1 Wednesday, 26 January 2005

2 [Open session]

3 [The witness entered court]

4 [The accused entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.

6 JUDGE KWON: Judge Robinson is absent for today. The remaining

7 Judges, Judge Bonomy and I, have decided to sit pursuant to Rule 15 bis.

8 MR. NICE: I'm grateful. I'm joined today by Mr. Saxon, and if

9 there are any questions to ask of this witness, it's Mr. Saxon who will be

10 asking them.

11 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. We have the witness already. Let the

12 witness take the declaration.

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

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

15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

16 WITNESS: BO ADAM

17 [Witness answered through interpreter]

18 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, it is for you to examine the witness.

19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Kwon.

20 Examined by Mr. Milosevic:

21 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Adam. Could you please start

22 off by giving us your full name and surname.

23 A. My name is Adam. My first name is Bo, that is Bo Adam.

24 Q. And when were you born?

25 A. I was born 1945.

1 Q. Would you please tell us what you are by profession and briefly

2 your CV, your professional career in brief, please.

3 A. Well, that is relatively short. I have been a journalist for

4 about 28 years. Before that, I was at the university. And as a

5 journalist I have been concerned mainly with international questions and

6 also with legal questions like Palme and Lockerbie. I was a reporter and

7 editor for Berliner Zeitung, and since 2002, I have not been working any

8 more because I am ill with cancer, and that is the reason.

9 Q. You were in Kosovo and Metohija or, rather, specifically you were

10 in Racak, were you not, and you felt --

11 A. That is correct.

12 Q. Tell me when you visited Racak.

13 A. That was in the year 2000. That was in March, as far as I

14 remember, but I must recheck on this. I have a stamp in my passport --

15 THE INTERPRETER: He's speaking English.

16 THE WITNESS: I speak German. Is that possible? Because I

17 confuse myself in listening to my English translation of my German

18 language, you know, so maybe I could speak a bit English and then change

19 into German in case it's too complicated for me to be in English. Is that

20 possible?

21 JUDGE KWON: It's no problem. As you please.

22 THE WITNESS: Thank you. Sorry. It was in 2000, in March. It

23 was 21st of March, I suppose. And in Racak, I stayed in Racak on the 23rd

24 of March. I have to check my passport. Yes, it was 21st of March. That

25 was the same day when Mrs. Ranta was in Racak for investigation.

1 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Mr. Adam, would you please tell us why you went to Racak in the

3 first place. Could you explain that to us, please.

4 A. Yes. Well, there were two main reasons for going to Racak. The

5 first reason was that of course Racak stirred up a lot of emotions in the

6 whole world, in the Western world, or rather, to be precise, the news

7 about Racak. It was a major event. It was a decisive event in the Kosovo

8 crisis, and a lot of politicians said that in those days, and a lot of

9 media said that, that Racak turned everything into war. And definitely it

10 was so, that Racak helped to break the resistance against the war in the

11 public opinion in Western Europe. So that's one of the reasons.

12 Maybe I can quote one statement by a leading politician. In --

13 oh, that's great, there's no translation. By Mr. Clinton, who was

14 president in the United States, the United States at that time, and when

15 it came to the war --

16 MR. NICE: Your Honours, I don't wish to interrupt the witness,

17 but nevertheless, the time is, I think, going to come with this witness

18 when questions of the admissibility of his evidence will have to be

19 considered, and it's probably helpful if I set out my position now and

20 maybe I shan't have to set it out again.

21 From the materials that we've seen and from the researches that

22 we've conducted, this witness is only, as he's now explained, in Racak a

23 year after the events, and there may be problems of admissibility or

24 relevance in anything he's able to say - we'll wait and see what he says -

25 because it will simply be a character, a form of hearsay that is not

1 acceptable to the Chamber.

2 Insofar as he's seeking to comment on or refer to public

3 statements by people such as former President Clinton, I'm at the moment

4 at a loss to see how that's going to be of any relevance, certainly coming

5 from this witness. It appears to be related to the overall determination

6 of the international community to take the steps that it did, but that's

7 not for a journalist - I don't mean that in any sense derogatorily of

8 journalists - but it's not for journalists to deal with it. If it's

9 relevant it has to be dealt with by the appropriate type of witness in due

10 course.

11 So perhaps I should also add this: We of course understand that

12 the accused's case includes allegations of conspiracy by all sorts of

13 powers to do down Serbia and to rely on Racak, and for that reason alone I

14 will be reluctant to object, because it may look as though I'm concerned

15 that there may be substance in what he's raising as part of his Defence.

16 I will object when it becomes obviously the case that the material is

17 inadmissible. But if the accused chooses to use his time adducing

18 evidence that has nil value in the end, that is a choice he will have

19 made, and it's not something he will be able to pray in aid if when the

20 150 days has passed he says he wants more time. So it's his decision, and

21 with this witness I think we should proceed cautiously on questions of

22 admissibility and relevance.

23 MS. HIGGINS: Your Honour.

24 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Higgins.

25 MS. HIGGINS: May I address you briefly? In relation to the

1 points raised by Mr. Nice, it may be in fact more prudent to allow the

2 development of this testimony before the Judges take any decisions. It

3 seems to me, if I may just finish, Your Honour, that this witness has been

4 called as a witness of fact. He is evidently, therefore, entitled to

5 bring to Your Honours' attention matters that he read and that came to his

6 attention that may well have led to his investigations. It's a brief

7 point, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

9 [Trial Chamber confers]

10 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Nice, I wasn't assisted at all by that

11 intervention. I would be much more fully assisted, I think, if the

12 intervention took place when there was an objectionable question, and I

13 envisage from what you've already said that there will be objectionable

14 questions, but all the witness was asked at this stage was why did he go

15 to Racak, and he's in the course of giving his second reason, as I

16 understand it, for going to Racak, and I would be assisted certainly by

17 knowing his reasons for going there in the first place.

18 MR. NICE: Your Honour, he's given the reason, and the reason I

19 raised the point when I did --

20 JUDGE BONOMY: He gave only one reason and he said there were two,

21 and my understanding is he's now dealing with the second one.

22 MR. NICE: But he -- as I understood the remark that he made, or

23 the beginning of the answer that he was going to give, "May I quote the

24 statement by a leading politician," and then he turned to Mr. Clinton, to

25 be connected to what he'd said earlier about Racak stirring up a lot of

1 emotions in the Western world, or news about Racak, and a lot of

2 politicians saying that Racak was an event that turned everything into

3 war, and I simply thought it -- it seemed to me that was likely to be

4 something that was inadmissible from the mouth of this witness. But

5 there's no -- there's no -- there's no --

6 JUDGE BONOMY: Just a moment, Mr. Nice. He very carefully

7 corrected that statement, the one you've just given, and said that it was

8 the news of Racak that turned everything into war, and as soon as you say

9 that, then you open the door to the question, What was this news? And

10 indeed if it was news that did turn things into war, then it's very

11 relevant.

12 MR. NICE: There it is.

13 JUDGE KWON: I don't think we need to --

14 MR. NICE: We needn't go any further.

15 JUDGE KWON: -- spend more time on this issue.

16 MR. NICE: But most fundamentally I'm not going to take an

17 aggressive line of objection. I'm setting out our general position and

18 I'm not taking an aggressive line for the reasons I've given.

19 JUDGE KWON: As a general rule hearsay is admissible here and it

20 is for the Chamber to determine the weight or probative value later.

21 MR. NICE: Certainly.

22 JUDGE KWON: Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.

23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Kwon.

24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. As we were saying, Mr. Adam, you were interrupted in the course of

1 your explanations as to what news you heard, what information was

2 available which motivated you to go to Racak.

3 A. Yes. Maybe I can end that quotation of Mr. Clinton, who said in

4 his message to the nation ahead of the war, just the evening before the

5 war started, he only mentioned Racak as the incident, and he said that in

6 Racak innocent men and women, as far as I can remember, innocent men,

7 women, and children were forced to kneel in the mud or in the dirt to be

8 sprayed upon by weapons. I think it's almost correct.

9 So that's a very grave accusation. So it's the reason for

10 journalists to go there, to look at that even a year thereafter.

11 And since Mr. Nice said it's a year thereafter, there is no

12 relevance for that, it was exactly the same date when Mrs. Ranta that was

13 there. So -- and so far -- well, at least my findings are -- could be

14 used in the same way or a similar way. Not the same way, of course, I'm

15 not an expert. But a similar way.

16 Okay. That was the main -- first main reason for every

17 journalist, investigating journalist, to go to Racak.

18 The second one was from the very beginning, those official stories

19 or official presentings of the events of Racak were doubted. There were

20 things which being a journalist for more than a quarter of a century where

21 you all of a sudden say there's something wrong in this story. There's

22 something wrong in the presenting.

23 For instance, there are those -- were those trenches in Racak.

24 There was telling about those trenches, by other journalists, I admit.

25 Well, a trench is not built to flee. A trench is built for fighting

1 purposes, nothing else. That's the sense, the meaning of a trench. And

2 there were different other aspects where you could -- started to doubt.

3 There was, for instance, the aspect that the Serbian officials

4 invited the TV crew to deal with that, to make videotapes of the event,

5 which is quite unusual in such a situation. Another case -- another

6 aspect is that if they had committed a crime, why didn't they take the

7 dead people with them to hide them? Why did they put them on presentation

8 in such a way?

9 So all those questions motivated us to say, okay, let's find out

10 what is to be the real truth, objective truth. And so we tried to obtain

11 documents, for instance. For instance, there was -- we obtained some

12 documents from the OSCE which were semi-official. They were at least

13 basis for the public opinion or public relations work of the OSCE.

14 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Adam, if you could confine your answer briefly.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Okay. Okay. Well, this document

16 which I refer to now is a special report on Racak. It was filed on the

17 17th of January by the OSCE. It included the statement of Mr. Walker. I

18 suppose you know all about it.

19 When we got that document, we were quite -- quite -- we found it

20 quite strange, because in that document there was no -- no mentioning at

21 all of any fighting of -- between KLA and Yugoslav or Serbian troops at

22 the -- at the Racak -- at Racak.

23 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Adam --

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

25 JUDGE KWON: -- you answered the question sufficiently, to the

1 question what was the purpose of your visit or what motivated your visit,

2 and it is for the accused to ask further questions.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Okay.

