made. But in most cases, this may have been a very specific piece of information, like a name or a number or a date, something concrete. (10) • Q.: Were these corrections noted anywhere? • A.: In most cases, no. • Q.: When you say that you didn't do that on your own initiative, who was the person who gave you permission to do that? • A.: Maybe I didn't express myself properly when I said that I didn't (15)do it on my own initiative. What I meant was that I didn't enter any changes, but what I meant to say was that I didn't make up anything, but that I often took the initiative to check the contents of the transcription in the notebook with the tape recording, and then to establish if there is an error, I would make that correction in the (20)document which was later encrypted and forwarded on. • Q.: You said that you frequently took the initiative? • A.: Yes. • Q.: In view of your prior education, educational background, were you perhaps better trained than the others, your associates in the group? (25)
• A.: I wouldn't agree with that.
• A.: I couldn't agree with that, either. • Q.: If it is the case that some were better trained than others, where would you put yourself in that spectrum? (5) • A.: Perhaps closer to the top, but somewhere in the middle. • Q.: In that connection, would you please look at page 4 of the Serbo-Croatian version, last paragraph. It is the one-but-last paragraph on page 4 of the English version. • A.: Yes. (10) • Q.: You have stated that you learned to recognise the voices of senior Serb commanders involved in the operation, including Zivanovic and Krstic? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Both these men had voices with very distinctive characteristics making them easily identifiable at the time? (15) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Can you explain to us which voice characteristics you had in mind whereby General Krstic could be identifiable in the conversations? • A.: All I can say is that when you listen to somebody's voice for a couple of hours a day over a period of several months, it is not difficult (20)to recognise it. • Q.: But you cannot describe to me any distinctive characteristic of General Krstic's or General Zivanovic? • A.: After so much time, I cannot.
• Q.: You said that you would listen to somebody's voice several hours a
(25)day?
• Q.: Over a period of several months, you said, and that is why you recognised them. May I take it, then, that General Krstic spent several hours on the telephone that you were listening to? (5) • A.: No, but I would listen to the tapes later on. • Q.: Also in this same paragraph you stated -- no, I withdraw that question. Can you remember what the intensity of radio communication was at the time of the attack on Srebrenica? (10) • A.: The intensity was above average. • Q.: Does that explain your statement that, "When the attack on Srebrenica was at its peak, it was not unusual for me to work for over 18 hours a day"? • A.: Yes. (15) • Q.: Tell me, as we can see from the documents, you worked both as an operator and as the person in charge of encryption? • A.: Yes. • Q.: That is, the person who is forwarding the messages to the command? • A.: Yes, yes. (20) • Q.: What were your working conditions in those days? Did you have sufficient room in the room you worked in? Did you have sufficient space? • A.: For me, it was sufficient. Perhaps the conditions were not something special, particularly good, but it was possible to work. (25)
• Q.: On the last page of this statement to the Prosecution there are
• A.: Yes. (5) • Q.: How many rooms in that facility did you use? • A.: As far as I can remember, four or five. • Q.: Could you please describe to us whether all those rooms were dedicated to interception or were used for other purposes? • A.: They had -- they were used for other purposes. (10) • Q.: Was one of those rooms designated as a sleeping room? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Did you have a kitchen of your own? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Attached to the kitchen, did you have a dining room or a living (15)room? • A.: Yes. • Q.: When you had an 18-hour shift, did you have lunch breaks? • A.: Breaks were made, yes. • Q.: Would it frequently happen for someone to bring you some food or a (20)coffee while you were at your workplace, or a drink of some sort? • A.: Coffee, yes. • Q.: In the room in which you were working where the equipment was installed, was smoking allowed? • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: Were there many of your colleagues who smoked in that room?
• Q.: In that room, I'm only interested in that particular room, how did you maintain hygiene in that room? Was there any kind of assignment for that? (5) • A.: I don't think so. • Q.: I think that in one of your statements, or maybe one of your colleagues had said that the night shift would start about midnight and go on until the morning? • A.: Yes. (10) • Q.: And during the night there was very little communication; is that correct? • A.: Correct. • Q.: In that case, were you allowed to bring books to the room you worked in to do crossword puzzles or something like that to make the time (15)go by more quickly? • A.: I did not. • Q.: Do you know whether one of your colleagues may have done? • A.: I cannot remember. • Q.: Thank you. On page 4, paragraph 7 of your statement, you said (20)that you have no recollection of any other military units performing intercept duties at Okresanica during this period; is that correct? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Apart from the State Security Service. • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: In addition to your unit, were there any other units at that
• A.: Yes. • Q.: On that same page, you were asked whether two individuals who worked at Okresanica could tape the same conversation. Could they? (5) • A.: This possibility did exist, that is to say, for two people to monitor the same conversation, but not within the frameworks of the same unit because that would be a waste of time. • Q.: Do you happen to know whether anybody else monitored and took down the same conversation that your unit did? (10) • A.: No, there was nobody else. • Q.: No, I mean do you know now? • A.: Now I do know, yes. • Q.: How did you learn about this? • A.: On the basis of documents, when I worked with the Prosecution. (15) • Q.: Which documents? Can you explain to me? • A.: Well, some of my writing that I recognise, my handwriting, this was compared to the text, a typed text which I was not able to recognise as being the text done by my unit. And the texts dealt with the same conversation, more or less. (20) • Q.: Does that mean that you were shown a text which represented the same conversation monitored by your unit, taped by your unit, and you recognised that this was not taped by your unit? Did I understand you correctly? Did you mean that?
