The tale of the last witness who has completed his testimony, Lazarevic, may seem a bit stale now, but I think it deserves to be told. But, before that, something about the "pretty humane" conditions that Milosevic is subjected to. One of his counselling lawyers, Misha Ognjanovic, went to visit him this weekend, and here's what he said: "The greatest exhaustion to Slobodan Milosevic is brought by afternoon sessions, and they are practically no time gain to the court. Because, if there is an afternoon session, then there is the obligatory an hour-and-a-half lunch break. The afternoon sessions begin at 14:30 and end at 16:15. During the lunch break, Milosevic sits alone in a small room in the courthouse, without the possibility to have lunch as well. By the time he arrives at the detention unit, around 17:00, it is already too late for a fresh-air walk or a meeting with his legal counsels, due to the detention unit house rules." (POLITIKA, 5 Nov.)

Breaking its long silence, the BBC NEWS of 30 Oct. came up with the coverage of the trial - the testimony given by Slobodan Lazarevic ("Milosevic Challenges Key Witness"). According to the article, the witness said "that Mr Milosevic controlled and financed the Bosnian Serb and Croatian Serb armies during the conflict in the early 1990s." But the article is in trouble to define Lazarevic: "a former Yugoslav spy", "said he worked as an under-cover agent", "a solid, serious-looking man who served with Serbia's military intelligence"... That is just the problem: Lazarevic was none of the above, so he couldn't possibly have any info on controlling and financing anything by anybody. Indeed, all the evidence he ever gave was "some officers told me", "it was common knowledge", "everybody knew that", "I heard it over the speakerphone when some officers spoke to Belgrade", "Colonel Zimonja told me". Well, here's the key name: Colonel Zimonja was the supposed "connection" of the witness inside the YU Army Counter-Intelligence Service, who "recruited" him 30 years ago (the witness knows nobody else in the Service!) and to whom he personally submitted reports once a week. The only problem was that Lazarevic miscalculated the age of his "connection": Zimonja was way too young back in 1968 to "recruit" anybody. Later on, he was studying in the USSR for 9 years and even later, he was the military attache in the YU embassies throughout Europe (therefore in no position to meet our wannabe-spy on a regular basis in his neck of the wood where he lived (Velika Kladusa and Vojnic).

Even one of our zealous journalists reporting live from The Hague in session breaks for TV B92 couldn't just plant the usual "another strong witness" sop. Instead, she whined how the "Prosecution did a really poor job with this one, not previously checking the obviously easily checkable facts" and letting the "spy" embarrass them.

So, Lazarevic never even claimed he was a military man, he just "liked to collect uniforms and wear them" around with various insignia, particularly the British Army officer's uniform, "because I thought this one suited me the best." He finished University in Sarajevo (English language) and became an interpreter long before the war, first in AGROKOMERC, until Fikret Abdic fired him for stealing from his office, then at the SAO Krajina HQ (to interpret when the UN, OSCE or Red Cross officials came; he referred to this as being "a liaison officer" - thus the deliberate misunderstanding about his non-existent military career). But it would not look good if a simple interpreter would reveal "some of the most incriminating testimony" (BBC NEWS), it had to be the "man who served with Serbia's military intelligence." Otherwise, Lazarevic could not be present at all those important inner-circle top meetings (without the UN, OSCE, Red Cross present and no interpreter needed), where speakerphone was used when communicating with Belgrade.

Colonel Zimonja was a man whom Lazarevic "saw for the first time in his office in 1995", after the Operation Storm, when the flood of Serb refugees from CRO came to Belgrade, bringing our "spy" along. The whole story was obviously spinned then and there, backwards all the way to 1968. Clearly, another case of megalomania, another Ratomir Tanic case (Remember him? Conferring regularly with Milosevic in his cabinet about the plans for the ethnic cleansing, and not even knowing on which floor and in which wing of the palace the cabinet of Milosevic actually was?!)

BBC NEWS, as always relying on their readers not to read transcripts or to watch the video of the "trial", wrote about Lazarevic: "Mr Milosevic suggested he was a nobody with no inside information and had been bribed to give fabricated evidence", but that Lazarevic "a solid, serious-looking man... stood up to the attacks". Let's see how he did that.

Although the witness claimed in both his live testimony and in his written statement that he exclusively "personally reported to Zimonja" for 30 years, when asked how to explain the fact that Zimonja was first in the USSR school and then in European embassies for decades, therefore unavailable to meet in Bosnia and CRO "once a week", the witness changed his tune: "I was sending my reports in writing, and our embassies forwarded them to Zimonja." This was the first serious crack in the facade of this witness, who started to get angry, to frequently drink water, to give sarcastic quibbles, rather than answer unpleasant questions. And it got worse.

Lazarevic eloquently told how he "drove in his car with his wife" to check out one of those famous road blocks by local Krajina Serbs back in 1990 ("tree-trunk revolution"), "out of pure curiosity", only to discover "these were not local Serbs but the guys from Belgrade, receiving each DEM 100 a day." The same story in his written statement was: "Colonel Zimonja told me that some of those people at the road blocks came from Serbia..." Explanation? A mistake in the written statement. I would say, "testimony strengthening".