4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Kwon. Before I go on

5 to ask my questions and put them to Mr. Adam, I would like to draw your

6 attention that in the exhibits, tab 1 is the statement made by Clinton to

7 which the witness referred, which was one of the reasons he decided to

8 investigate. He's a journalist and an investigator. And I'm only going

9 to quote that portion that the witness referred to, which is in tab 1, as

10 I said, paragraph 5 on that one page of tab 1.

11 And it's Clinton's statements: "[In English] We should remember

12 the thousands of people facing cold and hunger in the hills of Kosovo last

13 fall. Firmness ended that as well. We should -- we should remember what

14 happened in the village of Racak back in January - innocent men, women,

15 and children taken from their homes to a gully, forced to kneel in the

16 dirt, sprayed with gunfire, not because of anything they had done, but

17 because of who they were."

18 [Interpretation] That is the statement, and I'd like to tender it

19 as an exhibit. And before I continue, you have tab 2, which is the

20 special report of the Verification Mission, Kosovo Verification Mission of

21 the OSCE, and I'm just going to quote the first line from the beginning of

22 that report, and it starts with: "Summary [In English] On the 15th of

23 January, 1998 -" [Interpretation] it's 1999, actually. That's a mistake,

24 but it doesn't matter - "[In English] in the village of Racak, 45 Albanian

25 civilians were killed." [Interpretation] That's what was claimed.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Now, Mr. Adam, from your explanations --

3 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, we'll give the next exhibit number to

4 this binder.

5 THE REGISTRAR: That will be D273.

6 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.

7 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Mr. Adam, if I might be allowed to conclude from what you've said

9 so far, it was doubt that led you to visit Racak, your doubts.

10 A. That's true.

11 Q. Tell me, did you have any other reasons for your doubts or

12 suspicions? What were all the reasons for your doubts?

13 A. [Previous translation continues] ... say I have dealt a lot with

14 that, so maybe that has finished. I could continue for hours about my

15 doubt, because there are a lot of doubts, or were a lot of doubts.

16 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please go on. Mr. Milosevic, ask further

17 questions.

18 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Did you have in mind that first report or, rather, the first

20 statement made by Walker when he said that, and I'm going to quote, he

21 said: "[In English] mostly elderly men."

22 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Milosevic, that's a plainly leading question,

23 and it's not assisting me in the least for a proposition like that to be

24 put. The witness is anxious to tell us about his investigations. We know

25 he's there because of his doubts, so can we not turn to the actual

1 investigation and what he claims to have discovered.

2 JUDGE KWON: Try to put specific questions.

3 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. You wish to give an additional explanation, Mr. Adam, as far as I

5 was able to understand, with respect to your doubts and suspicions.

6 A. Yes. Well, just understand what I then in the end investigated.

7 I have to -- to produce the background. You know, in this -- I refer now

8 to the OSCE report, which is an official or semi-official document by an

9 international organisation, paid by the taxpayers of Europe, and so it's

10 obliged to be truthful and work neutral.

11 So in that report, we have strong description, a strong

12 description of a massacre. We have mentioning of executions. We have

13 mentioning of people who were elderly and not of fighting age, which is

14 what is explained. Women, children, and so on, who were executed, as

15 Mr. Walker said, by weapons held close to their heads.

16 So that was the very beginning of my investigation. That was the

17 background. Is that true or is it not true?

18 So we then discussed what -- how could we, that's our journalists

19 in the --

20 JUDGE KWON: Who are "we", Mr. Adam?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We journalists in the Berliner

22 Zeitung. We were a small team of three journalists who did that work. I

23 was maybe the leading one of them.

24 We then discussed the possibility of obtaining the protocols which

25 was made by Mrs. Ranta, since they were -- seemed to us to be the most

1 objective way of finding out whether there was a massacre or whether there

2 was not a massacre. We were totally neutral in that approach, because we

3 didn't know. But what puzzled us was that normally -- I can tell from my

4 experience, normally such documents are leaked to the press by someone,

5 but those documents are not -- were not leaked to the press, immediate --

6 simply to show, let's say, it was a massacre and now you had the details

7 leaked.

8 Those documents, those protocols, were not leaked. And when we

9 then searched in -- to the north, to the south, to the west, to the east,

10 and when we obtained those documents by Mrs. Ranta, the protocols from the

11 forensic investigation, it became quite clear that the allegations about

12 executions from -- from close to -- shooting close to the heads and so on

13 were not true, at least according to that protocols -- those protocols.

14 We, of course, did not only do that work from ourselves -- by

15 yourselves, but we of course asked forensic experts about their

16 assessment, and we had an interview done in the Berliner Zeitung with a

17 German expert who exactly stated that there were no bearing in those

18 allegations.

19 So that was the next step of my investigation, because my

20 investigations, of course, not only on-site investigations; I'm dealing

21 with documents. As a journalist, that's my job.

22 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Did you investigate the conduct of the Serb authorities in

24 relation to Racak? Did you, within your team which analysed the issue of

25 Racak, as you've just mentioned, consider who could possibly benefit from

1 such an incident which was given spectacular publicity in the

2 international media?

3 A. Well, in the end it was obvious that -- well, being -- speaking

4 about Racak, you're speaking about at least 40 people who died. That's a

5 tragedy. That's -- so speaking about benefiting about that, it's not very

6 easy to do. But of course, in the end, if you speak in political terms,

7 it was -- obviously it was the KLA that benefited from the Racak affair

8 and surely not the Serbian side.

9 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Adam, could you look at tab 2 of the documents

10 which you produced. Is that the OSCE report that you were referring to in

11 particular?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, sir, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE BONOMY: Can you show me where it refers to children and

14 women and men of older than fighting age.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Well, according to -- relating

16 to the elderly men, you can find that on page 1, 2, 3 -- 4, in the

17 statement of Mr. Walker. Then after that, we have three women, and in

18 that case you speak of -- they speak of one child, which is correct. It

19 was Mr. Clinton who spoke about children, not Mr. Walker.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: You'll see that at the very beginning of the report

21 there is a summary.

22 THE WITNESS: Yes.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: And there it talks of 45 -- the part Mr. Milosevic

24 read: "... 45 Albanian civilians were killed. The victims included one

25 female and one boy." Is that accurate? From the subsequent

1 investigations that you made, is that accurate?

2 THE WITNESS: I've never found out the exact number of the people

3 who died.

4 JUDGE BONOMY: Was there one female and one boy?

5 THE WITNESS: One boy is exact. One boy is exact. There I

6 referred to Mr. Clinton said "children."

7 But dealing with here, there were two females. That means --

8 JUDGE BONOMY: That's all I need to know for the moment. It's for

9 Mr. Milosevic to continue the questions.

10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, I hope that you

11 understood the essence of what the witness was saying. What the witness

12 had in mind was Clinton's statement where he clearly states "women,

13 children, and the elderly were forced to kneel and were executed," which

14 could not have been based on anything else but Walker's fabrications. And

15 this is what this investigative journalist looked into.

16 JUDGE BONOMY: Just a moment. Mr. Milosevic, I don't know about

17 your experience of dealing with other people, but in my case it's enough

18 to tell me something once. Thank you.

19 MR. NICE: Your Honours, my objection was to the accused using the

20 opportunity to reply to Your Honour to make an allegation about somebody

21 who has been a witness and whose credibility falls for determination by

22 the Chamber. We've had this sort of problem with him before.

23 JUDGE KWON: Having heard that, please continue the questioning.

24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

25 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

1 Q. Mr. Adam, what did you do then in preparation for your trip to

2 Racak?

3 A. Well, of course I -- we tried to approach Mrs. Ranta to find out

4 what -- to have a comment of hers to the documents which we obtained,

5 especially because we had the feeling that she herself had stirred up

6 emotions and -- and added fuel to the fire when she, at her press

7 conference in March 1999, had spoken about -- had spoken about the people

8 at Racak where the evidence was that -- it's very complicated because it

9 was quite a complicated sentence she said. There was nothing else than

10 being civilians, unarmed civilians, without -- which hadn't fired weapons

11 by themselves. That's not exactly the phrase, but it's more or less the

12 content of her -- her statement at a press conference.

13 And we approached her, and she was not very willing to discuss

14 that with us, but at least she said to me, or to us, that we -- that she

15 didn't -- had -- that they had never tried to find out whether the people

16 had traces -- powder traces on their hands. In the press conference, it

17 came out as if they had done that. And I can refer to Mr. Vollebaek, who

18 then at that time was the president, I suppose it was, of the OSCE, or

19 presiding minister of the OSCE, who then said that he had concluded that

20 they were not firing. But that was not true. That was simply not true.

21 She -- the team of Mrs. Ranta had said -- had investigated --

22 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Adam, once again --

23 THE WITNESS: -- traces --

24 JUDGE KWON: -- the Chamber is not assisted by a lengthy answer.

25 The question is what did you do in preparation for your trip, and you

1 answered that question, and it is for Mr. Milosevic to ask -- to elicit

2 specific evidence each time.

3 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. Please take a look, Mr. Adam, at tab 3, which is an ECMM daily

5 monitoring activity from the 15th to the 17th of January, 1998. Please

6 take a look at just one sentence on page 2.

7 You said just now that the OSCE kept silent about the KLA. In

8 this ECMM record, it is stated on the second page, on sentence 2: "The

9 UCK did tell EU KDOM, however, that six of their fighters had been killed

10 and six wounded."

11 A. That's true. That's very interesting, because we obtained that

12 document at the same time when we obtained the OSCE report, and from

13 almost the same source. And in Kosovo there were different structures,

14 there were parallel structures; there was still this KDOM structure and

15 there was then the OSCE structure, and they reported back to their

16 governments, and this is one of the KDOM parallel documents produced

17 almost at the same time when the OSCE document was produced. And contrary

18 to the OSCE report, in this KDOM report you have clearly the mentioning of

19 the KLA presence at Racak on page 2, which surely -- well, which was

20 absolutely deleted from the OSCE report. When you look at the OSCE

21 report, you only have an approach of the Serbians going into the village

22 of Racak and shooting people.

23 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Adam, you assert the year is once again a typo?

24 It says 1998.

25 THE WITNESS: Well, that's -- that's a typing mistake, I suppose,

1 because you're in January, and every -- every people -- all people then

2 forget to change the last digit. I suppose it's that.

3 JUDGE KWON: Yes. It deals with the massacre in Racak on the

4 first page. Yes, it should be 1999.

5 Yes, go on, Mr. Milosevic.

6 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

7 Q. Mr. Adam, was it clear, in view of the fact that there had already

8 been this report of the ECMM, that --

9 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, contrary to the instruction by Judge

10 Robinson, you started your question with "Is it clear..." I think it's a

11 leading question. Rephrase it.

12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. I will rephrase it.

13 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Was it possible, Mr. Adam, in view of the fact that there had

15 already been this official report of the ECMM, that the competent

16 authorities did not know that there was the UCK presence there?

17 A. Sorry. Okay. Obviously the responsible politicians knew about

18 the KLA presence at Racak, because that is one of the reports they

19 obtained in those days.

