SYNOPSIS FOR THE MILOSEVIC
"TRIAL" FOR JUNE 03 2003
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - June 3, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
Today at the Milosevic trial, President Milosevic concluded the cross-examination of the secret witness “B-1098.”
In an attempt to be dramatic Mr. “B-1098” said that he was taken prisoner along with 700 other Muslims and that “none of those people were ever seen again.”
President Milosevic asked “B-1098” how many of those 700 people could he identify. The witness responded that he could identify only 4 of them.
President Milosevic then asked the next logical question. He asked the witness how it was that he could say that these people were “never seen again” when he didn’t even know who the people were to begin with. How could the witness possibly know if the other people, whom he couldn’t identify, were seen again or not?
Seeing that President Milosevic had captured this witness in a lie, “Judge” May intervened to save the witness. Mr. May became indignant, asking President Milosevic in a rather rude manner how he could possibly think that this witness was making up stories. Then he accused President Milosevic of attempting to provoke the witness and demanded that he move on to another topic.
Following the conclusion of the cross-examination by President Milosevic; the Amicus Curiae, Mr. Tapuskovic cross-examined the witness. In his cross-examination Mr. Tapuskovic established a useful fact. This witness had given two written statements he gave one statement to the authorities in Tuzla on June 17, 1992 and he gave another statement to the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of The Hague Tribunal on November 24, 1996.
In the first statement of June 17, 1992, just days after the alleged executions by the Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA) had allegedly taken place; the witness never mentioned the JNA at all. Not once in his 1992 statement was the JNA even mentioned at all. It wasn’t until he gave his statement to the OTP in 1996 that the JNA suddenly appeared.
Upon the conclusion of Mr. “B-1098’s” testimony another secret witness was called by the prosecution. Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff called the secret witness testifying under the pseudonym “C-47.”
Mr. “C-47” was examined by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff until the hearing adjourned for the day. Mr. “C-47’s” examination in chief is expected to take another hour, and conclude early in the day on June 4th. Following his examination in chief, he will be cross-examined by President Milosevic.
Mr. “C-47” professes to be a former member of the Serbian Radical Party (SRS). He says that he was a policeman in Serbia, and he claims to have been a Chetnik volunteer.
After the trial was adjourned for the day, a motion hearing was held. President Milosevic was not present at the motion hearing.
At the motion hearing, the Prosecutor, Mr. Nice complained that the government of Serbia-Montenegro (formerly known as FR Yugoslavia) was not cooperating. Mr. Nice claimed that they were not providing the documents, and the access to documents that was requested by the OTP.
Lawyers for the Serbia-Montenegro (SCG) government were present at the hearing. The SCG’s lawyers denied the prosecutor’s allegations that the government was not cooperating.
The SCG lawyers accused the prosecutor of wanting to go on a “grand fishing expedition” through the state archives of Yugoslavia.
In my opinion, if the prosecution is granted unrestricted access to the archives of FR Yugoslavia, then President Milosevic and his associates should be granted the same unrestricted access to state archives, not only in Belgrade and Podgorica, but also in Zagreb, Sarajevo, Pristina, Skopje, and Ljubljana.
“If it’s good for the goose it’s good for the gander”
In my opinion, If the Tribunal should rule that access to the archives of a state should be unrestricted and that a party should have unfettered access to them, then that should apply equally to the prosecution and the defense, and it should apply equally to all of the states that this illegal Tribunal considers to be under it’s so-called “jurisdiction.”
At the end of the motion
hearing the so-called “Judges” announced that they would rule in due course, and
then the motion hearing was adjourned.
Chronology of events: