12.07.2015 Views

Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY

Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY

Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

38549<strong>al</strong>l this evidence, the Tri<strong>al</strong> Chamber finds that the artillery projectiles which impactedGračac town on 4 August 1995 were fired by Speci<strong>al</strong> Police artillery pieces, includingby HV artillery pieces attached to the Speci<strong>al</strong> Police. The Tri<strong>al</strong> Chamber further findsthat these artillery projectiles included 130-millim<strong>et</strong>re shells fired from the three 130-millim<strong>et</strong>re artillery pieces of the TS-5/TRS-5, which were located in firing positions inGvozdanka, approximately 23 kilom<strong>et</strong>res from Gračac. 5601 Having <strong>al</strong>so consideredTurk<strong>al</strong>j’s evidence that multi-barrel rock<strong>et</strong> fire was not used in relation to Gračac, theTri<strong>al</strong> Chamber finds that the evidence is insufficient to establish wh<strong>et</strong>her rock<strong>et</strong>s werefired at Gračac.1453. The Tri<strong>al</strong> Chamber now turns to the question of which objects the HV designatedas targ<strong>et</strong>s in, and in the immediate vicinity of, Gračac. The Tri<strong>al</strong> Chamber hasconsidered the aforementioned orders of <strong>Gotovina</strong>, Rajčic and Firšt, P1125, D970 andP1201 respectively, to put the town of Gračac under artillery fire, without furtherspecifying what should be targ<strong>et</strong>ed. On 29 July 1995, Červenko ordered the Speci<strong>al</strong>Police to work in constant coordination with the Split MD command. The Tri<strong>al</strong>Chamber has not received any documentary evidence containing specific artillery ordersissued by the Speci<strong>al</strong> Police in relation to Gračac. P2436 reported that on 4 August 1995at three separate times that day, the HV fired shells at Gračac, without any furtherspecification of targ<strong>et</strong>s. Similarly, P2385 reported that twice on 4 August 1995, theSpeci<strong>al</strong> Police fired artillery targ<strong>et</strong>ing Gračac, without further specifying the targ<strong>et</strong>sfired at within Gračac. Fin<strong>al</strong>ly, Mladen Markač reported in P583 that the Speci<strong>al</strong> PoliceJoint Forces had launched artillery preparations on targ<strong>et</strong>s in the battle range, includingGračac, <strong>al</strong>so without further specifying targ<strong>et</strong>s. The Tri<strong>al</strong> Chamber will consider inchapter 5.8.2 (i) wh<strong>et</strong>her these attack orders and reports should be interpr<strong>et</strong>ed to meanthat the town of Gračac as such was identified as a targ<strong>et</strong>.1454. In relation to specific designated targ<strong>et</strong>s within Gračac, the Tri<strong>al</strong> Chamber notesthe evidence of Rajčić that the planned military targ<strong>et</strong>s in Gračac were threeintersections and the police station. According to the evidence of Turk<strong>al</strong>j, the militarytarg<strong>et</strong>s in and in the immediate vicinity of Gračac were the police station, a municip<strong>al</strong>building (where, according to one possible understanding of his evidence, Turk<strong>al</strong>jbelieved the 9th Gračac Brigade command was located), a railway station, anintersection, and a depot. While noting the significant discrepancies in the evidence of5601 The evidence as a whole <strong>al</strong>so strongly indicates that they included mortars.766Case No.: IT-06-90-T 15 April 2011 `

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!