• A.: The conversation that I was shown in the form of a typed document,
(25)I was not sure whether our unit had taped it in view of the format, the
• Q.: But later on you ascertained that it was not your unit that taped it. • A.: Well, we didn't spend too much time on that. (5) • Q.: How do you know, then, that that conversation was taped at Okresanica, that other conversation? • A.: Well, I don't know that it was taped at Okresanica. • Q.: That other conversation that you were shown, was it a typewritten text or a handwritten text? (10) • A.: No, it was a typewritten text. • Q.: How were you able to recognise that the typewritten text was not one done by your unit? • A.: Well, it is difficult for me to say anything specific on this typed document. I remember the form of the document and how I typed it, (15)and that text did not have that form, the form which I used. • Q.: Was one of the elements of form the signature? • A.: Yes. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] I should like to call upon the usher to show the witness document 395C -- 359C. (20) • Q.: Asked by the Prosecution, you said you recognised the conversations intercepted at 1200 and 1210 hours. • A.: Yes. • Q.: However, the previous conversation does not have a signature. Was the previous conversation intercepted by your unit too? (25)
• A.: It's difficult for me to say anything specific.
• A.: I always signed the documents. (5) • Q.: Did you do this on your own or did you have instructions to do so? • A.: I had instructions. • Q.: Does that mean that the people that took your place at the cryptoprotection task had the same instructions? • A.: Yes. (10) • Q.: Do you know from the material and documents that you looked through in preparation for your testimony whether there were telegrams where this other person signed themselves? • A.: Yes. • Q.: How many cryptoprotection operators worked in a shift? (15) • A.: One, sometimes two. • Q.: For the period that we are interested in, the battle for Srebrenica, I can conclude, therefore, that there were two; is that correct? • A.: Yes. (20) • Q.: And that both these people had instructions to sign their names to the telegrams; is that correct? • A.: As far as I know, yes. • Q.: Is it possible that a third person could send a telegram from your work post? (25)
• A.: No.
• A.: Yes. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, I know that it will be difficult for you to follow because the copy is in B/C/S, but they are (5)the last words of a conversation at 1200 hours. • Q.: The last sentence means, "They now have over 50 buses ensured." Have I read this out correctly? • A.: Yes. • Q.: This is the text that you took down from the tape. No, I (10)apologise. This is the text that you taped as the operator; is that correct? • A.: This text is a description in summary form of what was taped. It is a summary of the taped conversation; that is to say, it contains just the information that was interesting from the conversation, interesting (15)for the higher command, that is to say, the facts, numbers, names, and things of that kind. • Q.: The words "over 50 buses" are in inverted commas. • A.: Yes. • Q.: In the English version, this does not exist, and I assume that it (20)does not exist in the French version either.
MR. HARMON: May I point out something to Your Honours and to my
colleague. It appears, from looking at this, that I might be able to shed
some light on this.
The English translation of the conversation in handwriting, at the
(25)bottom of the English translation there is a number, and you will see
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Perhaps, Mr. Harmon and Mr. Visnjic, we could add that the French translation of Exhibit 359D, it says, "plus de 50 autocars" in inverted commas, "more than 50 buses." Perhaps that could be of use to you. (20) MR. HARMON: So apparently in managing all of this paper, there has something that has been melange in the wrong order.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Thank you very much,
Mr. Harmon.
Mr. Visnjic, bearing in mind that at least seven translators have
(25)seen the inverted commas of the B/C/S, please go ahead with your
MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, I'll withdraw the question because I did not notice what Mr. Harmon has just brought to my attention. That is the first point. Secondly, I would like to object to (5)the English version of Exhibit 359A. Also I should like to take advantage of this occasion to inform the Trial Chamber that during the next break we shall be handing to the registrar our comments with respect to all the exhibits as far as translation is concerned. Those comments and objections have been marked, (10)and I don't wish to lose time now, but the Registrar will have a chance to respond to those comments over the next few days. MR. HARMON: Mr. President, in respect of my colleague's objection, we will reorganise this exhibit in the proper way and we will resubmit it. (15) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. Mr. Visnjic, having heard that, are you able -- are you in a position to continue now? MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Yes, thank you. • Q.: Witness BB, tell me, please, the notebooks that you used, before you received them for use, did they have any special markings of any (20)kind? • A.: As far as I recollect, yes. • Q.: What were those markings, but just briefly? How were they marked?
• A.: They were entered into the register, and the registration number
(25)existed on them.
