Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evidence of British police officer on the massacre at Racak
ICTY Transcript ^ | 7th June 2002 | ICTY

Posted on 06/23/2002 7:31:32 PM PDT by ABrit

WITNESS: IAN ROBERT HENDRIE

14 Examined by Mr. Ryneveld:

15 Q. Mr. Hendrie, could you tell the Court your full name, please.

16 A. Ian Robert Hendrie.

17 Q. And, Mr. Hendrie, do I understand correctly, sir, that you are

18 currently 42 years old?

19 A. I am.

20 Q. And you have a background as a detective in both the Royal Hong

21 Kong and the London Metropolitan Police forces; is that correct?

22 A. It is, yes.

23 Q. Now, sir, did there come a time in 1997 or 1998 when you served

24 one of the offices of the United Nations in the Balkans?

25 A. Between October 1997 to October 1998, I served in the

Page 6473

1 International Police Task Force in Bosnia.

2 Q. And later on, in December of 1998, were you involved with the

3 OSCE/KVM mission?

4 A. In November 1998, I joined the United Kingdom Diplomatic Observer

5 Mission and then joined the OSCE in December of 1998.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you. Your Honours, by way of a very brief summary: In his statements, the witness indicates that he was originally- initially shown the body of someone identified to him as Banush which reports in his statement at scene 1. Now, for benefit of the Court and in terms of some diagrams and I believe the large maps that were in these court proceedings taken by Mr. Kelly, those are referred to on those documents as CL1, that's location one, scene 1. I just thought I would relate the scenes in his statement to the other descriptors that you have. He was shown a uniformed KLA soldier -- by a KLA soldier, a courtyard where a man named Bidi Banush identified the headless body of Azem Banush, and later, at the morgue, this body was labelled as RA-1. Then he was at scene 2, which is location 2, scenes 2 and 3. A man maimed Ismail Beqiri informed him of the location of the bodies of three brothers, Arif, Sabri, and Haki Syla, who had all been shot.

A short distance from this location, he was shown the body of Hajriz Jakujsi, who had also been shot. At scene 3, which is location 2, scene 4, he was brought to a family compound consisting of two houses where the body of Ahmet Mustafa, who was apparently around 70 years old, was identified to him. He appeared to have been shot several times and was later identified with the morgue label RA-9.

At scene 4 in his statement, which is location 2, scene 5 in the other documents, he was shown the body of a male in his mid-30s, identified to him as Skender, who had part of his skull missing. He examined an axe that was nearby which appeared to have a small amount of blood on it. At the entrance gate to that compound, he found a skull fragment with some hair on it; and in the house, he found bone fragments that appeared consistent with the man's injuries. This house had suffered heavy gunfire damage. En route to the next location, he located and photographed a rifle grenade in the ground with a fintail protruding. At scene 5 in his statement, which is location 5, scene 10 in other documentation, he came across a freshly-dug trench which was about four feet deep and two feet wide which showed no evidence of recent use. He then came to a gully where he located a total of 22 bodies in two groups, one comprising 15 bodies and the second comprising seven bodies. There was a 23rd body located a short distance away but in the same vicinity. On the northern side of the gully, he found ammunition boxes labelled in Cyrillic, indicating 7.6 calibre ammunition.

Now, this witness, in his statement, indicates that there were no signs of drag marks or blood leading in or out of the gully. It was apparent, however, to him that some if not all of the bodies had been turned over. Bloodstaining indicated the location where death occurred. All the bodies were rigid and dressed in civilian clothing. There were no weapons near the bodies. The vast majority of injuries on all the bodies he saw in Racak that day were due, in his opinion, to gunshots. He then recorded the individual details of bodies at scene 5, 1 to 23, which you will find again referred to as location 5, scene 10. He moves on then to crime location 3, scene 7. From the gully, he walked into the village to a house with the number 30 on it where the body of Hanemshah Mehmeti was identified to him. Mehmeti was reportedly killed by a sniper while Mehmeti was going to the aid of someone already hit by a sniper. He was then taken to another location and shown the area where Bajram and Hanemshah Mehmeti were killed. The body of Bajram was identified to him. It was lying in a room of the family home. He did not photograph that body because he'd used up all his film, however, another OSCE member by the name of Michael Pedersen apparently videoed it. He then moves on to what was referred to in Mr. Kelly's documentation as location 4, scene 9, which is a family compound where the bodies of Riza, Halim, and Zenel Beqiri were lying in a room. Villagers told this witness that they were shot by the police from a hill about 60 metres away. He also did not photograph those bodies. Xhemzjl Beqiri, a survivor from that incident, told the witness what happened. He moved on then to location 3, scene 8.