20 Q. Did you yourself hear any publicly announced information

21 mentioning KLA or any fighting going on?

22 A. Well, it was -- it was quite clear from the very beginning that

23 there was KLA fighting, because Reuters reported that on the 15th of --

24 they reported in the news dispatch, they reported about heavy fightings in

25 the area of Stimlje, but when this OSCE report came out, it was kept

1 silent. There was no mentioning of KLA activities and fightings between

2 Serb and Albanian forces any more, as far as the OSCE is concerned. As

3 far as the KDOM is concerned, there was mentioning of that.

4 Q. Yes, but the OSCE Verification Mission did not mention it. Is

5 that what you're saying?

6 A. Exactly. According to the papers which I obtained, yes.

7 Q. Now, please let us cover the next document very briefly. This is

8 a press release dated March 17th, 1999, forensic expert team on Racak. I

9 will not dwell on this in any substantial length of time. We will turn to

10 that later. But I would like now to turn your attention to page 3, a

11 paragraph that continues from the previous page, page 2, and goes on to

12 page 3. I hope the usher will give it to you.

13 A. I see. Can I have my own copy on that because -- may I use my own

14 copy?

15 JUDGE KWON: Yes.

16 THE WITNESS: Because I have some signs in there.

17 JUDGE KWON: You have the same copy.

18 THE WITNESS: No, it's quite a different one, so it's easier for

19 me to find on my copy. I don't know -- okay.

20 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. This is the report of the EU forensic expert team on the Racak

22 incident, dated the 17th of March.

23 JUDGE KWON: Put page 3 on the ELMO. Upper part.

24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. At the end of -- Mr. Adam, for you to be able to follow, at the

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 end of this paragraph which goes on from page 2 to page 3, so at the top

2 of page 3, it says: "There were no indications of the people being other

3 than unarmed civilians."

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. In order to save time, would you please take a look and tell us

6 your opinion about it. So please take a look at the following exhibit,

7 which is the press release number 22/99, "OSCE chairman in office comments

8 on the report by head of the EU forensic expert team ..." which in a way

9 is a set that makes one whole. The then chairman of the OSCE, Knut

10 Vollebaek, in the following paragraph says: "Dr. Ranta has concluded [In

11 English] that at least 40 unarmed civilians were killed at approximately

12 the same time in Racak ..." et cetera.

13 A. That is what I tried to explain some minutes ago, that Mrs. Ranta

14 didn't carry out investigations about the -- any traces on the hands. The

15 Serbian and the Belorussian pathologists did that, but that was not

16 internationally recognised, so we have no proof of anything -- of any kind

17 that those people were -- had -- had used arms, but we had no proof that

18 they had not used arms. There's no proof at all, either in that direction

19 nor the other direction.

20 MR. NICE: Your Honours I -- I'm so sorry. I'll let the witness

21 finish.

22 THE WITNESS: And you should have expected from Mrs. Ranta saying

23 exactly that in the press conference. But she twisted that so that a lot

24 of reporters, which I can prove by several of documents, or could prove,

25 that she just twisted it so that someone might have got the impression

1 that that was investigated and there was a proof that they had not used

2 arms, which was not true.

3 MR. NICE: Your Honour --

4 THE WITNESS: And then -- sorry, Mr. Nice. One last sentence.

5 And then, in case there was a misunderstanding still among the journalists

6 and the media, the press release of Mr. Vollebaek then stated exactly what

7 was not true, saying that she had proved it.

8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Nice.

9 MR. NICE: I repeat that I'm anxious not to take objection to this

10 witness's evidence in light of the concerns that the accused raises about

11 Racak, but I -- my duty is to remind the Chamber that the whole question

12 of the extent of hearsay admissibility was explored in respect of Racak,

13 where, as the Chamber will recall, a distinction was drawn between the

14 narrating of accounts of others by OSCE and Human Rights Watch personnel

15 as opposed to, for example, an investigator. And that was litigated to

16 the Appeals Chamber, and at no stage was it suggested that witnesses

17 without special expertise could offer opinions on matters that are plainly

18 ultimately for the Chamber. And this exchange, as the Chamber will have

19 observed at 19:5 on the page before you, starts off with, "... would you

20 take a look and tell us your opinion about it."

21 Now, of course I can see that if the witness is in a position to

22 tell us things about what Mrs. Ranta did or didn't do or said or didn't

23 say, then that may be admissible, and I'm anxious not to object to

24 anything that may be of help, but this is a sheer -- not a sheer, it's an

25 opinion simply on other materials, and I'm not sure that it can help the

1 Chamber. And it's my duty to draw to your attention that we may be

2 transgressing our own limits of admissibility.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: Speaking for myself, as a journalist who did an

4 investigation, he can give whatever assessment he has but the probative

5 value is for the Chamber to determine later. We heard about the relevance

6 or credibility of powder test. We remember that. And it is for the

7 accused to present his case.

8 MR. NICE: Your Honour, I hear what Your Honour says, and if

9 that's the conclusion of the Trial Chamber, I shall take no further

10 objections, but I think it would be regarded as a substantial departure

11 for the practice of this Tribunal as a whole if opinion evidence of

12 journalists was given a category of admissibility separate from the

13 understood categories of admissibility of evidence of fact or evidence of

14 opinion from experts with which we are all familiar. But I will take no

15 further point.

16 JUDGE KWON: I don't think it is the opinion of the witness the

17 accused is trying to seek but rather a kind of assessment of a journalist

18 who had a -- who made an investigation to the matter.

19 Judge Bonomy has further things.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Nice, there really are two objections in there,

21 I think. One about hearsay, and I don't think hearsay is really the issue

22 at this stage. The other one about the opinion is another matter. I

23 don't think the witness is offering an opinion on the validity of forensic

24 examination carried out. What he's telling us is what was conveyed

25 through the media about these events and whether that can be said to be

1 accurate. Now, there may be a question mark over the second proposition

2 there, whether it's accurate or its validity, but it doesn't seem to me

3 he's straying beyond the realms of his own professional work at the

4 moment. However, I have to say also that I see little value in what's

5 being presented in this form.

6 MR. NICE: Well, Your Honour, I was particularly stimulated to

7 raise the issue with Your Honours when the witness said, "She twisted that

8 so a lot of ..." and so on, because it seemed to me we are moving then

9 into a realm that is absolutely yours. I will take no more time, but I'm

10 concerned that we shouldn't set a precedent that would be unfortunate.

11 JUDGE BONOMY: I think you would be wrong, though, not to object

12 to something that does appear to breach a practice that has been

13 established in relation to this particular incident. If a particular

14 question arises in that regard, that would assist me, but -- so I don't

15 want to discourage you where something specific arises to which you take

16 exception.

17 MR. NICE: I shall reply.

18 JUDGE KWON: We should go on but I'm concerned about the time,

19 given that this witness cannot stay longer than today.

20 How long would you expect this examination-in-chief to last?

21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I hope it will be very brief. I

22 expected to complete it within the first session, but thanks to constant

23 interventions by Mr. Nice, time simply is wasted.

24 JUDGE KWON: Please go on.

25 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

1 Q. Mr. Adam, since you also spoke about how this was presented to the

2 public, and as a journalist you are competent to speak about that, please

3 tell us, why did you use the word "twisted" when you said that the picture

4 presented to the public was twisted? What was your basis for stating

5 that?

6 A. Maybe it's very complicated to explain. I'll try my best.

7 According to the protocols, there were no mentioning in the

8 protocols of any powder investigation. The -- in the press conference,

9 Mrs. Ranta said that famous sentence of "no indications of not being,"

10 which was misunderstood by 99 per cent of the media of the world, I

11 suppose. I haven't counted, but I suppose. That she had found that they

12 were unarmed civilians. But there's no proof in her investigation about

13 that.

14 That's -- you can call it a twist. You can call it a

15 misunderstanding. She would surely call it a misunderstanding. She

16 called it a misunderstanding when we asked her about it.

17 But then it comes to a twist when Mr. Vollebaek, in the press

18 release which came out immediately as a response to that press conference,

19 says she concluded that at least 40 unarmed civilians were killed.

20 You know, journalists are at times lazy people, and they take the

21 most easy sentence and not the complicated sentence, and so it was

22 published.

23 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, try to put questions where you can get

24 the specific events which the witness had heard or had seen, those ones.

25 This kind of analysis is not helpful to us. Anybody can tell those

1 stories. Proceed.

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will proceed immediately,

3 Mr. Kwon, but please bear in mind that it was precisely that incident in

4 Racak that was grossly abused in -- for propaganda purposes in an improper

5 and dishonest way.

6 JUDGE KWON: No. You shouldn't comment, just proceed.

7 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Mr. Adam, in one of your responses a moment ago, you said that you

9 had consulted in the course of your investigations of this event German

10 pathologists. Who were those German pathologists whom you consulted?

11 A. It was a professor from Hamburg. His name is Professor Pueschel,

12 and we did an interview with him which you can see, where he stated that

13 there was no bearing in the accusations -- in some accusations, to be

14 exact; in the accusations about executions.

15 Q. And this comes under number 9, the Berliner Zeitung. Klaus

16 Pueschel is his name. Is that the article you're referring to?

17 A. Yes. Thank you.

18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I have that tendered as well,

19 Mr. Kwon, please.

20 JUDGE KWON: What is the question?

21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The question was which German -- or,

22 rather, Mr. Adam mentioned having consulted German pathologists, and I

23 asked him which German pathologists, and he referred to the interview

24 conducted with the German pathologist whose name is written down here, who

25 explained that it is not true. It says: "It is not true that many

1 persons have been shot dead at extremely close range." That's what it

2 says.

3 JUDGE KWON: Pausing there. Mr. Adam, did you conduct the

4 interview? Or did you write the article?

5 THE WITNESS: Since we did it as a team, you know, it's not very

6 easy to distinguish. I tried to remember --

7 JUDGE KWON: Who is Roland Heine?

8 THE WITNESS: Roland Heine is a colleague of mine who was part of

9 the team. It was an informal team, of course, that went.

10 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Nice, is this not the territory in which you've

11 got something to say?

12 MR. NICE: It certainly is, but --

13 JUDGE BONOMY: Or am I misunderstanding your point?

14 MR. NICE: Certainly this is all the territory with which I've

15 raised objections. I had in mind, of course, the observation of His

16 Honour Judge Kwon earlier about the general acceptability, subject to

17 weight, of investigations.

18 JUDGE BONOMY: We're about -- well, if this document is admitted,

19 then what it amounts to is the views expressed by someone in a

20 professional capacity who could be brought here as a witness. And even if

21 he was, there might be questions about the amount of information he had to

22 draw the conclusions in the first place. But as it stands, it appears to

23 me to be completely valueless to hear what a journalist has to say about

24 an interview conducted of a forensic pathologist.