• A.: I don't remember. • Q.: I should like to ask the usher to show you 283, that is to say, you already have this document, and it's page 836 of that document. (5)On page 837 you have a number, number 46 in the upper right-hand corner. Underneath that number there are the initials "WE"? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Do you know whose those initials are? • A.: I can't remember. (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I think that this is a protected witness, is it not, Mr. Visnjic? Excuse me, Mr. Harmon can perhaps add something to that. MR. HARMON: I have been informed that when the original documents were received, somebody in the Evidence Unit did not know they could not (15)put initials on these documents, could not put any writing at all. So I've been informed that this number, 46 WE, is a notation that was inserted by a member of the Evidence Unit that received the document; it's not made by anybody from the Bosnian government. The person who made this notation was subsequently informed or informed during the process that (20)that was not to be done and ceased doing that. So this notation was inserted by a member of the Evidence Unit that received this document. It is an error in procedure, and it was corrected.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Mr. Visnjic, the secret has been
(25)uncovered.
(5) MR. HARMON: Excuse me to interrupt you once again, Mr. Visnjic, but just so the record is clear, Prosecutor's Exhibit 283, there's a notation found on the third page of that. There's a note for the file that has been inserted in Prosecutor's 283, and you will see that the explanation that I have given is entered in that particular note. This (10)was a member of the Tribunal that made that notation, and the explanation has been included in the exhibit. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Mr. Harmon. Mr. Visnjic, please continue. Continue to the end, if you (15)please. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Thank you. • Q.: On page 847, that is to say, the conversation at 1945 hours was recorded, at the beginning of that conversation you wrote, "X calling from General Krstic"? (20) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Can you tell me how you deduced this; that is to say, how you knew that the call was from General Krstic?
• A.: That first sentence is in fact a description. I heard that part of
the conversation where that unknown person, that is to say "X", Individual
(25)"X", said that he was calling from General Krstic, and had I not heard
• Q.: Do you remember that, or do you only assume and suppose that that is what it was? • A.: I assume because that is a piece of information. It is a piece of (5)data to go by which was essential for our army, and I would not have changed it quite certainly. Neither would I have thought it up. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, could we move into closed session for a few minutes?
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes, private session, we're
(10)moving into private session for a few moments.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] We're in public session now. You may continue, Mr. Visnjic. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. President. (15) • Q.: We're talking about Exhibit 354C, 1C, the telegram from the identical notebook and to facilitate the reading. This telegram was sent by you, and it was a conversation you intercepted; is that correct? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Can you tell me how you identified person "X"? (20) • A.: He introduced himself. • Q.: That can be seen from the text in front of us; is that correct? • A.: Yes. • Q.: What is the addition and special which is here in brackets mean? • A.: I'm afraid I don't know the answer to that question. (25)
• Q.: Did you write that down? Can you tell us that?
• Q.: Thank you. Will you please tell me when people were conversing on such lines, were they open lines? • A.: Yes. (5) • Q.: And the interlocutors mostly knew that you were listening in; is that correct? • A.: That is just my assumption, that they could have known. • Q.: Is that why they used coded names, code names? Thank you to the interpreter. (10) • A.: It is a rule in the army to use those code names. • Q.: Did the speakers sometimes identify themselves by the names of their units? • A.: I cannot remember. • Q.: Thank you. (15) MR. VISNJIC: Could I ask the usher to show you Exhibits 359 and 360. I apologise, I'm talking about 360 and 361, not 359. • Q.: Witness BB, Exhibit 360 is a conversation sent from your unit; is that correct? • A.: Yes. (20) • Q.: Did you in any way take part in the recording and sending of this conversation? • A.: I can't remember. MR. VISNJIC: Mr. Usher, would you please show the witness Exhibit 361. Just a moment, please. (25)
• Q.: It's a conversation or a telegram sent by your unit. Exhibit
• A.: No, I can't see that. • Q.: But you have still identified this telegram as a telegram (5)coming from your unit. • A.: I apologise. I do see the signature and I do identify the telegram sent from my unit. • Q.: Exhibit 362 is, again, a telegram sent from your unit, is it not? (10) • A.: Just a moment, please. Yes. • Q.: Can you tell me whether these conversations were noted down in the notebook? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Can you identify the notebook in which these conversations were (15)noted, written down? JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic, perhaps you are demanding from the witness to have an extremely good memory. I don't know whether the witness can answer that, but we'll listen anyway. • A.: In any event, I would need time to look through all the notebooks, (20)to compare them. But it is a fact that whatever I encrypted was typed from the notebook. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] • Q.: Let me put it this way: Was the date, an indication of date, compulsory on all telegrams? (25)
• A.: Yes. I'm sorry, not on all telegrams, but all documents that I
• Q.: But all those conversations were not noted down in a single notebook. (5) • A.: No. • Q.: According to your recollection, how many notebooks were in circulation during one shift usually? • A.: In any event, we had several notebooks. At least three. Sometimes when I was working on the encryption, a document that had a (10)header and a date and was encrypted would contain the contents of a conversation from one notebook but sometimes also from several notebooks. • Q.: In view of the fact -- when these messages were forwarded, can you check whether they perhaps figure in Exhibit 283 that you have before you? • A.: In any event, I would need a lot of time. I would have to look (15)through it all, because in the typed document, there is no date on the typed document. MR. HARMON: Perhaps I can assist my colleague and the Court in respect of Prosecutor's Exhibit 26 -- I'm sorry, 362. The handwritten version of that conversation that counsel has been asking this witness (20)about is found in Prosecutor's Exhibit 283, at page 850. So perhaps the usher could direct the witness to that as well. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic, the Prosecutor has assisted you to find the document, so please go on to your question.
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, my question was
(25)whether the witness could identify, and as we have identified the exhibit,
• Q.: Witness BB, during your interview with the investigators of the Tribunal conducted on the 12th and 13th of May, 1999, were you shown a (5)notebook marked 160 -- 106, 106, I'm sorry. • A.: I was shown a notebook, but I don't remember how it was marked. • Q.: Would you please turn to page 5 of your statement to the investigators of the Tribunal. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, the conversation has (10)not been separately marked but it takes up almost a whole page. But I would like to ask the witness something about it. • Q.: So notebook number 106, which contains the conversation between General Krstic and a certain Obrenovic, transcribed at 0950 hours, did you see that notebook when you spoke to the investigator of the Tribunal? (15) • A.: I saw the notebook, I had it in my hands, I leafed through it, but I really do not remember whether it was this particular notebook, number 106. • Q.: Is that notebook among the exhibits shown to you by the Prosecutor today, or while you were preparing to testify? (20)
• A.: I have to apologise, but in 1999 when I was interrogated, I was
shown the original notebook. And when being interviewed here the other
day, I was shown copies and we mostly focused on some particular pages.
So the difference between 1999, when I had the notebook as a whole in my
hand which I looked through, and what I did a couple of days ago, when I
(25)saw only some pages, so I cannot tell you exactly whether anything was
• Q.: Were you shown the conversation between General Krstic and Obrenovic, transcribed at 0950, or rather taped at 0950? • A.: Probably, but I don't remember the details of that conversation. (5) • Q.: Was it shown to you or not? • A.: I cannot give you a precise answer to that question. I just don't -- I don't remember. • Q.: But in 1999, you remembered the conversation conducted in 1995; is that correct? (10) • A.: At the time, they played me the tape of a conversation which I remembered. Whether that was that particular conversation, I really don't remember. • Q.: Was a tape played for you now? • A.: No. (15) • Q.: The conversation that you were able to recollect in 1999 was distinctive in some way, was it? • A.: Yes. • Q.: What made it distinctive? • A.: It was distinctive for me because of a joke that was a component (20)part of that conversation, and I laughed at the joke even in 1995, and again in 1999. • Q.: Can it be concluded from that conversation that it coincided in time with the conflicts over Srebrenica?
• A.: On the basis of what I remember of that conversation, that part of
(25)the conversation which sounded to me like a kind of joke, it is hard to
• Q.: Were the dates noted in that notebook? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Did you remember by the dates when that conversation could have (5)been conducted? MR. HARMON: Mr. President, I'm going to object to this line of questioning. This is not a conversation that has been presented in court through this witness, and therefore asking him about a conversation that is not an exhibit is beyond the scope of the examination, and we would (10)therefore object. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Visnjic, what is your response? MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, it is our intention to tender into evidence the conversation that the witness -- the interview (15)the witness had with the investigators, where mention is made of a specific notebook and a specific document. I was not able to find that document in the exhibits tendered by the Prosecutor. In fact, in that interview an audiotape is mentioned. I just wish to learn from the witness more so as to be able to -- that may help us in our investigation (20)regarding these two exhibits. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Harmon. MR. HARMON: We have neither tendered the tape nor the notebook, and that is the point of my objection.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes. So Mr. Visnjic, what do
(25)you have to say? Mr. Visnjic, the cross-examination must be limited by
MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, I don't know whether my next question is permissible in that context, but let me put it to the witness and it's up to you to decide. I'm not quite sure now. So may I have your permission to put it to the witness? (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Go ahead. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] • Q.: Witness BB, did you hear the audio recording with General Krstic's voice on it and which is linked to the talk, conversation? • A.: [redacted] (15) MR. HARMON: Same objection. I have the same objection, Mr. President. Unfortunately when counsel gets an opportunity to ask the question, the witness will answer before the translation occurs. I now would ask the Court to restrict the questioning to the subject of the exhibits that are before it and not permit any additional questions in (20)respect of exhibits that have not yet been tendered into evidence.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes. It is true that
Mr. Visnjic asked whether he would be allowed to ask the question, but the
witness was very quick to answer the question.
In any event, we have here two aspects to the tape; one is whether
(25)the witness listened to the tape to transcribe it, and that is an object
MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, in that case, I have no further questions for this witness. That ends my cross-examination. Thank you, Witness BB. (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. Visnjic. Mr. Harmon, do you have any re-examination? Let's try and finish with this witness before the break. MR. HARMON: I do have some questions. Thank you. • RE-EXAMINED by Mr. Harmon: (15) • Q.: Let me start in reverse order, Witness BB. MR. HARMON: If the usher could assist me, please. • Q.: Witness BB, you were asked to comment on Prosecutor's Exhibit 362. MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, if you would place 362/B in front of the (20)witness, the typewritten conversation of the tape. And if you would place Prosecutor's Exhibit 283, page 850, in front of the witness. • Q.: Now, on page 850 of Prosecutor's Exhibit 283, do you see your name written at the bottom of that particular conversation? • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: Now, turning to Prosecutor's Exhibit 362/B, do you see that same
• A.: Yes. • Q.: Are your initials the first of the two sets of initials that appear in the typewritten form of this conversation? (5) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Does the presence of your name in Prosecutor's 283, at page 850, and the presence of your initials in Prosecutor's Exhibit 362/B confirm that you are the person who transmitted and encrypted this conversation? • A.: Yes. (10) MR. HARMON: Could we turn to Prosecutor's Exhibit 361, please. Mr. Usher, could you place the exhibit in front of the witness. • Q.: On this particular page, Witness BB, on the last page, page numbered 602 in the evidence registration number, there are two sets of initials. Do you see your initials on this particular page? (15) • A.: Yes. • Q.: And does that mean, based on the location of those initials, that you were the person who intercepted this particular conversation? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Now, if you turn to the next page, please, the same exhibit, where (20)there are other initials on this, do you see -- and I'm referring to Prosecutor's Exhibit 361 -- the page number that has 00727603 on it, above that 603 number do you see two initials, two sets of initials? • A.: Yes.