He was brought to another location where he was shown a compound that had a ten-foot wall surrounding four houses. Ismet Bahimi pointed out the body and severed head of his brother Ajad Bahimi. Apparently he had been shot first and then, sometime later, his head was removed. He did not photograph this scene.

There was damage to the family tractors and it appeared that the house had been ransacked.

In his statement, he also talks about his dealings on the 17th of January, 1999, with Judge Marinkovic. He was at Stimlje when he saw a build-up of Serbian forces that were there apparently to assist the investigating Judge, Ms. Marinkovic. Her purpose was to enter Racak to investigate the incident. The witness indicates that there were sporadic firing aimed at and around the village. On the 18th of January, 1999, the witness spoke with Judge Marinkovic in relation to the investigation into Racak. She stated, inter alia, that the purpose of her visit was to show the world that the bodies were not of innocent peasants, as Walker had said, but that they were terrorists. She - and this is my paraphrasing - said that they found evidence that proves the villagers were terrorists because they found uniforms, trenches, machine-guns, and bombs.

He then, in his statement, goes on to indicate attending at the mortuary on the 19th and 20th of January, 1999, to observe the post-mortems of some of the deceased persons from Racak performed by the forensic pathologist from both Pristina and from Belorussia. He videoed some of those proceedings. Now, Your Honours, I propose at this point to show five photographs to assist the Trial Chamber with respect to evidence heard from witnesses concerning their observation of bodies and their conclusions that the bodies had been mutilated, shot at close range, or decapitated. You will recall that there's been extensive cross-examination about that, and in fairness and to assist the Trial Chamber to see whether or not there was any basis for those comments by the witnesses, I propose to show first of all photograph 00732320. And Mr. Usher, if you could put that on the ELMO.

This is a photograph showing an unusual eye injury. You will recall evidence about witnesses talking about mutilation and eyes.

22 Q. Witness, I'd like you to look at that photograph. Do you

23 recognise the scene depicted in that photograph?

24 A. I do.

25 Q. Yes. Now, is this one of the photographs you took or is this just

Page 6479

1 a photograph of a scene that you recall when you were there on the 16th of

2 January?

3 A. It's one of the photographs I took.

4 Q. All right. And -- all right. Thank you.

5 MR. RYNEVELD: The next photograph, please. Yes. Photograph

6 00732364. These are all in the Racak binder, in sequence, Your Honours.

7 Q. Again, Mr. Hendrie, is this one of the photographs you took?

8 A. It is, Your Honour.

9 Q. Below and behind the right ear, there appears to be a mark. Can

10 you describe what that mark looks like?

11 A. It appears to be an entry gunshot wound with scorching and

12 stippling around the wound.

13 Q. In your statement, sir, you indicated that they appeared to have

14 been shot at close range; is that correct?

15 A. Yes, Your Honour.

16 Q. Is this one of the factors that you considered in coming to that

17 conclusion?

18 A. It is, Your Honour.

19 Q. Thank you. Next photograph, 00732368. Again, sir, that's a

20 photograph you took?

21 A. Yes, Your Honour.

22 Q. And what, if anything, can you tell us about this photograph in

23 relation to the eye area?

24 A. It appears that a bullet has entered the skull and the passage of

25 the bullet has caused the eyes to be distorted.

Page 6480

1 Q. Thank you. Next photograph, 00732387. Again, sir, is this a

2 photograph that you took?

3 A. Yes, Your Honour.

4 Q. We've heard evidence, sir, about mutilation of bodies and gaping

5 holes in the chest area. What, if anything, did you note about this

6 particular body when you photographed it?

7 A. I observed that there were two or what appears to be two gunshot

8 wounds to the chest and fluids and remains of internal organs on the

9 chest.

10 Q. And this area that you noted that's shown in this photograph,

11 where is that wound in relation to where you would normally expect to find

12 the heart?

13 A. It was in the same vicinity.

14 MR. RYNEVELD: And finally, Your Honours, a photograph which has

15 not yet been marked as an exhibit in these proceedings. Oh, you've got it

16 there? Yes. Would you put that on the ELMO, please.

17 Q. That appears to be a headless torso, sir. You, in your report,

18 indicated you saw two of them. Did you take this photograph?

19 A. I can't recall just now.

20 Q. All right. Do you recall whether or not you saw any headless

21 bodies while you were being shown around Racak on the 16th of January,

22 1999?

23 A. There were two, Your Honour.

24 Q. Did you photograph one or two or any?

25 A. One.

Page 6481

1 Q. Thank you.

2 MR. RYNEVELD: Finally, Your Honours, I'd like to show a 30-second

3 clip of Exhibit 95. You've already seen certain portions of it.