To create a believable picture of a spy working under-cover in a small Bosnian place, Lazarevic weaved a real spy story: his "first serious assignment was to kill 2 brothers Brajdic", local Croat emigrees from Sweden, who came in preparation of the imminent wars. He formed a troika, was given weapons, but the whole action had been "aborted when 2 drunken JNA officers approached him in a cafe, started to talk aloud about the Greater Serbia project, so I was exposed". Milosevic asked him whether he was well known in the community; when the witness proudly confirmed it, Milosevic just quoted from his statement, where the same event was described differently: there was ONE captain who came to him, hugged and kissed him and called him "my Serb brother". Lazarevic weaseled out of this by claiming that "this must have been a bad translation". Both versions sadly disregard logic: why would a well-known local Serb be exposed as a Serb if somebody address him publicly as a Serb?

The same pathetic wrestling with the inconsistencies continued re the whole arsenal issued for the "action" (statement) versus "a Scorpio with the silencer" (testimony). I think at that point the witness would have gladly eaten up his written statement page by page.

Re claims how "Belgrade supplied weapons to Krajina", Milosevic asked the witness whether he's aware that the ex-YU arms production was mainly located in the central part of the country, namely Bosnia and Krajina, and that apart from food there was really no need for anything else as a help from Belgrade, and didn't he see on CRO TV how long it took to that Croatian General to drive in a Jeep through the endless arms&ammo depot in Knin after it was taken over in the Operation Storm? The witness arrogantly answered: "I have no clue." Milosevic said: "Well, that's exactly what I'm saying."

Towards the end of the first half of the cross-examination, the witness started to lose the last traces of rationality, so the dialogue went like this - Lazarevic:"You have pulled all the strings from Belgrade and also given orders for the ethnic cleansing of the Croats from Krajina." Milosevic:"Give me one example when somebody told you of receiving such an order from me." Lazarevic:"Everybody knows that."

One of the key incriminating "evidence" given by this witness was the claim that the Serbs themselves were killing other Serbs in Krajina, in order to accuse the Croats and create distrust; for that purpose they have even set up a "dirty jobs" unit, which at one point mined a football field in Glina, to arrange killings (later on, however, this was completely forgotten i.e. nothing happened). Another little thing was amiss: the darned original statement said it happened at the football field in Topusko! Again, the typing error was to be blamed (although the first reaction was:"No, I did not say what's written there.").

Another tackle by this witness was a heavy innuendo, for example: "General Mile Mrksic told me on one occasion all that he did in Vukovar." It turned out that the General spoke publicly, over a dinner with 30 people present, talking of the military aspect of the operation and certainly not of anything that this innuendo would like to suggest ("all that he did" = war crimes). Our truthful witness then said he was merely present at the table. Milosevic pointed out this is by no means anything like "General told ME" and that even a waiter serving soup could have made a statement that he heard the General talking about Vukovar.

The second day of the cross-examination Milosevic read 2 written statements received by the ex-Prime Minister of SAO Krajina Borislav Mikelic and the former Mayor of Slunj Mile Bosnic: both have refuted yesterday's "testimony" given by Lazarevic in the most emphasized wording, stating that the man was never an Army Intelligence officer but a mere interpreter, who ran away from his gambling debts in Velika Kladusa; and the chain of command tendered by him in the form of a diagram is totally false. At this point, of course, May jumped in to help. I forgot to mention that during the first day of cross-examination May was absent, Robinson was the presiding judge and he did his job superbly, i.e. mostly kept his mouth shut. But not our May (who explained he was ill and who still looked a bit yellowish but eager as always to help the Prosecution); he interrupted Milosevic scores of times, especially when he was about to make a point, by asking dumb questions (or rather, playing dumb): "What is the connection here? We did not follow." And when these 2 statements of the Krajina high ex-officials (May always referred to them as "those people") were introduced, he doubled up his interruptions. The witness was instructed to answer each sentence ("Yes, I was known to play poker games with friends, but I ran away from brothers Brajdic, whom I didn't kill.") This didn't help much in watering down the damning info benefiting Milosevic from 2 people not very much in favour of Milosevic. Finally, May flatly refused to let these signed statements to be tendered as defence exhibits.

To give you the idea how much this supposed officer knows about his fellow officers, here's the example of one Colonel Karan: he was mentioned many times as a source of important info, but unfortunately it turned out that the witness-fellow officer has no idea which branch of the Intelligence Colonel Karan was in: on page 19 of his statement he was KOS, on page 12 he was SDB. Lazarevic tried to dismiss the discrepancy with superior laughter, saying it was probably just another typo, and that Karan is really KOS. But, listen to his own written statement: "Colonel Mladjo Karan was a member of SDB, and he was very much disliked by KOS people, because of the rivalry of the two services." Does that sound like just a typo, a switch between KOS and SDB?! Sounds more like the guy is making all this up.