• Q.: In your direct examination, you testified you recognised those as
(25)being the initials from people who worked in your unit; is that correct?
MR. HARMON: Could we go into private session very briefly for one question, Mr. President?
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Let's go into private session,
(5)please.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] We are in open session, Mr. Harmon. You may continue and wind things up, please. (25)
MR. HARMON:
• A.: Yes. (10) • Q.: Now, you were asked a series of questions by my colleague that related to this topic, that related to the transcriptions that were made while you were the person who was encrypting and transcribing the conversations. You testified that you never made a change, after reading a (15)notebook, made a change in the typewritten version on your own initiative; is that correct? You would never alter what you saw in the piece of paper in the notebook when you were typing it into the encoded version, on your own initiative? • A.: I wouldn't alter it ever. (20) • Q.: The only time you would alter a conversation was after you asked that the conversation be listened to again, and if there was an error noted, you would then enter the change into the typewritten version; am I correct? • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: Now, you were shown a copy of your statement, and I'm referring to
• A.: Yes. MR. HARMON: I have no additional questions, Witness BB. Thank you very much. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, (10)Mr. Harmon. Judge Fouad Riad. JUDGE RIAD: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. President. • QUESTIONED by the Court: JUDGE RIAD: Good morning, Witness BB. Can you hear me? • A.: Good morning. Yes. (15) JUDGE RIAD: I have a few questions just to clarify your testimony. In one of the questions asked by the Defence counsel, Mr. Visnjic, which was related to your recognition of the voice of General Krstic, he asked you when you listened for a couple of hours a day, can you recognise the voice. And your answer was that as far as Krstic was (20)concerned, you were familiar with his voice because you could listen to the tapes later on. That means that -- did you mean by that that there were many tapes collected from messages by General Krstic in that period in particular? • A.: There were many tapes with messages by General Krstic on them. (25)
JUDGE RIAD: You were stationed in Okresanica and Konjuh from May
• A.: I can't remember exactly until when, that is to say, when the last conversation of General Krstic was intercepted; but up until the end of (5)the war, the unit functioned. It did the same things it did in July 1995. JUDGE RIAD: Referring to the last conversation of General Krstic, it was on 13th of July. It is rather strange because many of his words were in dots. If you look at the conversation, the interlocutor, the other one speaking, was very clearly noted, but General Krstic was in dots (10)four times or five times. Was his voice, in spite of that, was it clear in your opinion? Could you affirm that it was Krstic? • A.: Usually, yes. But it -- what could happen was that audibility was very bad, and then I wasn't able to recognise the voice. JUDGE RIAD: So he announced -- I mean, how did you then note that (15)it was Krstic?
• A.: I personally usually did not rely on recognising the voice but
only the information which I heard or recorded on tape. In some cases,
with respect to recognition of the voice itself, I would ask assistance
from a colleague, although I should like to mention once again that I
(20)personally avoided identification by relying on the voice.
So that this piece of -- the piece of information that I wrote
down was probably from another source, had another source. That is to
say, that when a connection was established, and at the very start of the
conversation, the tape recorder was not switched on straight away, but I
(25)heard the name; and on the basis of what I heard, I was able to note what
JUDGE RIAD: So you're sure it was from Krstic? That's my question. It was verified. • A.: Yes. (5) JUDGE RIAD: Now, another instance you said that the call was from General Krstic, "X" is calling from General Krstic. Do you have any means to know the source of the call? If somebody says, "I'm calling from 'somewhere'", could you check it? • A.: No. (10) JUDGE RIAD: So you take it for granted what he says, you accept -- you take it as a very basic fact? • A.: Yes, although we worked with directed antennae, and so we could speak about just one fact; the direction the signal is coming from. And from that location, we had no more precise data than that. (15) JUDGE RIAD: So you could know the direction, how accurate can that be? • A.: A 10 to 15 per cent error. Fairly accurate. JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Judge Fouad (20)Riad. Madam Judge Wald. JUDGE WALD: Witness BB, you tell us that there were many tapes with General Krstic's voice on it that you remember from around this time. You remember there were many from around this time, right? • A.: Yes. (25)
JUDGE WALD: And would you have taken down in the notebook and
• A.: No. Some conversations of high officials of the army of Republika Srpska I remember were marked on tape, but I can't give you any more precise information than that. JUDGE WALD: Well, let me ask it another way. If you were (10)monitoring and you heard his voice come on and you recognised his voice, would you later make a decision whether or not the conversation was worth monitoring, or would you, because of who he was, have recorded the conversation in your notebook? • A.: That conversation, if it had any -- contained any information of (15)any kind, it would be recorded. But there were a lot of private conversations as well which were just -- you know, family, friends, with no information, then that wasn't taken note of.