4 Could the AV booth help us? Start the video. It's only about 30

5 seconds. This is at a part of the exhibit, Your Honours, 95, of the video

6 that was taken with Mr. Walker present.

7 Yes. Would you run the video, please.

8 [Videotape played]

9 "Okay. At the top of the hill. The first corpse is that of a

10 male, probably in his mid-to-late-30s. He appears to have been executed

11 by being shot at close range through the head. There are two indicators

12 of --

13 "One of the bullets --

14 "There are two indicators of exit wounds. The man appears to have

15 had his right ear severed. He has been shot at very close range in both

16 the face, and I can't see where the chest exit wound originated.

17 "There's a bullet. I just wanted to assess what kind it is.

18 "Okay.

19 "Because it's not fired. It's pretty big.

20 "Got me?

21 "Yeah.

22 "There are significant numbers of 7.62 cardboard boxes sprinkled

23 around the area, suggesting that those that undertook this calmly executed

24 their victims and reloaded in the same place."

25 MR. RYNEVELD: Stop the video there, please.

Page 6482

1 Q. Now, the photograph of the body that we see -- I'm sorry, the

2 image of the body that we see in the video, is that the same person that

3 you photographed?

4 A. It is, Your Honour.

5 Q. All right. And again, it showed the chest wound?

6 A. It did.

7 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Ryneveld, you --

8 MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you. We haven't marked yet -- we haven't

9 given a number to that last photograph.

10 JUDGE MAY: No, but I -- I want to know who that was.

11 MR. RYNEVELD: Sorry. That was a -- I can ask the witness, yes.

12 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

13 MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you.

14 Q. Witness, did you recognise that individual who was speaking on

15 camera as having been present on the 16th of January when you were there?

16 A. Your Honour, I didn't see the man there on the day in question.

17 However, I did recognise him as being a man named Brown, a British liaison

18 officer.

19 Q. And were you aware of his function as head of the medical team

20 there or were you aware of that?

21 JUDGE MAY: Well, it would be better if you called Mr. Brown.

22 MR. RYNEVELD: Yes. That's fine.

23 Thank you, Your Honour. Those are all the questions, other than

24 having that last photograph, which has not been entered, marked as an

25 exhibit, those are my questions.

Page 6483

1 Might that be given an exhibit number?

2 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

3 MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you.

4 THE REGISTRAR: Prosecution Exhibit 215.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Hendrie, a technical question: The images

6 that we saw were of apparently internal organs, some of them, spread out

7 over the bodies or elsewhere near to the bodies. All of that would have

8 resulted from shooting at close range or could have resulted from being

9 shot at such close range?

10 THE WITNESS: It could have, Your Honour, yes.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Because I must say that, looking at it, one would

12 have the impression that the organs were pulled, were taken out almost

13 manually, which is consistent with what some of the witnesses said. But

14 what you're saying is that that is also consistent with being shot at very

15 close range?

16 THE WITNESS: I believe so, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

18 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, first of all, I have an

20 objection since here we heard comments on details which are considered to

21 be an exclusive domain of forensic analysis, and this witness here is not

22 a forensic expert. I think that --

23 JUDGE MAY: Why don't you ask him about his qualifications?

24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I can see that he's a police

25 detective. He worked in the English police.

Page 6484

1 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Hendrie. Help us about your qualifications to

2 deal with this evidence. What is your background in forensic matters?

3 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I served as a detective in the Royal

4 Hong Kong Police for six years, dealing with murders and rapes and other

5 serious crimes, and I've served in the Metropolitan Police Service in

6 London for some 13 years and the last few years as a detective. And I

7 served in Bosnia and in Kosovo where I've dealt with and seen numerous

8 gunshot wounds and have worked with forensic pathologists and scientists

9 on similar cases.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: balkans; icty; kosovo; milosevic; racak; serbia
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Because I must say that, looking at it, one would

12 have the impression that the organs were pulled, were taken out almost

13 manually, which is consistent with what some of the witnesses said. But

14 what you're saying is that that is also consistent with being shot at very

15 close range?

16 THE WITNESS: I believe so, Your Honour.

1 posted on 06/23/2002 7:31:33 PM PDT by ABrit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *balkans
bump
2 posted on 06/23/2002 7:32:11 PM PDT by ABrit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vooch; joan
If you need something useful to do, try reading a bit of transcript.
3 posted on 06/23/2002 7:36:02 PM PDT by ABrit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ABrit
cute, but a waste of my and the trubunal's time. This guy is a simple copper, not a forensic scientist.