If you think this is the dumbest explanation for a big inconsistency, listen to this: In a story of bodies exchange which he personally organized (100 dead Krajina fighters for 100 dead Muslims), the Serb side was 10 bodies short, so he tried with many local Serb commanders; some helped him to dig up 4 old corpses "with their hands tied at the back" (this was added just to spice the story, no elaboration). But still there were 6 missing and one of the commanders, a Colonel Pejovic, had 6 live prisoners and laughingly offered them, so our witness just marched away, appalled. Tomorrow morning he was delivered 6 fresh corpses. Innuendo again! The problem is this Colonel Pejovic, vividly described by the witness as a "heavy-set, tall blond man in his forties, very polite; we have met many times and co-operated really well before this." Milosevic innocently asked whether the witness knows the nickname of that man being "Gypsy", on account of his raven black hair and extremely dark complexion? The witness feigned surprise, but then offered a really great explanation: Colonel Pejovic had a really closely cropped crew-cut and a beret, so he was maybe wrong in describing him as being blond! And you know what May did to try to stop this exchange that was totally discrediting the witness? He had the nerve to say that "this is impossible to follow", so Milosevic had to patiently explain that the witness obviously has never seen Colonel Pejovic, let alone co-operated with him, and certainly not in any bodies exchange, which is not something interpreters organize.

To confirm his Army Intelligence status, Lazarevic stated he owned a diplomatic passport, so Milosevic simply aksed him to be so kind and produce it. The Prosecution jumped in, offering a smudged photocopy, which placed on the ELMO was proven to be a mere service passport for an interpreter accompanying a delegation going to one peace conference. Strange, I thought the Prosecution should know the difference; but no, they just included this stupitidy as the "exhibit", following the rule of "the more, the merrier".

The spy story was needed to add weight to this flimsy witness, so his whole testimony was peppered with the relevant jargon (briefing, debriefing, "recruiting", hit job troikas etc.). But listen to another bubble bursting: The witness had described in detail how he was present as the "liaison officer" at all the numerous peace conferences in 1994 in Geneva, Austria and Norway, where CRO and Krajina tried to reach some agreement, "helped" by the EU politicos (while the Operation Storm was being prepared). The Krajina delegation would come to Belgrade each time, he would remain at the hotel, the military part of the delegation would go to the YU General Staff HQ (to Gen. Perisic) and the civilian part to Milosevic's cabinet, to be briefed and instructed to stall and obstruct the negotiations. But in his written statement the witness was miraculously present at all those briefings: "I would read out loud the agenda, and then the representative of the YU Govt. would instruct us..." The explanation of the discrepancy by the witness? "I have insisted this part to be expunged from the statement, because I have never said that." Milosevic: "Then, why this is still in your statement?" Witness: "You know, people make mistakes..."

It was getting worse all the time: the President of SAO Krajina Goran Hadzic phoned YU President Lilic to consult during the conference in Geneva - but alas, Goran Hadzic was never part of the delegation at this particular conference! The witness was truthful once more: "Well, I could be wrong, maybe he wasn't there, I spoke relying on my memory..." Milosevic: "Is it true that the line of separation had been agreed then?" Witness: "Yes." Milosevic: "So, it is not true that nothing ever was agreed and that they got the instructions not to agree on anything?" Witness: "Well, yes... but that was not implemented later!"

When testifying about another conference, the witness described how Goran Hadzic, addressed as "Mr President" in the hotel lobby by "the US Ambassador and some other Ambassadors, I think Canadian", responded that he's merely "a dispatcher", the innuendo being he was just delivering messages from a potent player behind - Milosevic. The same lobby talk, described in the written statement, was a one-to-one with the witness, the wretched Hadzic feeling his inadequacy in all that international whirlwind conferencing, sincerely complained to the attentive, sympathetic interpreter that he used to be "just a simple warehouse manager" before the war, i.e. dispatching goods! Now, that's a creative story twisting.

The icing on the cake came at the end: Milosevic faced the witness with his last 4 years in Belgrade: jumping companies, first as an employee then as a founder, debts, frauds cum police record (one of his ventures was a FIVE STAR Co. selling time-sharing deals for fictitious apartments in Spain and Malta, collecting money in advance and then disappearing). The witness finished his YU career by running away with just one suitcase, leaving behind his wealth "earned" in those few years (house, Mercedes, Porsche...)

Then came the confused decisions by May, first to exhibit the written statement of this witness under seal "because his new identity could be revealed", but then the troika conferred a bit, realizing that such a decision might look bad in their attempt to appear as doing justice, so they decided after all to exhibit it without seal, but first to leave out these identity-revealing parts. I hope those numerous discrepancies will not be left out as well.

Lazarevic has been already given a new identity and is working as a Security Supervisor at an international airport somewhere. Who is then "Slobodan Lazarevic"? This person exists no more.

And, I almost forgot to mention the cheap trick the Prosecution has already used before: the sudden switching from protected to unprotected status. Lazarevic figured as C-001 until his first day at the courtroom. Why the change? Officially, he needs no protection now that he has changed his name and has been relocated. Real reason? To make data collecting more difficult for the Defence. (The same trick was applied for the next witness who started his testimony before this break, Candic - originally C-034). The trick obviously didn't work for Lazarevic: he exposed the falsity of his testimony by overdoing it. Liars often talk too long and add too many details, to quote Prof. Gil-White.