JUDGE WALD: My last question is just a general one about your
general impression, not any specific conversation.
(20)Is it your impression during this period, the Srebrenica period
that we're talking about, that you recorded conversations in which General
Krstic took part that you have not been asked to identify so far by the
Prosecution? I'm not asking about any specific ones, just whether or not
when you talked about there being many tapes with General Krstic's voice
(25)on it, whether it is your memory or impression that there were
• A.: I had occasion to listen to a copy of a tape in 1999 when I gave (5)my first statement for the Tribunal. I had occasion to hear just a segment of a copy. I do not know what you have. JUDGE WALD: No, I had only -- I wasn't asking you about that particular conversation. I was simply trying to find out if whether or not when -- during this period when you say you identified or you (10)recognised General Krstic's voice, and that there were many tapes with his voice on it during this period, that's what you testified to, whether or not it was your memory or impression that there were lots of conversations recorded that we haven't talked about. I don't want to know about any specific one, but that there were many that were not identified or (15)introduced into evidence, just your memory of whether or not that's true. Yes, no, or I don't remember. • A.: I don't remember. JUDGE WALD: All right. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Witness BB, just one question. (20)We spoke about codes. You said that armies frequently used codes. Could the word "Krstic" be a code, or was it a name corresponding to a person? • A.: In this concrete case, it is my opinion that it was, in fact, a name belonging to a person, denoting a person.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Do you know other surnames for
(25)that same name?
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. Witness BB, you have completed your testimony here at the Tribunal. (5)I think that we have some exhibits to regulate, and perhaps we could do that rapidly. Exhibits 365 and 366 of the Prosecutor are to be admitted under seal, and I think we also have a statement that Mr. Harmon mentioned, 221 [sic], Defence Exhibit 221, and that is to be tendered and admitted. (10)Mr. Harmon. MR. HARMON: Yes. Then I would tender, subject to the Court's previous ruling, of course, Prosecutor's Exhibit 340, 341, 342/1, 342/2, 343/1. We would ask that that be under seal because there is a name on it. Exhibit 344/1. Exhibits 345/1 and 345/2, we would ask that both of (15)those be under seal because there are initials on it that could identify witnesses and individuals. Exhibit 346/1. Exhibit 347/1, we'd ask that that also be under seal; there is a name written on that particular document. Then all of the remaining exhibits that I identify we're asking to go under seal; that is, 354/1, 355/1, 359, 360, 361, and 362, all of (20)those under seal. And Your Honour has already mentioned 365 and 366 which we're requesting go under seal. Thank you. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic, I didn't mention the other exhibits because we were within the frameworks of the Chamber's ruling. What do you have to say to all these exhibits, Mr. Visnjic? (25)
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, with respect to
(5) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Harmon, you have not stated your views with respect to D21, I think. We have yet to have your response. MR. HARMON: We have no objection as long as it's admitted under seal. (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes. Very well. Exhibits 365, 366, and D21 are admitted under seal, and the other exhibits mentioned will await an opportune moment. I apologise to my colleagues and everybody else. We seem to have overstepped our time limit and have been working for more than two hours, (15)but very often we have to do this. We wanted to finish with this witness. We have a voice distortion witness next, and so it would be a good idea to have a break now. We're now going to have a half-hour break and resume after that. Thank you very much, Witness, for coming here. Please remain (20)seated for a little while yet. We wish you a safe journey back home and every success in your work. Thank you. THE WITNESS: [Int.] Thank you too.
--- Recess taken at 1.25 p.m. (25)
--- On resuming at 1.58 p.m.
THE WITNESS: [Int.] Yes, I can.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Madam Registrar, this microphone
needs to be repaired; I already told you that.
(5)Witness W, you were here last week, but nevertheless you're going
to read the solemn declaration handed to you by the usher. Please stand
up. THE WITNESS: [Int.] I solemnly declare that I will speak (10)the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
WITNESS: WITNESS W
[Recalled] JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] You may be seated and make yourself comfortable. You already know the procedure. Mr. Harmon has (15)some questions for you, and please answer them. Mr. Harmon, your witness. MR. HARMON: Thank you very much. • EXAMINED by Mr. Harmon: • Q.: Welcome back, Witness W. (20) MR. HARMON: With the usher's assistance, if I could have Prosecutor's Exhibits 348 through 353, and Prosecutor's Exhibit 363 given to the witness, we can go through this testimony very quickly.
• Q.: Witness W, last week when you testified, you testified about
procedures that were used by your service. We're not going to go back
(25)into that. Let me just start by showing you Prosecutor's Exhibit 350.