25 [Trial Chamber confers]

1 JUDGE KWON: I agree with Judge Bonomy. Put another question,

2 Mr. Milosevic.

3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

4 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

5 Q. Mr. Adam, when you conducted your investigation and interviewed

6 the German pathologists, were they -- did you have the protocols put at

7 their disposal by the Finnish forensic team which otherwise come under

8 point 17, and they are Prosecution Exhibit 156. It is in our list number

9 17, and it says "Already exhibited as Prosecution Exhibit 156," in

10 brackets.

11 So did you work with those protocols, and did you present the

12 people with those protocols?

13 A. Yes, of course I did. We presented all the protocols we had

14 obtained to the experts, yes.

15 Q. So what the experts concluded and what they were not able to find

16 in the protocols they didn't find because it didn't exist in them. They

17 had everything else. Did I understand you correctly?

18 A. Yes, of course. Since I rely on the expertise, then I would say

19 yes.

20 Q. Very well. Thank you. Let's move on. Did you try to contact

21 Mrs. Ranta and to seek an explanation from her for the contradictions

22 between the official version and what was announced and the report by the

23 expert team?

24 A. Well, we tried that. I tried it. We tried it via some other

25 channels, Dutch journalists who had this, and so on. We did it, but all

1 in all, when it comes to the end of the day, it's -- Mrs. Ranta didn't

2 want to cooperate with us about that.

3 Q. Are you saying that she refused to make a statement about this?

4 A. Yes, she did. She refused.

5 JUDGE BONOMY: Is there anything wrong with that?

6 THE WITNESS: No, no. Simply -- sorry. I don't want to speak

7 about Mrs. Ranta. She made -- you could call it a game of hiding for

8 this. Or played a game of hiding.

9 JUDGE BONOMY: For all we know, that could be because of her

10 previous experience with journalists. We have no idea why she would do

11 that.

12 THE WITNESS: But then -- then we were informed that Mrs. Ranta

13 went to Racak. And since we had all those other doubts and problems and

14 questions, we decided that I should go to try to meet her at the place, at

15 the spot. That was then the idea. That was then the 21st of March.

16 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. Very well. Thank you. Mr. Adam, we have now established that you

18 decided to go to Racak, and you went to Racak, as you say, on the 21st of

19 March. And what happened next? Did you meet Mrs. Ranta there? Or tell

20 us generally what happened. From the moment of your arrival in Racak,

21 what happened next?

22 A. As I said, the purpose of going to Racak was of course not only to

23 speak to Mrs. Ranta. It was my hope to do it, but that didn't work in the

24 end because she refused again. But there was, of course, another reason

25 to go there, and that was to try and find out as much as I could, as an

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 investigating journalist, what had happened at Racak and to get a picture

2 of the whole scenery.

3 So when I was -- went to Racak, then when you come into the

4 village, you first see the graveyard on the left side of Racak, and so I

5 decided to go up there first, and there was a person gardening in that

6 graveyard. I now forgot his name, but his brother was one of the people

7 who died at Racak. Azemi it was. And I asked him to go and show me

8 around where the things happened at Racak, and he agree to that. And then

9 we went ahead and were then first stopped by what I would call a KLA

10 policeman who tried to stop me going around in the village, and he argued

11 that he could tell me everything about the incident so I don't need to

12 look for myself, but I insisted to do that and in the end he gave in.

13 And then just ten metres later on we came into a cordon which was

14 done by Finnish troops who had escorted Mrs. Ranta, and I approached them,

15 I identified myself to them and said that I would like to -- would be very

16 happy if I could speak to Mrs. Ranta, but they then talked to her by

17 walkie-talkie, and they -- since she denied to be -- to speak to me, I had

18 to take that into account and say okay. She was up in the ravine at that

19 time.

20 Q. All right. You weren't able to contact Mrs. Ranta, so did you go

21 where else, then, in other direction? Did you go to some other places in

22 Racak?

23 A. Since the ravine was sealed off, I had to go to other places in

24 Racak. And -- I knew that I had quite short time, so I had to concentrate

25 on two things, two aspects. The first was how did the woman die, because

1 that was crucial to the question was there a massacre or not, an execution

2 or not. And the other one was how did the boy die, because those was at

3 least -- it was, of course, a tragic event, and -- a very tragic event,

4 and to find out whether it was very -- very important to find out whether

5 the sentence of Mr. Clinton and other statements of politicians were

6 right, of the people forced to be -- to be sprayed on -- forced to kneel

7 in the mud to be sprayed upon. So I tried to find that out.

8 Since people from the village helped me and assisted me, it was --

9 Q. And what did you discover? You wanted to find that out, so what

10 did you find out?

11 A. I insisted that they didn't only tell me but showed me the places

12 and showed me how the people died. And they did that, themselves being

13 eyewitnesses of those days. That was very important for me, those

14 villagers who joined us.

15 JUDGE KWON: Can you tell the names?

16 THE WITNESS: Mr. Azemi was one of them. There was a coming and

17 going because we went all over the village, and there were different other

18 people which I have names of but I wouldn't reveal because maybe that's

19 not good.

20 JUDGE KWON: Do you remember the first name of Mr. Azemi?

21 THE WITNESS: I should have to have a look.

22 JUDGE KWON: Yes, if you could.

23 THE WITNESS: His brother was one of the victims. Sorry for --

24 that you're waiting. Oh, sorry. It was wrong -- the name was wrong.

25 Shabani, Nesret Shabani. It must have been, yes.

1 JUDGE KWON: Shabani. Yes. We have Shabani as well in the list

2 of victims.

3 THE WITNESS: Yes.

4 JUDGE KWON: You don't remember his first name?

5 THE WITNESS: Nesret. Nesret.

6 JUDGE KWON: Nesret.

7 THE WITNESS: As far as it was written down for him here.

8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, thank you. Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.

9 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

10 Q. A moment ago you were explaining that your interest focused at

11 that stage of your visit on establishing how the woman had died and how

12 the boy had died and that you wanted not only to hear about it but to show

13 you the place and describe the event.

14 Would you now, to save me interrupting you, tell us in your own

15 words what you established when it came to the death of the woman and the

16 death of the boy and possibly any other person whom you investigated.

17 A. From the point where the road goes up to -- you know, Racak is on

18 a hillside, situated on a hillside, and before Racak there's a broad

19 valley, and there's a road going around those hills at the bottom of the

20 hill, and that's -- should be the main road of what you could call the old

21 village of Racak. And when we started going around in the village, we

22 stopped at the crossing just at -- of this main road, between two houses.

23 I don't know exactly if the crossing was between the houses or the two

24 houses were afterwards, but at least it was on that road. And that was

25 the point where the people told me here the lady died. Okay, I said, and

1 how did she die? They then turned around and showed to the other side of

2 the valley, which was some hundred metres away, where another hillside

3 comes up, the other hillside from the valley, and they said they shot from

4 over there.

5 So that was, of course, tragic and surely not -- should not have

6 happened, but it was no execution at short range, and it was no kneeling

7 in the mud to be sprayed upon. So that was the first, let's say, case.

8 We then went ahead, that road to the back part of Racak, because I

9 insisted that they would show me the place, the spot where the boy died,

10 because that would be a very grave indication of execution if in case he

11 had been killed in that way.

12 First we went to the courtyard of the family, and I met with the

13 mother of the boy, and of course I expressed my condolences. That is not

14 for the Court here, but I have to say it because that's from my personal

15 feeling, it's necessary.

16 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. Is that what you heard from

17 Mr. Nesret Shabani?

18 THE WITNESS: The woman?

19 JUDGE KWON: Nesret Shabani. I don't remember if it's he or she.

20 Nesret Shabani came here as a witness.

21 THE WITNESS: It must be a he. That's -- well, it was such a way

22 that I first met the man upside -- in the graveyard, as I told you. Then

23 other people joined us, so it was a small group. And I was, of course,

24 obtaining information. For me it was not of quite great importance who

25 said what in that group.

1 JUDGE KWON: I'm referring to your statement that the --

2 Mr. Shabani -- the woman was shot from the hills 300 metres away.

3 THE WITNESS: Maybe --

4 JUDGE KWON: Is that what Mr. Shabani said to you?

5 THE WITNESS: I cannot tell you that Mr. Shabani said that. One

6 in that group of the eyewitnesses from those days.

7 JUDGE KWON: But Mr. Shabani was among them?

8 THE WITNESS: Must have been among them, yes.

9 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Nice.

10 MR. NICE: I think, to be receiving information from an

11 unidentified member of a group, will probably be found to contravene the

12 limitations imposed by -- both by the Trial Chamber and by the Appeals

13 Chamber for reliability.

14 JUDGE KWON: That goes to the weight of the evidence.

15 MR. NICE: Well, possibly admissibility, but one way or the other.

16 JUDGE KWON: Yes.

17 JUDGE BONOMY: If, however, someone who has given evidence here

18 was present, and that is the indication, then it can at least have a value

19 in relation to credibility and reliability of that witness if he doesn't,

20 for example, jump in to contradict the statement made. So I think this is

21 one that will require more detailed exploration in due course rather than

22 a blanket refusal to hear it at this stage.

23 MR. NICE: It may be, but of course for that to apply the point

24 should have been raised with the witness, and I'm not sure now whether --

25 I haven't checked it, but I'm not sure now whether it has been.

1 JUDGE KWON: We will allow the accused to proceed.

2 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. So you first established how the woman died, and from this group

4 of villagers who accompanied you, you received information that there was

5 shooting coming from the opposite hill, the hill on the other side of the

6 valley, and that she was hit in that shooting. Have I understood you

7 correctly, Mr. Adam? And have I also understood you to say that it was on

8 that basis that you established that it was quite a different story from

9 any execution having taken place or, rather, the woman having been killed

10 by execution.

11 A. Definitely.

12 Q. Now, please could you tell us what they told you, whether you were

13 on the spot in the place where the boy had died and what they told you

14 about that.

15 A. As I tried to explain, I went -- we went to the courtyard where I

16 met with the mother and I expressed my condolences to her, and then I

17 asked to show me again the exact spot where the boy died and how he died,

18 of course. So we went out of the courtyard again, and we went along the

19 road and up to a small road which went up the hill. And after ten or 20

20 metres, 30 metres - I cannot say - they stopped and said here the boy was

21 killed.

22 Now, this is -- was -- you could call it another ravine, but it

23 was not the ravine, the notorious ravine but simply another ravine, a road

24 which was covered by bushes and trees on the side, but since it was --

25 when I was there it was March, so there were no leaves on the branches,

1 and of course in January there were no leaves again.

