Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY

39287Trial Chamber considered that, in this particular case, even if some of these documentswere statements of witnesses which were on the Gotovina Defence’s Rule 65 terwitness list, but whom the Gotovina Defence no longer intended to call, this did not baradmission of the official notes into evidence. 100 On 4 November 2009, the TrialChamber admitted into evidence two VP official notes to corroborate and complementthe testimony of Expert Witness Feldi and to better evaluate his testimony. 101 Whenadmitting official notes into evidence, the Trial Chamber reiterated that their admissionwas in no way an indication of the weight, if any, which the Chamber would ultimatelyattach to these documents. 102 The Trial Chamber compared official notes with otherevidence on the same topic, and sometimes identified notable differences orinconsistencies between these different sources of evidence. 103 Furthermore, in someinstances the contents of official notes led the Trial Chamber to believe that the notesdid not accurately reflect what had been stated by the interviewee. 104 In evaluating theevidence, the Trial Chamber determined the weight to accord to each official note on acase-by-case basis. As a rule, the Trial Chamber accorded the official notes little weightand did not rely on them except to the extent that they were corroborated by otherevidence.46. Findings. As set out above, the Trial Chamber received a large quantity ofevidence on the crimes alleged in the Indictment. This evidence includes testimonies ofwitnesses who were victims of the crimes, (alleged) direct perpetrators, andinternational observers who witnessed the crimes or saw the results of crimes. Thedocumentary evidence admitted in this case includes reports from internationalorganizations, documents from police, military, and judicial organs in Croatia, as wellas forensic documentation. The diversity and volume of evidence painted a complexpicture regarding the incidents charged in the Indictment. Before addressing theseincidents against the backdrop of the applicable law, the Trial Chamber made factualfindings on all their relevant aspects. These factual findings can be found in Chapter 4.100 T. 20679-20680.101 T. 23891-23892; Decision on Gotovina Defence Request for Certification to Appeal the Trial ChamberDecision of 4 November 2009, 20 January 2010, para. 7.102 Decision on Admission of MUP Official Notes and Reasons for the Decision to Deny the Admissionof the Official Note of Ivan Čermak, 30 January 2009, para. 10; T. 20681, 23892.103 See e.g. the Trial Chamber’s finding on the alleged murder of Nikola Dragičević and others in Chapter4.1.9.104 Pero Perković, T. 19460, 19463, 19494, 19496, 19498, 19502, 19508 (in relation to allegedconfessions to the Gošić murders); see also Decision on Prosecution’s Application for an Order pursuant28Case No.: IT-06-90-T 15 April 2011 `