(5) THE REGISTRAR: Yes. MR. HARMON: Thank you. • Q.: Witness W, before you should be Prosecutor's Exhibit 350B which is in B/C/S. Can you identify this particular document as being a conversation that was recorded -- intercepted and recorded by your (10)service? • A.: Yes, it is a document done by my service. • Q.: In fact, if you turn to the second page of the B/C/S version of this exhibit, you will notice two numbers at the bottom. Is this a conversation that you personally intercepted? (15) • A.: Yes. MR. HARMON: If we could show the witness, please, Mr. Usher, 348, 349, 351, and 352, if you just place each of those exhibits in front of him. • Q.: Witness W, if you would take the first exhibit that's marked 348 (20)and turn to the B/C/S version of that exhibit, can you identify if this is a document that was intercepted and then recorded by your service? • A.: Yes, it is a document prepared by us.
• Q.: Now, do you recognise at the end of that document two numbers that
appear on the end of a page that has an ERN number 00869277? Do you see
(25)those two numbers?
• Q.: Do you recognise those as being the code numbers for members of your organisation who were working with you? • A.: Yes, precisely. These are the names of the people but, of course, (5)in code. • Q.: Will you turn to the next exhibit, please, Prosecutor's Exhibit 349, and can you turn to the B/C/S version which is found at Prosecutor's Exhibit 349B and turn to the last page. Let me ask you, one, is this a conversation that was intercepted by your service? (10) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Do these code numbers relate to the individuals from your service who captured this conversation and who transmitted this conversation? • A.: Yes, that is correct. • Q.: Could you turn to Prosecutor's Exhibit 351B, please. If you look (15)at the bottom of Prosecutor's Exhibit 351B, you'll see the same numbers. I ask you the same question: Is this a conversation that was captured by members of your service, and do these two numbers at the bottom reflect the identities of the individuals who were working with you who intercepted the communication and who transmitted the communication? (20) • A.: Yes, the conversation was intercepted by my service and recorded by these two operators whose code figures are at the end of the page.
• Q.: Let me turn to Prosecutor's Exhibit 352B, please. Again, you'll
notice at the bottom of the page certain code numbers. Is this
conversation that is found in Prosecutor's Exhibit 352 -- actually, there
(25)are two conversations in the B/C/S version and only one translated into
• A.: Yes. • Q.: How can you tell that? (5) • A.: I explained that last time, and I can do it again if necessary. This is a document that has its registration number, its date. It's registered in the book of records, and then the code of the operators means that they intercepted, recorded and reproduced it. The first sentence with which every conversation of ours begins -- (10) • Q.: Thank you, Witness W. Let's turn to the next exhibit, Prosecutor's Exhibit 353, if you turn to the B/C/S version of that. Is this a document that contains conversations that were intercepted and transcribed by members of your service on the 12th of July, 1995? • A.: Yes. (15) • Q.: Again, turning to the second page of the B/C/S translation, there appear to be two numbers. Are these the code numbers for the individuals who identified and transmitted the conversation? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Lastly, Witness W, I'd like to turn your attention to Prosecutor's (20)Exhibit 363. I would like you to examine the B/C/S version of that. At the bottom, instead of code numbers you will see two names. MR. HARMON: If we could go into private session, I would like to ask the witness to identify the reason why there are names here and not code numbers. (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes, let's go into private
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] We are already in open session. Mr. Petrusic. Witness, you are now going to answer questions put to you by (15)Mr. Petrusic. Mr. Petrusic, you have the floor. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Good afternoon, Your Honours, my learned friends from the Prosecution, and Witness W. • CROSS-EXAMINED by Mr. Petrusic: (20) • Q.: Witness W, if we go back to Exhibit 349B, usually in the header there is the date, the registration number, the serial number, and the sentence, "On the above-mentioned day, monitoring frequency so and so, at 1555 hours," and I will stop there. You gave this conversation the number 537? (25)
• A.: Yes.
(5) • A.: I can't answer with certainty whether that is correct. I would have to consult the reception notebook to be able to answer that question. I see that for the first time now. • Q.: The next conversation, which carries the number 535, is on the same frequency at 1623 hours on the same page. (10) • A.: Yes, I can see that. • Q.: Is that correct? • A.: Are you asking me whether the time is correct, when the conversation took place? • Q.: Is it correct that it is number 535, and is it correct that the (15)time is 1623 hours? • A.: I think that is correct, but the person who typed in may have made a mistake, instead of 15, putting 16 hours. That may an error. • Q.: And the next ordinal number, 536, is that the right number? • A.: I don't understand what you're asking me. (20) • Q.: Is the next ordinal number 536? • A.: Yes. • Q.: And the time, 20 minutes after 1623 hours?