2 I then asked who shot and how did they shoot him. And then again

3 they turned around and looked at the other hillside on the other part --

4 on the other part of the valley and said, okay, from there. So it was

5 again some hundred metres affair, and no execution at short range.

6 Then we afterwards went another ten metres high along that road

7 and stopped, and then the -- those people said here the father died,

8 Mr. Beqiri. Right. And again I insisted they show me how he died.

9 And now on that spot, you had a hole in the bushes. I don't know

10 if -- how you can explain that. There were -- as if they were cut away.

11 And I made a photo of that. And when I asked how the father died, one of

12 the persons who had joined me laid himself into that hole, this attitude

13 here, as if he had a rifle in his hands, laying on that -- into that hole,

14 and then he did it that way, and not that he did it that way. That's how

15 he was shot.

16 That's not -- not correct what they -- exactly what they said,

17 because Mr. Beqiri was shot here, but that's a detail. According to the

18 autopsies, again, which I checked, of course.

19 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Adam, do you remember who it was who talked to

20 you about that event?

21 THE WITNESS: In that case, I have no name. I made a photo of

22 that and --

23 JUDGE KWON: Photo of the person.

24 THE WITNESS: Photo of the person in that hole.

25 JUDGE KWON: Did he say that he was on the spot when the boy,

1 Beqiri, was killed?

2 THE WITNESS: He didn't say that. No, I cannot say that he did

3 say that.

4 JUDGE KWON: But how did he know, then, if he was not there?

5 THE WITNESS: You know, the problem is that we have dealt a lot

6 and I had dealt a lot with witnesses, villagers who said -- said this and

7 that, and as a journalist my own possibility to find out was to ask other

8 villagers, of course. As far as I know, there was nobody else in that

9 small ravine when they were shot, but I'm not sure, of course.

10 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.

11 THE WITNESS: But afterwards there was an uncle which died at

12 another ten metres later, but that's -- that's --

13 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. So you established how several of the people died, and you've

15 described to us now that Beqiri, the man you spoke about, that he showed

16 you and lay in the hole and explained that the man had a rifle in his

17 hand. So what would that mean? What does that mean, what he described to

18 you and showed you? How did you understand that?

19 A. The only way you can -- you could understand that was that it was

20 not a fleeing situation but a fighting situation. But other hand,

21 Mr. Beqiri was not listed as or named as a KLA fighter. He was named

22 under the civilians. And when those villagers told me that -- or that

23 villager told me that, I of course was shocked, because that was just

24 contrary to the official presentation of the things.

25 JUDGE KWON: How do you know Mr. Beqiri was a member of KLA? Did

1 anybody say to you --

2 THE WITNESS: No. That's what puzzled me. What they told me was

3 that he had a rifle in his hand, it was a fighting situation, but he was

4 not named as a KLA fighter in the official version of the things.

5 I must say that I have gone it through and gone it through for

6 times. When I was there, I met another journalist that was -- okay,

7 that's again hearsay, Mr. Nice, but maybe it's important enough to do it,

8 and you can judge about it afterwards.

9 There were -- there were among journalists always rumours about a

10 village militia at Racak that was not officially KLA and not -- had no

11 uniforms but was fighting in the days around Racak. Those rumours or

12 those informations or what you can call them were -- had been around all

13 -- all the days. And later on, Der Spiegel made a story about it where

14 they definitely said that there was a village militia at Racak. It was

15 not uniformed and not KLA.

16 JUDGE KWON: Very well. One more question and we'll break,

17 Mr. Milosevic, but I can say that the Chamber is not assisted by the

18 general overall hearsay, but try to get specific events he specifically

19 heard or saw. Yes.

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. Kwon, I understood it that

21 Mr. Adam had specifically seen and heard all the details connected to the

22 deaths of both the woman and the boy and Beqiri's father. And I think he

23 mentioned another relation of his. So it was on the basis of those

24 details that he had established that they were killed in the shooting that

25 took place several hundred metres away from them and that this man had a

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 rifle in his hand and that he died that way and he didn't die fleeing, he

2 died fighting. I think he went into great detail.

3 Now, you have Exhibit number 6, and they are photographs.

4 Mr. Adam wanted to have the photographs as confidential to protect the

5 identity of the person he took pictures of in view of the fact that his

6 statement is diametrically opposed to the official statement by which --

7 which said that these were civilians. So he doesn't want to threaten the

8 man's security and safety.

9 So please may we have the photographs placed on the ELMO - and it

10 is Exhibit 8 - but that it be on Sanction and not publicly displayed.

11 JUDGE KWON: If it is to be confidential, what merit do you have

12 to putting them on the ELMO or Sanction? You can put these pictures to

13 the witness.

14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I hope the witness has his own

15 pictures of this, but I wanted to show the people sitting here in court.

16 And if it's not transmitted, then it won't disclose the identity of the

17 person in question.

18 JUDGE KWON: Your intention is to maintain the confidentiality of

19 these pictures?

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It is my intention to respect what

21 the wishes of the witness are, and he wishes to protect the identity of

22 the man he photographed, and I think we have to respect that. It's not a

23 secret for any of us here in the courtroom, but it should remain a secret

24 and confidential to the public, because that is how he is protecting the

25 safety and security of this man.

1 JUDGE KWON: Put the pictures to the witness, not on the ELMO.

2 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. You have the pictures, I think, the photo spread.

4 A. [Previous translation continues] ...

5 JUDGE KWON: So that those are the pictures of those you

6 interviewed or had words with?

7 THE WITNESS: Yes.

8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. And it's time. We'll break for 20

9 minutes.

10 Mr. Adam, you are not supposed to have words with the Defence team

11 during the break.

12 --- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.

13 --- On resuming at 10.59 a.m.

14 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, I would expect you to conclude your

15 examination-in-chief in half an hour.

16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone for the accused,

17 please.

18 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Mr. Adam, let us deal very briefly with this issue of

20 identification of the persons you've mentioned.

21 In the first group, was Nesret Shabani among the people in the

22 first group?

23 A. It must have been him, yes.

24 Q. Was the mother of the boy with whom you talked the person that was

25 identified? Third, the person that we see in the picture here, is that

1 the person explaining how Beqiri was killed?

2 A. I suppose you mean the picture of the hole in the ravine, down to

3 the left. Down to the left. Yes, that was the person, according to my --

4 Q. Yes, in the lower left corner. Therefore, in addition to these

5 three persons that we can identify, was everybody else in that group

6 confirming what you heard from these persons?

7 MR. NICE: Your Honour, there must be a limit to leading

8 questions. The witness has said nothing about general confirmation. He

9 simply said that information came from a group. The last question is

10 really wholly unacceptable and shouldn't have been asked in that way.

11 JUDGE KWON: I agree. Reformulate the question again.

12 THE WITNESS: Can I put something? I have to correct myself,

13 because I made a picture of Mr. Azemi, so it must have been Azemi I met

14 first. You know, he is sitting just beside the grave of his brother.

15 Afterwards I met Mr. Shabani. I met a lot of those people who were

16 eyewitnesses, but the first one was Mr. Azemi. I have to correct that,

17 from the picture.

18 Up to the right corner you see -- on the pictures, you see the

19 mother of the killed boy. And down, you have one of the Sadik Osmani

20 family, down to the right.

21 JUDGE KWON: Bottom left is the same man, still Mr. Azemi?

22 THE WITNESS: No. It's a different one which I cannot identify by

23 name. He joined us and was part of the group of eyewitnesses. I asked

24 him to -- to tell me in case they were eyewitnesses.

25 JUDGE KWON: Sorry, but is it okay for you to name them in public

1 session?

2 THE WITNESS: Yes, I did. I did. But I cannot -- simply I cannot

3 identify this person by name. Sorry for that.

4 JUDGE KWON: You wanted the confidentiality of these pictures.

5 THE WITNESS: I'm not able to do it. I cannot identify. I wrote

6 a lot of names down, you know --

7 JUDGE KWON: I'm referring to Mr. Azemi, the mother of this boy

8 and -- and another one.

9 THE WITNESS: Yes. Sorry for that, but you know, I made my

10 photos, I made my notes, and I didn't corroborate them. It was some time

11 ago now.

12 JUDGE KWON: Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.

13 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Did I understand you well, Mr. Adam? You simply do not wish to

15 show the picture of the man showing how Mr. Beqiri was killed? Is that

16 the only thing you want to keep confidential?

17 A. That is the only thing I would like to be confidential. That's

18 right.

19 Q. Very well. How many persons there were in that group that toured

20 with you several of the spots?

21 A. The group consisted of two, three, four, five people. At times --

22 it was a long road going, and of course the people were curious and joined

23 us, and then others went back again and -- you know, I was not doing that

24 as an investigator for the Court, I was doing it as a journalist, so it

25 was quite natural. For me it was important to get the news, get the

1 facts, and get, of course, the names of the people but not to corroborate

2 them in the straight manner or the tight manner of a court.

3 Q. The persons providing information to you, there were always

4 several of them present; is that right? And therefore, the others present

5 there, did they also confirm or did they also agree with the information

6 you were receiving?

7 A. Yes. As I understood, what was told me was general opinion of the

8 people. There was nobody who opposed it, there was nobody who said

9 anything else. Exactly when I insisted on showing me how it happened,

10 people were there, and one told me and showed me, and the others were

11 around and kept silent. They didn't oppose anything.

12 Q. Would you please be so kind, Mr. Adam, in relation to the

13 photograph of the man showing how Beqiri was killed, to describe the

14 terrain, the configuration of the terrain where he is located and where --

15 from which direction the fire that killed him came.

16 A. As I told, Racak is on the hillside and then there's a valley and

17 then there comes the other hill, up here some hundred metres away where

18 the OSCE monitors were and the Yugoslav or Serbian forces were at that

19 time. And as -- the Beqiri incident happened in the back part of Racak.

20 Not at the end but in the back part of Racak, and it was a road going up

21 the hillside, but it was quite clear since we stood there and turned

22 around that we could look at the other hillside from -- on the other side

23 of the -- of the valley, and of course that could be looked into from the

24 other side of the valley. That was the important thing for me. It was

25 very plausible what they told me.

1 Q. Mr. Adam, you mentioned the village militia. Do you know anything

2 about the sources of the information concerning the village militia?

3 A. No. As far as magazine Der Spiegel is concerned, this is an

4 article where you could have a feeling that the source is somewhere in the

5 Prosecution of this trial which leaked something to Der Spiegel because

6 they are mentioning French tapes which intelligence forces from France

7 taped of the conversation of -- of the conversation between -- between

8 that village militia and the KLA, which as far as I know, haven't been

9 presented here in the courtroom, but of course I don't know. So I cannot

10 say anything about the sources, but it looks as if it may be useful to ask

11 the Prosecution about it. Or to ask Der Spiegel people.

12 MR. NICE: Your Honour, this is something in which I think it is

13 appropriate that I should inform you of recent correspondence between

14 Mr. Kay and ourselves. In anticipation, I think, of what this witness

15 might be saying in evidence, Mr. Kay sent a letter to me on the 27th of

16 October, seeking query -- seeking answers to queries about sources of

17 intelligence of the kind that the witness has referred to, and the Office

18 of the Prosecutor searched all its records, as it had already done for

19 disclosure under Rule 68, and refreshed all its inquiries and wrote back

20 to Mr. Kay but also to the legal associates of the accused by a letter

21 dated the 8th of December of 2004, explaining the nature of the inquiry

22 that had been done and making clear that there was no information of this

23 kind available to the Prosecution.

24 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.

25 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

1 Q. Mr. Adam, let us go back to your own experience. When you

2 completed touring these spots, what did you do next?

3 A. Well, I decided then to go to the small village of Malopoljce,

4 which was five or four kilometres away from Racak.

5 JUDGE KWON: Could you tell us the village name again.

6 THE WITNESS: Malopoljce.

7 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Mr. Adam, why did you decide to go to Malopoljce?

9 A. Sorry, Malopoljce. The reason is in the mentioned OSCE report,

10 you have a figure of five civilians killed at Racak, taken away by their

11 families to Malopoljce. Five of the original 45 people which were

12 mentioned there. And I wanted to know how they were then buried at

13 Malopoljce and what had happened to them.

14 JUDGE KWON: Yes. I just noted it appears on page 3 of tab 2.

15 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Very well. Mr. Adam, what did you establish upon arriving in

17 Malopoljce?

18 A. Well, when you come into Malopoljce, you have -- just from the

19 very beginning see a graveyard, another graveyard with the Albanian flag

20 on top, the red flag with an eagle, and this graveyard was guarded by a

21 KLA soldier. And I approached that graveyard. I was together with a taxi

22 driver who drove me around that day, who was Albanian and who spoke a bit

23 English, so we could understand each other. And I approached that

24 graveyard, and we were first stopped and then were allowed into the

25 graveyard and the KLA soldier then told my driver that those were KLA

1 soldiers who had died at Racak.

2 I went along those graves and noted names of the people who had --

3 were buried there and was, of course, very puzzled because in that OSCE

4 statement you speak about civilians -- they speak about civilians, but

5 those were, according to the KLA soldier on the spot, they were KLA

6 soldiers. So that cannot be true that they were civilians.

7 Q. Please tell me, Mr. Adam, whether you remember any names of

8 persons which you investigated. According to the information I have here,

9 this involves the members of the Mujota family, if I'm pronouncing it

10 right.

11 A. I can -- if I -- I'm allowed to look at my notes?

12 JUDGE KWON: Is that --

13 THE WITNESS: The names.

14 JUDGE KWON: You made it spontaneously?

15 THE WITNESS: No. I put them into my computer afterwards, of

16 course. But it's only the names.

17 JUDGE KWON: Yes, it's okay.

18 THE WITNESS: The names of the people who are buried at

19 Malopoljce, but according to their graves died at Racak were Shaqir

20 Berisha, Rashita Simoni [phoen], another Skender Simoni [phoen], Nasim

21 Kokolari [phoen], Ismail Luma, Shefqet -- I'm not able to speak Albanian

22 so maybe it's not the wrong pronunciation, but Sadik Mujota, Hanumshahe

23 Mujota, Mehmet Mustafa, and Kadri Syla. So those people were buried at

24 Malopoljce but died on the 15th at Racak.

25 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

1 Q. The names of these persons, are they listed in the report dealing

2 with the people killed in Racak?

3 A. As far as know -- I know, they are not. They are deleted like

4 everything else what is concerning the KLA and fighting of the KLA. There

5 is no mentioning of that in the OSCE report.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. --

7 THE WITNESS: To --

8 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Adam, is that seven names you gave us?

9 THE WITNESS: Those were the names I noted.

10 JUDGE BONOMY: And are there seven?

11 THE WITNESS: Ten.

12 JUDGE BONOMY: You noted ten. Thank you.

13 THE WITNESS: There are the names I noted. Of course, there were

14 more graves but I was short of time, so when I hit the names of Syla and

15 Mujota, which I knew were from Racak, then I stopped investigating because

16 for me it was not a matter of completeness but a matter of principle.

17 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. What did you conclude based on that, Mr. Adam? What was your

19 conclusion upon establishing that those were the graves of the KLA

20 soldiers, that they were not listed as the victims of Racak incident but,

21 however, that they had been in Racak? What did you conclude based on

22 that?

23 A. I would like to refer to that --

24 JUDGE KWON: What's the point of the question? We can proceed.

25 We've heard everything.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, maybe I can -- maybe I can add

2 something?

3 JUDGE KWON: Yes.

4 THE WITNESS: When I refer to the OSCE report from the 17th of

5 January and see there that they note that five people, civilians, were

6 taken by their families to Malopoljce, and then I find out that those were

7 in fact, KLA fighters, then there you have two things which is not --

8 surely not disputed any more. They were fighters, but in those days it

9 was a dispute or it was denied by the OSCE. Secondly, if you put it that

10 way, family members, maybe they were taken away by family members, but

11 that was not their characteristic. They were there not as family members

12 at Racak but as KLA fighters. Then you hide something.

13 Now, that's my point against that report of the OSCE, that they

14 hided the identity of KLA fighters in their report to maintain the picture

15 of being only civilians.

16 JUDGE KWON: Very well. We've heard that.

17 Mr. Milosevic, proceed with your questions.

18 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. On the basis of what did you establish upon arriving in Malopoljce

20 that it was the KLA graveyard and not an ordinary cemetery?

21 A. Well, the graveyard -- well, it was told to me by that KLA soldier

22 that guarded that graveyard. So all -- it was told to my driver who was

23 my interpreter at the same time, to -- again to be exact. Well, it was

24 the shape of -- of course there was this Albanian flag on top, which was

25 not typical. At Racak you have -- for instance, two cemeteries. You have

1 the traditional one around the mosque, and you have another one which

2 deals with the people who died at Racak on the 15th. And that's again the

3 same type of -- of graveyards and of cemetery as at Malopoljce, with a

4 flag on top and so on.

5 So I was told at Malopoljce that this is a KLA or UCK graveyard --

6 cemetery.

7 Q. Now, Mr. Adam, let us make some very brief conclusions. You

8 arrived in Racak doubting certain allegations in the official presentation

9 of the event as it was presented in the West; is that right?

10 A. Yes, that's right.

11 Q. Now, please tell me, as I have followed your evidence quite

12 attentively, to what extent were you able either to confirm your doubts or

13 to dispel them through your investigation in the field? I will ask you

14 about five points in relation to the execution which was the leitmotif.

15 What was your starting point and what did you establish through your

16 investigation?

17 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, that question simply calls for the witness to

18 repeat his evidence. It's a complete and utter waste of time.

19 THE WITNESS: It's short. There's no problem.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: We've heard it. We don't need to hear it twice.

21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

22 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Mr. Adam, I will now enumerate all five questions that I wanted to

24 summarise.

25 So these doubts that were dispelled or confirmed pertained to the

1 execution, to the claim that women and children were killed, to the claim

2 that this involved unarmed villagers. It pertained to the presence and

3 activities of the KLA and to what you had established in relation to the

4 Mujota family.

5 So your suspicions were aimed at the allegations in the official

6 publications, announcements. To what extent were you able to dispel or

7 confirm the doubts that you had about the execution of unarmed civilians,

8 women, children, the presence of the KLA, and so on?

9 JUDGE KWON: It's just a repetition, as Judge Bonomy pointed out.

10 Go on to another question.

11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In that case, I would simply like to

12 turn now to several exhibits remaining. I've already mentioned Berliner

13 Zeitung under tab 9. "It is not true that many persons were shot dead at

14 extremely close range."

15 And then we also have Berliner Zeitung on the 13th of March, "OSCE

16 Representatives Repudiate Walker."

17 Then tab 11. This is the report of the Reuters News Service.

18 Then tab 12 is an article from Le Figaro, "Obscure Areas of a

19 Massacre."

20 Tab 13 is another article from Berliner Zeitung, "Europeans Urge

21 Head of Kosovo Mission to Resign."

22 Tab 14 is Berliner Zeitung again, "The Disappeared Dead of Racak."

23 I would like to briefly discuss this, this topic.

24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. What do you know about the disappeared dead of Racak?

1 MR. NICE: Your Honour, before -- before the witness answers and

2 without, I hope, inconveniencing him, I'm not sure if the accused is

3 seeking by his last observations to have admitted all those newspaper

4 articles; and if so, on what basis.

5 JUDGE BONOMY: We'll deal with that, I think.

6 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we will.

7 JUDGE BONOMY: But not at the moment.

8 JUDGE KWON: I think the accused is going to deal with tab 14.

9 Go on, Mr. Milosevic.

10 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. Under tab 14, there is an article dealing with "The Disappeared

12 Dead of Racak." What do you know about that, Mr. Adam?

13 A. That article deals with exactly what I had told you; that some of

14 the KLA fighters from Racak were brought away to another village and

15 buried there to hide that it was not -- that it was a different thing of

16 execution and that there was a fight in Racak.

17 JUDGE KWON: Which was written by you.

18 THE WITNESS: It was written by me, yes.

19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. Now, Mr. Kwon, I would

20 like to tender these exhibits into evidence, the ones attached to the

21 testimony of Mr. Adam. And I heard the intervention made by Mr. Nice

22 awhile ago that newspaper articles should not be introduced into evidence.

23 I think he has introduced numerous newspaper articles along with his

24 witnesses and their testimonies, so I think it is quite reasonable, in

25 view of the fact that we're talking about researchers, journalists from

1 the West, in this case from Germany, who have no reason whatsoever to be

2 biased and support the Serb side in any way, that they should be

3 introduced.

4 And having said that, I should like to ask just one more question

5 of Mr. Adam, and it is this:

6 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

7 Q. Mr. Adam --

8 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, before asking that question, we ruled

9 already that we will not admit tab 9 for the reasons stated by myself and

10 Judge Bonomy, and -- but 10, 12 -- I'm speaking for myself. I'm minded to

11 admit tab 14, but the other articles, I don't see any point to admit them

12 in such a wholesale manner. We'll deal with it later and after having

13 heard your last question.

14 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Mr. Adam, since you're a professional journalist yourself, I

16 assume that you are quite competent to answer the question related to the

17 topic you dealt with, the investigation you undertook. Was this a case of

18 propaganda which was utilised against Serbia and the Serb authorities with

19 respect to what you uncovered in Racak?

20 MR. NICE: Your Honour, I really don't think that the record of

21 this trial should be burdened with an answer to that sort of question. It

22 is the broadest possible conclusion. If relevant, it's a matter for the

23 Chamber on evidence, and it is not something for this witness.

24 JUDGE KWON: Yes. The Chamber agrees with the observation.

25 That concludes your examination-in-chief?

1 [Trial Chamber confers]

2 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber is minded to admit from tab 1 to tab 6,

3 and tab 11, and tab 14 for the reasons that because they were referred to

4 during the examination-in-chief.

5 If there's any other observation from the Prosecution? Mr. Nice

6 -- Mr. Saxon. I'm sorry.

7 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, thank you.

8 Cross-examined by Mr. Saxon:

9 Q. Mr. Adam, you made the comment early on in your direct testimony

10 that Racak was the decisive event in the Kosovo crisis, and that was one

11 of the reasons why you eventually decided to go to Racak. That's correct?

12 A. Yes, in connection with my doubts, yes.

13 Q. And when you went to Racak, you spoke to several witnesses there

14 about the events of the 15th of January, 1999 because, as you put it, that

15 was very important to you. That's right?

16 A. That's part of my investigation. That's correct.

17 Q. And would you agree with me that for an event as decisive, to use

18 your words, as Racak, it would be important to do -- for the authorities

19 to do a complete and comprehensive investigation in order --

20 A. What authorities do you mean?

21 Q. Well, the authorities of the Republic of Serbia at the time.

22 THE INTERPRETER: Could the usher kindly adjust the witness's

23 microphone. Thank you.

24 THE WITNESS: Yes, in principle, yes, of course.

25 MR. SAXON:

1 Q. And part of such a comprehensive investigation could include, for

2 example, speaking to survivors of the event, as you spoke to them, a year

3 later.

4 A. Yes, of course.

5 Q. Part of such an investigation might include speaking to the

6 members of the police or other units, armed units, who may or may not have

7 been present at Racak on that day. Would you agree with that?

8 A. Yes, of course.

9 Q. In fact, it might even include speaking with members of the KLA if

10 that were possible; would you agree?

11 A. My approach is a journalistic one, of course, and I speak to

12 everybody.

13 Q. Sure. So an investigation that made no attempts to speak to

14 survivors or perhaps police who were involved would not be very complete,

15 would it?

16 A. Surely not.

17 Q. In fact, it would be somewhat deficient, wouldn't it?

18 A. Yes, you can say that.

19 Q. Just to clarify one point: On the 15th of January, 1999, the day

20 of the events that occurred at Racak, do you recall where you were?

21 A. Yes, exactly. I was at home because it was Friday -- well, I was

22 at work, and on Saturday, when the first news came in, I know it very well

23 because I said to my wife, then wife, that in case that is true, there

24 will be a war. So I knew from the very beginning that that was a crucial

25 point.

1 Q. And can I assume that your home is in the Berlin area?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. So on that day, you were many thousands of kilometres away from

4 Racak?

5 A. Yes, of course.

6 Q. And on that day you had no direct contact, for example, by

7 telephone or by radio with persons in Racak, did you?

8 A. No, of course not.

9 Q. So everything that you've told the Trial Chamber today is based on

10 things that either you read or that you were told by other persons; right?

11 A. Yes. That's the way we journalists are doing it, and we are

12 finding a lot out.

13 Q. I agree. You mentioned Dr. Ranta in your direct examination, and

14 you mentioned at one point that you -- you and your journalist colleagues

15 had received all of the protocols done by Dr. Ranta and her team, and I

16 just want to clarify something. By the word "protocols," you're referring

17 to the autopsy reports that were done on the bodies from Racak; is that

18 right?

19 A. Yes. Well, they are called protocols, so we obtained the

20 protocols. I don't -- to be quite exact, we missed two or three pieces,

21 and there were reports which were part of the protocols, but that's very

22 detailed now, so I wouldn't go into that in case you don't want.

23 Q. Thank you. And after reviewing those protocols, you and your

24 colleagues came to the conclusion that President Clinton's earlier

25 allegations about executions, et cetera, clearly were not true. That's

1 what you've testified today; is that right?

2 A. Well, if you shorten it very much, then you could say that, but

3 first of all I have to state that we, of course, when we had those

4 protocols, we went to the experts.

5 Q. Okay. All right.

6 A. That's very important, because -- well, now I would almost say

7 that I'm half an expert on that issue, but of course they are still

8 experts, real experts.

9 Q. All right.

10 A. But of course my conclusion in the end, or our conclusion in the

11 end was that what Mr. Clinton said, which I quoted, "forced to kneel in

12 the dirt to be sprayed upon by weapons," had no bearing.

13 Q. Okay. I'd like to show you an exhibit, if I may.

14 MR. SAXON: I would like to show the witness Prosecution's Exhibit

15 156, tab 11.

16 JUDGE BONOMY: Just before another question is put, in case I've

17 misunderstood this, my understanding was that you thought that the

18 evidence did not justify the statement by President Clinton, and that's

19 because you considered that insufficient attention had been paid to a

20 particular line of investigation that might have clarified the position.

21 But equally, I didn't understand you to be saying that what he said was

22 wrong. What you were saying was it hadn't been proved to be right.

23 THE WITNESS: Well -- well, of course I cannot -- I cannot tell

24 you what happened at Racak. What I can tell is what didn't happen or

25 probably didn't happen. I can put of pieces of evidence together like

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 police people do it, I as a journalist do it, and I can say that they are

2 not consistent. That's what I can say.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

4 MR. SAXON: We have this exhibit on Sanction, I'm told now by

5 Ms. Dicklich.

6 Q. Mr. Adam, I'm going to show you part of an exhibit that was

7 produced in this courtroom by Dr. Ranta. It's entitled Executive Summary

8 on the Work of the European Union Forensic Expert Team in Kosovo, the

9 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, in 1998 to 2000. And this report was

10 submitted to the European Union on the 22nd of June of 2000.

11 Obviously when you and your colleagues reviewed the protocols

12 produced by the forensic experts, you had not read the contents of this

13 summary, had you?

14 A. Of the field investigation?

15 Q. Correct.

16 A. No.

17 Q. And I'd like to --

18 A. That was kept secret.

19 Q. Exactly. And I'd like to direct you to page 9 -- excuse me, page

20 19 of this exhibit, if we can get it.

21 MR. SAXON: I think we need to look at the next page.

22 JUDGE KWON: Yes. This is page 18.

23 MR. SAXON: We need to look at one more page. Well, we don't have

24 a very legible -- can this be improved in any way? I'd like the witness

25 to be able to read it with me.

1 THE WITNESS: March 2000?

2 JUDGE KWON: He's able to see the Sanction, but I wonder whether

3 the witness is able to see the document. I have the original.

4 MR. SAXON: I have the original as well, and I'm willing to let

5 the witness read along with me if someone could lend me their copy so I

6 could follow along as well.

7 THE WITNESS: I see a page on the screen. I can read it.

8 MR. SAXON:

9 Q. You can read it? Very good.

10 A. Yes, starting March 2000.

11 JUDGE KWON: Yes.

12 MR. SAXON:

13 Q. Mr. Adam, I'd like to direct your attention to the last paragraph

14 on this page. It begins: "The forensic materials and evidence ..." and

15 it goes on to say "... during scene investigations were recovered and

16 documented by the members of the team with the effective logistic

17 assistance of the Finnish KFOR Battalion in Lipjan, Kosovo. In November

18 1999, metal detectors, which were adjusted to reach a depth of 30

19 centimetres, were employed and the total area of 170 metres by 30 to 60

20 metres was searched for metal objects." And they're referring to the

21 ravine at Racak in this paragraph.

22 "Several bullets and bullet fragments were found at a depth of 0

23 to 15 centimetres. The location of the victims, as verified by the OSCE

24 on 16 January 1999, and the sites of recovery of bullets and bullet

25 fragments coincide. Bullets were not found elsewhere in the gully or its

1 vicinity. Moreover, cartridge cases were recovered on the surface of the

2 ground, occasionally under leaves and silt. The majority of cartridge

3 cases recovered by the team were found under the bushes lining the gully.

4 In some cases, other material of human origin was found in association

5 with bullets."

6 Obviously you did not have this information to use when you and

7 your colleagues were reviewing simply the protocols regarding the

8 autopsies that were done. If you had had, for example, this information

9 that the location of the victims in the gully and the sites of recovery of

10 bullets in the ground coincide, might that have changed your mind or

11 altered your view as to whether an execution did take place at Racak?

12 A. Well, first of all, you should expect from such an investigation

13 that this investigation is complete; right? As I mentioned, I came to

14 Racak and Mrs. Ranta was up doing finishing of her investigation, and they

15 had done the other metal detector investigation in November, and when she

16 left, then I was allowed to go in or I went in to the ravine, and what I

17 found there were the paint spots made by the investigation teams where

18 they had found something. But what I also found just half an hour after

19 Mrs. Ranta, were cartridges, spent cartridges. I could have taken half a

20 dozen of them with me. I took one with me. I have it here in my fingers.

21 Which let me doubt, without having known the outcome of the investigation,

22 that this investigation -- at least it puzzled me, to put it polite, that

23 an investigation was done and then just afterwards simple persons like me

24 can come and recover other cartridges.

25 That's what I can say to that investigation. I can hand it over

1 to the Court if you need, but it's not -- not a very pleasant memory.

2 Q. Mr. Adam, can you answer my question, please. The question was

3 very simple.

4 A. Yes, I understood you.

5 Q. Well, let me repeat it again --

6 A. Okay.

7 Q. -- because I have not received an answer. The question is just

8 this: If you had had the information available to you that I just read to

9 you when you were also reviewing the autopsy protocols --

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. -- might that have affected your views about whether an execution

12 took place at Racak or not?

13 A. Okay. Everything that I read affects me, and I try to find out

14 what that means. I answered your question, because that experience with

15 that cartridges, of course, influenced my opinion about investigations of

16 Mrs. Ranta. Nevertheless, of course Mrs. Ranta's investigation were

17 surely interesting.

18 What I'm missing, before I come to a conclusion, and maybe that

19 should be done here in court, is a match of those bullet fragments and

20 bullet holes in the ravine with the wounds of the people who died in the

21 ravine. I haven't -- as far as I know, there has been no match of that --

22 Q. As far as --

23 A. -- now.

24 Q. As far as you know; is that correct?

25 A. As far as I know.

1 Q. As far as you know.

2 A. Not in public, as far as I know. That's part of the answer. When

3 you try to find out those incredible bullet holes at times, well, we -- we

4 all know that film JFK where there is a magic bullet going this way, that

5 way around, turning around and so on. This is nothing against the riddles

6 when you try to match the bullet holes at Racak in the ravine. There you

7 have people being shot 15 times and just aside of that, behind those

8 people, people who are shot only three times or one time. There are holes

9 you cannot corroborate with anything else. And of course the whole thing

10 is -- the main thing is that the -- even if you find bullets there --

11 well, I'm not telling you that there was -- that people were not shot

12 there, some of them at least. Some of them at least. But how they were

13 shot, that's the important thing.