There were 2 foreign and 1 government forensic teams which published reports on the victims of the firefight. Why isn't the court hearing testimony from the forensic experts ?

the only new info we have gotten from the prosecution witnesses is that the KLA gangpressed local villagers (many in their 60's) to fight that day.

4 posted on 06/23/2002 7:57:40 PM PDT by vooch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ABrit; vooch
A man maimed Ismail Beqiri...

Oh, the horrors! Have they caught the man that maimed Ismail?

5 posted on 06/23/2002 8:06:49 PM PDT by F-117A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F-117A
Exactly the problem with the Serbs, they don't care about any human life except their own.
6 posted on 06/23/2002 8:24:50 PM PDT by ABrit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ABrit; vooch
Exactly the problem with the Serbs, they don't care about any human life except their own.

Obviously, you don't even know what you post!

7 posted on 06/23/2002 8:45:16 PM PDT by F-117A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: F-117A
KLABrit, thanks for pointing to this document. Hope that KLA goons will not kill you for blowing the wistle and pointing to the hoax.

>>>>>>"He was shown a uniformed KLA soldier -- by a KLA soldier, a courtyard where a man named Bidi Banush identified the headless body of Azem Banush<<<<<<<

One might conclude that Bidi Banush is relative of Azem Banush. Wrong! Dead man name was Banush AZEMI, not Azem Banush as transcript says. there is significance in this false testimony. ICTY IS MAKING UP THE NAMES OF THOSE KILLED IN RACAK.

>>>>he was shown the body of Hajriz Jakujsi, who had also been shot.<<< No such person exist in list of found dead in Racak. >>>>>Ismet Bahimi pointed out the body and severed head of his brother Ajad Bahimi. Apparently he had been shot first and then, sometime later, his head was removed.<<<<<<<<

Previously mentioned that body of Azem Banush was headless. That is two, so far. Plus one severed by an axe with blood traces on it. Question: How many headless corpses were documented in Ranta's report?

>>>>>>>>>.... significant numbers of 7.62 cardboard boxes sprinkled 23 around the area, suggesting that those that undertook this calmly executed 24 their victims and reloaded in the same place."<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

"Sprinkle" is interesting choice of word for an native English speaker. Sprinkled by whom? A Freudian lapse or a fraudulent testimony?

Serbian police and paramilitary carried their AK-47s with spare clips fastened with duct tape. In fighting, there is no time to reload.

As of Hendrie expertise, Judge May confirmed that he is no forensic expert so his opinion is irrelevant.

8 posted on 06/23/2002 9:10:29 PM PDT by DTA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ABrit
I'm re-reading it and here's a snip.....

24 Q. You claim that this body had no shoes on; right?
25 A. Yes, sir.
Page 6503 1 Q. But there was a full amount of clothing appropriate to the weather 2 conditions; is that right?
3 A. He was fully clothed, sir, yes.
4 Q. Could one conclude that the footwear was removed from this body 5 before you saw this body?
6 A. No, sir.
7 Q. Well, do you believe that when somebody leaves the house, that 8 person would put on a jacket, a hat, and so on and then leave the house 9 barefoot? Is that what you normally suppose if you think that the 10 footwear had not been removed from this body?

Now Abrit, this brit detective is no Sherlock Holmes. A Detective that disclaims the most obvious gives the 'prosecution' no credibility. Ditto, over and over for all 'witnesses'so far.

9 posted on 06/23/2002 9:29:39 PM PDT by duckln
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DTA
"Question: How many headless corpses were documented in Ranta's report?"......Well these corpses were videod and photgraphed on site, so if Ranta didn't get them, you'd have to ask why.

10 posted on 06/24/2002 3:08:07 AM PDT by ABrit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: duckln
Did the testimony of the police officer say that the person had on "a jacket, a hat, and so on", or was that something Milosevic included for effect?
11 posted on 06/24/2002 3:10:42 AM PDT by ABrit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ABrit
It is in the photographs that the firefight KIA'd were dressed in winter gear.

Under cross it becomes clear that while the KLA dumped the bodies in the night, some 'bright' KLA decided to steal the guys boots......that is why he didn't have boots on.

12 posted on 06/24/2002 5:02:24 AM PDT by vooch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DTA
good call the issue with the names !
13 posted on 06/24/2002 5:02:55 AM PDT by vooch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DTA
"No such person exist in list of found in Racak."

The indictment was written some time ago and contains only the names of those "known" to have been killed. It does not claim to be complete.