• A.: Yes, but let me try and explain. This is one file which has a
certain sequence, and you can see everything that is recorded; it has a
(25)certain chronology. And this last conversation, after the last
• Q.: The numbers, do they correspond to the times when the (5)conversations were intercepted? • A.: Mostly, yes. They should be linked to the time, but if they occurred at the same time on two sets, because we have spoken about three different sets of equipment, then the number may cause a problem, a little problem, so the time was indicated on both. (10) • Q.: Witness W, if we compare these two exhibits 349/B and 348/B, in 349/B we will see the time written in as 1555 hours, and the ordinal number is 537? • A.: I can see that. Just a moment please. • Q.: In Exhibit 348/B, we see the time indicated as 1610 hours, and the (15)ordinal number 534, so a lower number in relation to the time, in relation to the time indicated for these two conversations. Do you agree with me? • A.: Yes, that's what it says here. • Q.: This conversation intercepted at 1555 hours, would it logically have to come before the conversation bearing the number 534? (20) • A.: Logically, yes. Indeed, it should come after 535, 536, because as I said, it is possible that the person who was typing, instead of 16, having written 15 hours. It's possible. • Q.: When you said at the same time, you meant the transcription of the conversation? (25)
• A.: I can't remember what I was referring to when I said "the same
• Q.: So you will agree with me that the sequence of numbers does not (15)correspond to the times? • A.: It is throughout, except for this one report. • Q.: Thank you. Witness, tell me, of course if you can, how did you determine the ordinal number? How did you give these documents numbers? • A.: Of course I can. Every subsequent number would be given the next (20)number in turn. • Q.: Did it start at Okresanica with 001? • A.: I'd rather not talk about that. • Q.: Is that a secret? Is that why you don't want to talk about it?
• A.: We could have started with number 444, for instance, or I think
(25)that this is a question that is a sensitive one, and I would not like to
MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, I would suggest we go into private session so I can ask the witness the same question.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Let's go into private session,
(5)yes, for the witness to be able to answer.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I see that we are in open session. Mr. Petrusic, you may continue, bearing in mind that it is almost half past two. (10) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Yes, I am watching the clock. I will certainly finish by half past two. • Q.: Witness W, was it feasible for two reports to be sent under the same number? • A.: It could happen only in the case of an error being made. (15) • Q.: And finally, Exhibit 354/1C -- THE INTERPRETER: Microphone. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] I'm sorry. • Q.: Witness W, you said that your report, under number 611, was taken over from the PEB of the 2nd Corps. (20) • A.: I am not saying that our report was taken from the PEB of the 2nd Corps but that the report of the 2nd Corps was taken over. It is their report. • Q.: Exhibit 354/1C, is it a telegram sent by your service?
• A.: Yes. It was taken over from the PEB of the 2nd Corps and
(25)forwarded to my service.
• A.: I believe it did, but there are records of that. • Q.: Do you know when that conversation was transcribed by the operator? (5) • A.: From the report, I know nothing more than you do. • Q.: Thank you, Witness W. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, I have no further questions for this witness. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, (10)Mr. Petrusic. Mr. Harmon, do you have any re-examination? MR. HARMON: I do not, Mr. President. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much. Judge Fouad Riad, no? (15)Judge Wald? Witness, thank you very much for coming here once again. We have no further questions. We wish to renew our wishes for a safe journey home and success in your work. We're going to adjourn for today. (20)Mr. Harmon, yes?
MR. HARMON: In terms of the exhibits that have been tendered by
this witness, I would offer them into evidence, and those are Exhibits 348
through Prosecutor's Exhibit 353, and I would ask that Prosecutor's
Exhibit 363 be placed under seal because the names at the end of the B/C/S
(25)version identify certain individuals.
THE REGISTRAR: Yes. May I please also take this chance to make a
(5)correction.
[redacted] MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President -- MR. HARMON: Perhaps we could go into a closed session. (10) MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] -- this is a question for a closed session. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President. MR. HARMON: Perhaps the witness should be escorted out before we (15)deal with the closed-session comments of counsel. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Just a moment, please. Can we separate these things, because the Chamber has other engagements. If we can deal with this matter tomorrow, we will do so. No, Mr. Harmon?
MR. HARMON: If we could go into closed session now or private
(20)session, then I can at least allude to the reasons why we wish to address
the Court and why the witness should be released before we do this. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic. (25)
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, I apologise. Perhaps
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. Mr. Harmon, the reasons for your intervention, do they still have (10)anything to do with the presence of this witness or not, or can we deal with that matter tomorrow? MR. HARMON: I don't want to insist on this, Mr. President, but there were certain issues that were discussed with this Chamber at a different time that are extremely sensitive, and it's very difficult to (15)talk restricted in this way to identify what the problem is. I'm reluctant to do that in the presence of this witness. On the other hand, I don't think it can wait until tomorrow. It should take but a minute or two once the witness is excused. I could send a note to the Court and I can explain it. Perhaps (20)that's the easiest way to do it.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Perhaps that would be the best
solution, because I know that we have other meetings and we have to finish
at 2.30.
So if the question that you have to address, Mr. Harmon, has
(25)nothing to do with the witness, the witness -- we can leave before the
MR. HARMON: I am. I'm drafting it right this minute. (5) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Madam Registrar, you mentioned an exhibit, a Defence Exhibit, D21, identifying it, so I think mention of that document needs to be redacted, deleted. Is that all right? THE REGISTRAR: Yes. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Will you do that straight away, (10)please? THE REGISTRAR: Yes, I'm doing it now.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: Okay. Thank you. (15) MR. HARMON: Yes, thank you. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. Thank you for drawing our attention to it. MR. HARMON: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I apologise for any delay, but I don't think the matter could have waited until tomorrow. (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, you're right, Mr. Harmon. Always when there is a dialogue among the deaf, there is difficulty in communication. So I apologise to my colleagues who have other appointments. We will now adjourn and meet again tomorrow at 9.30. (25)
--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
|