14 Q. Mr. Adam --

15 A. A fight -- in a fighting situation or not in a fighting situation.

16 I can tell you one thing which I discussed with a --

17 Q. Mr. Adam --

18 A. -- specialist on that.

19 JUDGE KWON: That's enough, Mr. Adam.

20 MR. SAXON:

21 Q. Mr. Adam, I need to -- in order to move along, I need to sort of

22 guide you with my examination. You don't have any formal training in

23 forensic science, do you?

24 A. Well, in the Racak case.

25 Q. Is that formal training?

1 A. No, it isn't formal, but I have dealt so much with that so that at

2 least I know a little. You know, that's part of the job of being a

3 journalist; you have to start from zero and then within a week or time you

4 have to be able to speak to a professor of a science or what else, and you

5 have to put the right questions, and that's ability I have learned.

6 Q. Right. And in this case, for example, with the Racak case, you

7 started at zero; is that right?

8 A. Well, at the very beginning, yes, of course, as we all do it.

9 Q. Would it surprise you to learn that, for example, in the case of

10 one body there was a bullet found in the ground next to a molar that came

11 from the jaw of the victim whose body had been recovered from that spot?

12 A. No. I've heard about that or I've seen that, yeah.

13 Q. And that to you would at least be a fairly effective, or a sign of

14 a reasonably effective forensic investigation, wouldn't it?

15 A. Yes, of course. That's part of it.

16 Q. You also gave some testimony regarding the information that you

17 heard, that you received when you went to Racak in March of 2000,

18 particularly regarding the death of a woman and a child, and I think the

19 woman you're referring to is a woman who was known as Hanemshahe Mehmeti?

20 A. Muso.

21 Q. And I believe the child's name was Halim Beqiri.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Based on what the group of people who you met with in Racak told

24 you about how this woman and how this child died, you learned that

25 apparently they were fired at from a distance of approximately a hundred

1 metres; right?

2 A. That was what they showed me, what they told me.

3 Q. And therefore, you took the view that there had been, at least

4 with respect to these two victims, there had been no "execution at short

5 range"; is that right?

6 A. Well, exactly. That's what I tried to find out and I found out,

7 that in those two cases there was not an execution at short range, right.

8 Q. Can I just ask you --

9 A. Or three times, because there was an uncle up the hill.

10 Q. Mr. Adam, can I just ask you this: Is it possible that those --

11 that woman and that child died as the result of a long-range execution?

12 A. Again, I have to tell you that my approach as a journalist was --

13 I'm not in the situation that I can do a full-scale investigation. So I

14 have to concentrate on several things, and I have to concentrate on what

15 is being said, and then I have to compare that with what has been said in

16 the official version, to put it, and then what can I find out, and to

17 match those things in some small cases and then to try and find out is it

18 -- okay, that's -- and since Mr. Clinton spoke of children who were first

19 forced to kneel, then that was a clear match between that sentence and the

20 facts.

21 Q. Or perhaps to -- to follow your point, a clear mismatch, I think.

22 A. A mismatch.

23 Q. Fine. I completely understand your point, but I'm asking you

24 something different. It's just very simple. Is it possible that

25 Hanemshahe Mehmeti, the young woman, and Halim Beqiri, a 13-year-old boy,

1 were the victims of a long-range execution; for example, a sniper firing

2 from a hundred metres away? Is it possible? Just yes or no.

3 A. Of course, it's possible. The problem is you then have to take in

4 the surroundings, the situation. Is there a fight? Is there -- in that

5 time, is there -- are there people fighting -- shooting there and back and

6 so on, or is it an invasion by forces into a village which is totally

7 peaceful? And I cannot say -- I cannot say what that shot was, but I can

8 say that if you -- of course if you leave out the fighting situation, then

9 it must have been some form of execution. But that's what not is true,

10 because there was a fighting situation over the day, as Mr. Shukri Buja

11 told us.

12 Q. Can I just ask you another question just to follow up on that

13 point. In situations of armed conflict where there -- there is fighting

14 going on, in your experience are sometimes civilians deliberately

15 targeted, in your experience as a journalist?

16 A. In that general form I have to say yes, of course.

17 Q. And would you agree that if civilians are deliberately targeted by

18 one belligerent force or another, that would be a crime, wouldn't you

19 agree?

20 A. Of course that would be.

21 Q. I would like -- I would --

22 JUDGE KWON: Sorry to interrupt you. You referred to Mr. Shukri

23 Buja.

24 THE WITNESS: Yes.

25 JUDGE KWON: Does that mean you met him in person or you referred

1 to his testimony?

2 THE WITNESS: I referred to his testimony.

3 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

4 THE WITNESS: I think that's allowed. Of course I can refer to

5 Reuters or what else.

6 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Mr. Saxon.

7 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour.

8 Q. Are you aware that in at least one published report from the 17th

9 of January Ms. Hanemshahe Mehmeti was reportedly coming to the aid of her

10 stricken brother when she was killed?

11 A. Yes, that's one version, yes.

12 Q. That's one version. All right. I would like to show you a bit of

13 videotape, Mr. Adam, and this will be an extract, I believe from a BBC

14 production called The Fall of Milosevic. And I believe we have a

15 transcript of the extract that we're going to show you so that people can

16 follow along.

17 [Videotape played]

18 "Narrator: In early January 1999, the KLA shot dead three Serb

19 policemen. The Serb response in the village of Racak would change

20 everything.

21 "[No interpretation]

22 "Narrator: For six hours the paramilitary police fired into the

23 village from one end while army units bombarded it from the other. Then

24 the major moved in with his police.

25 "[No interpretation]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 "Narrator: The Serb force reported finding the bodies of 15

2 Albanian men in the village. The Serb major says that after searching

3 from house to house he left a small unit to stand guard overnight.

4 "[No interpretation]"

5 MR. SAXON: Thank you.

6 Q. Mr. Adam, I take it as part of your investigation you did not

7 interview Goran Radosavljevic, the Serb police commander we saw in this

8 film; did you?

9 A. No.

10 Q. All right. He was also known as Gurij. The information that you

11 just received, or this particular version of the events that we just saw,

12 if three policemen had been killed and certain people had already been

13 identified as suspects, normally wouldn't you expect that those people,

14 the suspects, would have been investigated, perhaps prosecuted according

15 to the legal system in place in that society? Would you expect that?

16 A. You will repeat that question?

17 Q. I'm sorry. I'm -- like journalists, lawyers sometimes are lazy

18 and not as concise as they should be.

19 Assuming what the police commander said was true, that they had

20 information that residents of Racak had -- were responsible for the

21 killing of three policemen, do you think it might have been possible for

22 the authorities of the judicial system in the Republic of Serbia to

23 investigate what had happened?

24 A. I wouldn't assess that.

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon.

1 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that the question is

3 improper, because the police officer on the tape spoke about a terrorist

4 group in Racak and the attack that the police carried out against the

5 terrorist group in Racak, not against the inhabitants of Racak. If you

6 follow it, what the police officer said. Therefore, the question is

7 improper.

8 JUDGE KWON: I don't think your intervention to be appropriate,

9 because the witness is surely able to deal with the question.

10 MR. SAXON: Actually, Your Honour, just to clarify, what the

11 police commander says was, "We got reports that a family in Racak had

12 killed three policemen."

13 Q. So I'm just wondering, do you find it perhaps a little odd that

14 rather than the local authorities taking action against these -- this

15 alleged family that was responsible, we see a large police operation?

16 A. That was part of the things that puzzled me at Racak because in

17 case this was a small group of KLA fighters or what else, how you call

18 them - let's call them KLA fighters - then you don't need that build-up,

19 that military, paramilitary build-up. You see the tanks on the video.

20 Not on this video but on other videos. You see two tanks. Not firing,

21 but they were there. What puzzled me, and I -- I cannot understand, but

22 that means -- well, I don't know if I'm allowed to --

23 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please go on. Go on, please.

24 THE WITNESS: For me, the presentation by Mr. Buja, Shukri Buja,

25 shed a light on that because it was far much more than a, let's say,

1 criminal investigation into the murder of policemen. It was far more than

2 that.

3 MR. SAXON:

4 Q. Thank you. Thank you for clarifying that. Would you agree also

5 that after a village is bombarded, as the commentator said in this video,

6 for about six hours, that it's possible that some of the villagers, women,

7 children, some men, might try to flee? Would you accept that's possible?

8 A. Absolutely, but again we know from Mr. -- sorry, from Mr. Buja

9 that they had asked the people to go out of Racak before the fight.

10 That's what he said, refers to that.

11 Second, I have to correct you. It has been said many times that's

12 part of the things which are not true, that cannot be true, according to

13 my materials, to be cautious, that this village was bombarded. In that

14 same OSCE report from the 17th of January, they mention three houses

15 burnt. Three houses. After six hours of bombardment of a village, three

16 houses burnt. Of those three houses, two houses were the so-called KLA

17 headquarters or bases. And the third one was -- I couldn't identify the

18 third one. But that's not a bombardment of a village.

19 Q. Let me --

20 A. According to my materials, I say.

21 Q. Let me follow up on the point that you just made. You mention

22 Shukri Buja's testimony that members of the KLA had asked the civilian

23 residents to leave, but you're also familiar with his testimony where

24 Mr. Buja said, however, that that many civilians decided to stay.

25 A. Yes, some of them did.

1 Q. I would also -- you also mentioned in your testimony the presence

2 of trenches in Racak.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And you described how trenches are not used for fleeing, they're

5 used for fighting.

6 A. Right.

7 Q. And during your time walking around Racak, you went up to the

8 infamous ravine, I take it. You didn't see any trench running up that

9 ravine, did you?

10 A. Exactly. I saw that. There is a trench halfway down the village,

11 and that goes directly up to the ravine so that you can say the ravine is

12 part of the trench if -- a natural part of the trench, because it's like a

13 trench, this ravine. And there are what I suppose in English it's called

14 foxholes up in the ravine, because you can -- in a wonderful way you can

15 overlook the whole valley from the ravine. It's a very interesting

16 military point.

17 Q. Could a ravine be used for fleeing? Could people flee up a

18 ravine?

19 A. Of course. People can flee everywhere.

20 Q.