The issue about "Azem Banush" is a red herring. It may be a translation error, but the fact is the man was killed by the Serbs
14 posted on 06/24/2002 5:44:09 AM PDT by ABrit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ABrit
Look, KlaBrit, Anyone who had an oportunity to monitor the tv news from Yugoslavia in the 1980's is familiar with the specific facial expression of Kosovo Albanians when forced to lie. The same can be seen on Kangaroo Kourt videos of Albanian "wintesses" tesifying.

There is internal struggle going on. Their words are saying one thing, their faces another. It has something to do with the high ethical codex on one side and the prevailing social norms in Kosovan society on other.

Kosovan Albanians are poor liars, they make childish lies and expect to get away with it. As if they want to be caught and relieved of embarrasment.

The issue of names is not red herring. It is of th ehighest signifficance, because ICTY can NOT change once published "facts".

If all those killed were indeed the villagers of Racak, how come their identities and D.O.B's were not known at the time, not known at the time ICTY wrote "indictment" and not known to the present day? How believable is the fact that mother, father or son do not know what are the names of the killed one and when they were born?

This is believable the same way as the fact that grown up man leave the house fully dressed in overals yet without shoes on his feet.

NO wonder Clinton sided with Kosovo Albanians.

15 posted on 06/24/2002 6:15:21 AM PDT by DTA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ABrit
Did the testimony of the police officer say that the person had on "a jacket, a hat, and so on",
Yes, that's what "He was fully clothed, sir, yes." means.

or was that something Milosevic included for effect?
No, he puts it into specifics showing how preposterous the 'testimony' is. And the whole 'prosecutors case' likewise.

16 posted on 06/24/2002 6:48:39 AM PDT by duckln
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: duckln; joan; ABrit
what is great about this thread is that poor KLA-Brit posted some testimony he thought was solid. But KLA-Brit, just like the prosecution, didn't take the time to do a close reading.......

Upon close reading, the Bobby's testimony discredits the prosection............

KLA-Brit, just keep posting more of the transcripts.....it is a hoot.

17 posted on 06/24/2002 8:50:09 AM PDT by vooch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ABrit
Can you do us all a favor A(lbanian)Brit? You agree that heads were found cut off right? Can you name for me any Croat, Serb or Russian who is serving time for decapitating someones head? This was a Muslim massacre and we have gone over this time and time again with you. Only Muslims perform this sick act.

decap2.jpg (23279 bytes)

EDS. NOTE: GRAPHIC CONTENT: An ethnic Albanian inspects the decapitated body of one of as many as 40 men that were found on a hillside in the village of Racak, some 25 kilometers (16 miles) south of Pristina, Saturday, Jan. 16, 1999. The bodies of dozens of men, many of them mutilated, were found lying on a hillside in southern Kosovo Saturday, a day after Serb forces launched a fierce assault on ethnic Albanian villages. Kosovo Albanians said 46 were killed. (AP Photo/Visar Kryeziu)

18 posted on 06/24/2002 10:39:15 PM PDT by Andy from Beaverton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
Read the transcripts Andy, it was the Serbs that did it, and they have proved it.
19 posted on 06/25/2002 2:49:24 AM PDT by ABrit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ABrit
Once again I repeat myself "Can you name for me any Croat, Serb or Russian who is serving time for decapitating someones head?" Why should I trust any Brit? They are consummate liers and trust in NATO. We have gone over Racak a 100 times with you. But you only believe Serbs could do this. Please wake up!

I like how you avoided answering my post on Universal Declaration of Human Rights

20 posted on 06/25/2002 4:53:10 PM PDT by Andy from Beaverton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Andy from Beaverton
If you read the transcripts of the Milosevic trial, you will see that the evidence about what happened in Racak is overwhelmingly that the Serbs comitted a massacre there.

Your equation of NATO with the NAZIS is foolish in the extreme.

Your post about the UN declaration of human rights does not seem to me to have any relevence.

My post of Arbour's talk on war crimes tribunal was an attempt to start a rational debate about the subject. Unfortunately there does not seem to be any taste for that debate among the posters here.

I believe that the only way to deal with criminal regimes is through an international court, as far as I can see, there is no other way.

Your point about the Moslems being the only people who decapitate their opponents is, as far as I am concerned only your opinion. It is up to the court to decide that, and I'll wait for the evidence, and their decision.
21 posted on 06/25/2002 7:04:01 PM PDT by ABrit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ABrit
If you read the transcripts of the Milosevic trial, you will see that the evidence about what happened in Racak is overwhelmingly that the Serbs comitted a massacre there.

And Santa Claus and the Easter Rabbit are real...

22 posted on 06/25/2002 7:06:57 PM PDT by medved
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson