Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY
Share Embed Flag
Download ePaper

Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY

Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY

cpi.hr
12.07.2015 Views

38945hand-gun in her direction. 2793 The bullet struck the stone door frame causing a chip fromthe door to hit Marta in the hand resulting in a minor injury. 2794 Another soldierimmediately intervened and told the first soldier to let it be. 2795 The soldiers then droveaway in their green four ton “Zastava” truck with all the Subotić livestock, except for asingle pig. 2796654. According to an ECMM report dated 26 August 1995, by 4:20 p.m. on 15August 1995, Ervenik village was burnt down. 2797655. In addition, the Trial Chamber has considered P1200 reviewed in chapter 4.2.8(Parčić).656. Based on the evidence of Rajko Guša, the Trial Chamber finds that sometimebetween approximately 10 August and 10 September 1995, persons referred to assoldiers were entering houses in Ervenik village and its hamlets, which would begin toburn shortly thereafter. The persons set fire to three to four houses in a hamlet, beforemoving to another hamlet and repeating the process. During this period, around 100houses were destroyed in the Subotići area of Ervenik town and about 80 houses in thecentre of Ervenik were burnt, along with the village school and a shop. According to anECMM report, by 4:20 p.m. on 15 August 1995, Ervenik town was burnt down. Duringthe same period, groups of persons in camouflage uniforms, referred to as Croatiansoldiers, loaded furniture, electrical appliances, and other valuable household goodsfrom houses in Ervenik onto civilian and military trucks and drove off. The evidenceindicates that this happened on a daily basis. These persons also took cars, trucks,tractors, trailers, and farming vehicles, as well as parts from broken down vehicles, hay,and firewood on a large scale, and large numbers of livestock from farms. On oneoccasion a large number of goats were slaughtered, skinned, and taken away. A numberof trucks left the town every day carrying property and livestock. Based on Guša’sdescription of these persons as Croatian soldiers, the Trial Chamber finds that they woremilitary-type uniforms. However, Guša did not provide any further details as to thefactual basis for this qualification. Consequently, the Trial Chamber cannot assesswhether this qualification was made on a proper factual basis. However, considering the2793 P959 (Rajko Guša, witness statement, 28 May 1997), para. 39.2794 P959 (Rajko Guša, witness statement, 28 May 1997), para. 39; Rajko Guša, T. 9874-9875.2795 P959 (Rajko Guša, witness statement, 28 May 1997), para. 39; Rajko Guša, T. 9874.2796 P959 (Rajko Guša, witness statement, 28 May 1997), para. 39.2797 P815 (ECMM report by Liborius, 26 August 1995), pp. 1, 7.370Case No.: IT-06-90-T 15 April 2011 `

38944number of persons involved in these incidents, the fact that these persons wore militaryuniforms and that some of them travelled in military trucks, and in light of the time andlocation of the events, the Trial Chamber finds that the persons who burnt theapproximately 180 houses, a shop, and a school, and took goods, vehicles, and livestockfrom Ervenik town were members of the Croatian military forces or Special Police.657. Further, the Trial Chamber finds that on 8 August 1995, the 3rd InfantryBattalion of the 134th Home Guard Regiment was in the area of Kaštel Žegarski andErvenik. On 9 August 1995, the 134th Home Guard Regiment was reinforced with the2nd Infantry Battalion and was in the area of the villages of Muškovci, Kaštel Žegarskiand Ervenik, and a forward command post and forward section of the logistics base wasset up in Kaštel Žegarski. From 11 August until 15 August 1995, the 3rd InfantryBattalion was on leave, and the 1st Infantry Battalion remained in this area. On 15August 1995, the 1st Infantry Battalion started marching to Velika Popina in Gračacmunicipality. Based on this evidence, the Trial Chamber finds that between 8 and 15August 1995, members of the 134th Home Guard Regiment were in the vicinity ofErvenik.658. According to the 1991 Population Census, in 1991 the inhabitants of Ervenikwere almost exclusively Serbs. Based on this evidence, and considering the amount ofobjects taken and the number of houses burnt, the Trial Chamber finds that a vastmajority, if not all of the property that was taken or burnt was owned or inhabited byKrajina Serbs. The Trial Chamber will further consider these incidents in relation toCounts 1, 4, and 5 of the Indictment, in chapters 5.5.2, 5.6.2, and 5.8.2 (f) and (g)below.659. The evidence also indicates that at the end of September 1995, three personswearing camouflage uniforms, who were referred to as Croatian soldiers, came to Todorand Marta Subotić’s farm in Ervenik and forcefully took almost all of their livestock,comprising a large number of animals. Considering that the persons who came to thefarm spoke a Croatian dialect common to the Zadar area, the Trial Chamber is satisfiedthat they were Croatian. Further, based on Guša’s description of these persons assoldiers, the Trial Chamber is satisfied that these persons wore military-type camouflageuniforms. However, Guša did not provide further details as to the factual basis for thequalification of Croatian soldiers. Considering this and the absence of any visibleinsignia, the Trial Chamber cannot asses whether this qualification was made on a371Case No.: IT-06-90-T 15 April 2011 `

38945hand-gun in her direction. 2793 The bull<strong>et</strong> struck the stone door frame causing a chip fromthe door to hit Marta in the hand resulting in a minor injury. 2794 Another soldierimmediately intervened and told the first soldier to l<strong>et</strong> it be. 2795 The soldiers then droveaway in their green four ton “Zastava” truck with <strong>al</strong>l the Subotić livestock, except for asingle pig. 2796654. According to an ECMM report dated 26 August 1995, by 4:20 p.m. on 15August 1995, Ervenik village was burnt down. 2797655. In addition, the Tri<strong>al</strong> Chamber has considered P1200 reviewed in chapter 4.2.8(Parčić).656. Based on the evidence of Rajko Guša, the Tri<strong>al</strong> Chamber finds that som<strong>et</strong>imeb<strong>et</strong>ween approximately 10 August and 10 September 1995, persons referred to assoldiers were entering houses in Ervenik village and its haml<strong>et</strong>s, which would begin toburn shortly thereafter. The persons s<strong>et</strong> fire to three to four houses in a haml<strong>et</strong>, beforemoving to another haml<strong>et</strong> and repeating the process. During this period, around 100houses were destroyed in the Subotići area of Ervenik town and about 80 houses in thecentre of Ervenik were burnt, <strong>al</strong>ong with the village school and a shop. According to anECMM report, by 4:20 p.m. on 15 August 1995, Ervenik town was burnt down. Duringthe same period, groups of persons in camouflage uniforms, referred to as Croatiansoldiers, loaded furniture, electric<strong>al</strong> appliances, and other v<strong>al</strong>uable household goodsfrom houses in Ervenik onto civilian and military trucks and drove off. The evidenceindicates that this happened on a daily basis. These persons <strong>al</strong>so took cars, trucks,tractors, trailers, and farming vehicles, as well as parts from broken down vehicles, hay,and firewood on a large sc<strong>al</strong>e, and large numbers of livestock from farms. On oneoccasion a large number of goats were slaughtered, skinned, and taken away. A numberof trucks left the town every day carrying property and livestock. Based on Guša’sdescription of these persons as Croatian soldiers, the Tri<strong>al</strong> Chamber finds that they woremilitary-type uniforms. However, Guša did not provide any further d<strong>et</strong>ails as to thefactu<strong>al</strong> basis for this qu<strong>al</strong>ification. Consequently, the Tri<strong>al</strong> Chamber cannot assesswh<strong>et</strong>her this qu<strong>al</strong>ification was made on a proper factu<strong>al</strong> basis. However, considering the2793 P959 (Rajko Guša, witness statement, 28 May 1997), para. 39.2794 P959 (Rajko Guša, witness statement, 28 May 1997), para. 39; Rajko Guša, T. 9874-9875.2795 P959 (Rajko Guša, witness statement, 28 May 1997), para. 39; Rajko Guša, T. 9874.2796 P959 (Rajko Guša, witness statement, 28 May 1997), para. 39.2797 P815 (ECMM report by Liborius, 26 August 1995), pp. 1, 7.370Case No.: IT-06-90-T 15 April 2011 `

logo

products

Resources

Company

Terms of service
Privacy policy
Cookie policy
Cookie settings
Imprint
Change language
Made with love in Switzerland
© 2024 Yumpu.com all rights reserved

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!