Would you believe, Monday and Tuesday there were another two witnesses for Dubrovnik! The first one was Petar Kriste, former Croatian Minister of Defence and subsequently Minister of Trade, who finished Tuesday, and Ivo Simunovic, a Dubrovnik businessman and wartime deputy of the city's defence commander (the latter started to testify today and is to continue Wednesday). To include more Dubrovnik witnesses is getting increasingly counterproductive, because the whole scheme of the Croats of planning and provoking war is coming out in each its dirty detail. And Milosevic was more than good (for Simunovic he was at its best), while Tapuskovic drove May crazy for Kriste.

Kriste is a meek man, one of those who stumbled into politics for reasons unknown, unless it’s the necessity of political sharks to have fumbling, Alice-in-Wonderland underlings who are needed to honestly say 'I know nothing of it'. He actually explained some actions by General Spegelj and Tudjman saying they 'wanted to avoid war and conflicts with the JNA'! The notorious Spegelj, who is on tape planning individual killings of the JNA officers at their homes way before the war and who later on submitted an official plan to the Government to remove the JNA from CRO. And equally notorious Tudjman, who is on tape giving the speech on the Ban Jelacic Square in Zagreb in May 1992 saying 'there would have been no war if we hadn't wanted it'. Both tapes were already played in the courtroom months ago, but Kriste wasn't doing his homework. When asked about Spegelj by Milosevic, Kriste said that his plan 'was never officially accepted'. Milosevic quipped: "But it was carried out." Kriste blurted: "Well, yes, some army barracks were blocked and taken over, but it was the only way for us to obtain weapons." When asked about Tudjman by Tapuskovic, Kriste actually said that he did not know 'what was Tudjman saying in 1992' (?!). As his Minister of something, he was most probably at that square, more like it.

What did Kriste say in his examination-in-chief that justified his being summoned? I couldn't pinpoint anything significant. Maybe it was his answer to the question from Uertz-Retzlaff: "Why, then, was Dubrovnik attacked?", when he rehashed the good ole Greater Serbia slander. Or maybe his contribution was a new angle, a historical claim by the Serbs over Dubrovnik, which they called 'Serbian Athens'? Or was it quoting from the book by General Kadijevic, the former Federal Chief of Staff, about the secured lines of withdrawing the JNA, which the eager Kriste interpreted as the lines of attack and the planned lines of political division? Uertz-Retzlaff introduced the book as the exhibit, proving how desperate the Prosecution is. Even May was exasperated by that and wanted to know whether he had any knowledge other than that book about all this being a part of some plan. When Kriste started to mumble that 'this is all well known, the abolishing of the autonomy of Kosovo…', May actually said: "These are all parts of the general knowledge and of what you have subsequently concluded. But, do you have any specific knowledge, proofs, reports…?" Poor Kriste had to say: "There were no such proofs, we have just discussed all that at the Cabinet meetings…"

Everything else that he said has brought more damage than benefit to the Croatian cause. For instance, he testified that he came to Dubrovnik before the fighting started, together with two Croatian MPs, and they brought an articulate truck full of mines and explosives. Later during the cross-examination Milosevic put to him this has been used to mine all the access roads from Montenegro, way before any clashes began. Kriste also testified about his own and other Croatian politicians' numerous comings and goings to and from Dubrovnik before and during the battle (he was in Mesic's famous propaganda convoy of ships). All those politicians, Kriste included, took part at one time or another in negotiations with the JNA about its withdrawal from Split and about Dubrovnik ceasefire, port de-blocking and reparations of water and electricity supply. He declared that the 'first skirmishes were on the eastern line towards Herceg Novi' (and what about the official version that there were no such things, only a handful of attacked defenders inside the town?). When he first came (with the truckload of explosives), he said he found some 300 defenders. And the ex-Mayor Poljanic testified there were merely 50. Kriste, not doing your homework again!

His strong point should have been his eyewitness testimony of the infamous attack of 6 December ('the greatest tragedy in the 2000-year history', as Poljanic described it). Yes, our Kriste-in-and-out was again in Dubrovnik on that significant day, and watched 'the heavy shelling' from the roof terrace of his hotel 'Argentina' . He gave to the Prosecution an amateur video, made by the receptionist of the hotel and few moments of it were shown in the courtroom. Again, more damage to the cause than benefit: no heavy shelling, only few mild 'poufs' near the town ramparts, looking more like firecrackers, and some of them definitely going upwards; a small black fire was burning near the car park; added to this footage were few frames taken from the Montenegrin TV, showing a JNA officer, claiming all this is a set-up, explaining how mines were placed into holes much earlier and then activated - it really looked that way. Miserable, Uertz-Retzlaff complained that what was shown is just a small part of the whole footage and asked the witness: "Were the shells' incoming trail visible on the original whole tape?" Kriste answered: "Yes." Hildegard then pleaded with the judges: "Your honours, that was not seen here in the courtroom, but if you yourselves take a look at the whole tape, you'll be able to see it." How do you like that!? Hildegard proceeded to 'fortify' her case: "We have heard that the mines were activated. Was that true?" Kriste, naturally, answered in the negative. Ditto when she asked him whether rubbers were burned. But, where did she find that, it was not mentioned on the tape? Although, that smouldering little flame surely looked like one burned tyre.

Kriste managed to mention that the next day another negotiations with the JNA took place, ceasefire had been agreed and two JNA officers with a cameraman were sent to the city to film the alleged damage. There were no more fights, 'only sporadic incidents' and in the summer of 1992 JNA started withdrawal, which was completed in October.

Then Milosevic cross-examined and Kriste was exposed as a flabby, misinformed dunce. He claimed that the Serbs in CRO 'never lost anything' with the 'change of the wording in the Constitution'. To the question of unlawful nationality-based dismissals from jobs, he stated 'the Serbs were over-represented' and 'some changes were necessary'. His personal history showed him to be embittered Croatian nationalist in 1972, 'prevented to take his Doctor's thesis'. But, when Milosevic asked whether he was prevented by the Serbs or by the Croatian police, Kriste had to consent in was the police to be blamed. [This notorious 'Croatian Spring' or 'Maspok' was an early nationalist uprising mostly among Croatian intellectuals, but Tito swiftly and rudely suppressed it; Tudjman and Mesic, among others, were imprisoned.] Even here, silly Kriste tried to justify: 'Maspok was not nationalistic, but just wanted Croatia to be equal to others…' Ah, Kriste, Kriste, and I remember how Maspok members managed to infiltrate into some municipalities and temporarily took over, Vukovar was one such municipality, and the first thing they did was to form lists of all employees of all the companies and the lists of schoolchildren by their nationalities! Before that, many didn't even know which nationality they belong to!

The ultimate proof of how much of a political ninny he was Kriste gave when he tried to disentangle himself from two short conversations he had with Tudjman and Gojko Susak. Obviously, nobody was telling him anything, although he was a Minister of Defence for few months (Milosevic ridiculed him that he became a civilian Minister of Defence to promote new democratic orientation of CRO, as he himself boasted, but that democracy had been short-lived, because he had been promptly replaced by Spegelj). So, the poor man had to gather information in passing brief one-liner conversations in corridors and on stairs. Thus he once met Tudjman in 1989, who told him that he considered the Muslims actually as being the Croats and that the eastern border of CRO should be on the river Drina [all of the Bosnia&Herzegovina included]. But Kriste promptly explained these were just 'historical - philosophical meditations', which were never acted upon. Milosevic instructed him of the well-documented intrusions of Croatian ZNG units into B&H, the first such being the notorious Sjekovac case (Bosanski Brod municipality on the Sava river), when the whole Serb village was killed; there were no armed incidents before that in the whole Bosnia & Herzegovina. Milosevic then produced the Croatian magazine NACIONAL dated 3 Dec. 2002 with the big interview by Kriste and quoted: 'Tudjman as early as 1989 planned the border on the Drina'! I can imagine how it is for the former Tudjman collaborators in CRO: they have to do the washing in public, criticizing Tudjman (only up to the point, not touching his role as the 'father of the nation'). Kriste did this rather late, only a month ago. More funny quotations from the interview followed, all opposing the testimony just given, with mocking of the type 'you must have told all that to Tudjman, being his close friend and collaborator and as such having the guts to warn him of being wrong'. Kriste squirmed that 'it was not Tudjman's politics and practice, it was just one conversation we had'; Milosevic pressed with another quotation 'right here you said it was his politics and you found fault with that'; Kriste just took a sip of water and kept quiet. The other staircase-conversation was with Susak; Kriste asked him how come he's in such a good mood, and Susak answered he had just came from the meeting with Stari=Old Man [Tudjman tried desperately to emulate Tito in everything, he even adopted his nickname!]; and the annexation of Herzegovina to CRO had been decided. Kriste testified about that conversation in order to connect it with the meeting Tudjman - Milosevic in Karadjordjevo, where they allegedly agreed the partition of B&H. But, when questioned, Kriste had to admit these were only rumours and when more quotations from the interview were read, would you believe that May asked whether Milosevic would like to introduce it as evidence and it was admitted! As I said before, the 'judges' are in serious trouble with hearsay: they have to admit everything now.

And Dubrovnik? It was nearly forgotten, since Kriste single-handedly ruined his testimony by stating damning things for his own part. Even when Milosevic asked few questions regarding the letter of General Kadijevic to Lord Carrington, Kriste couldn't stop being foolish: of course, all that the General claimed was untrue, but anyway 'we had to use all possible means, even to take over that Army installation in Kupari'. Milosevic also stated the obvious, namely that Cavtat was not attacked nor damaged at all, since nobody from there was shooting, and Kriste had to agree. He also had to agree when Milosevic put to him that the first quantities of ammo arrived at the Dubrovnik airport on 24 Jan. 1991, that the Crisis Staff was established in September, and the plans for minefields were executed in August, all this well before any 'attacks'. Kriste's only explanations were 'it was our territory', 'we had to defend ourselves', 'we knew we would be attacked'. When faced with some previous statements from Croatian witnesses re deployment of weaponry and soldiers in the town, his only defence was 'impossible'. Milosevic asked what about Ivanica on 24 Sept. in the territory of B&H, was it razed to the ground by the Serbs perhaps? Kriste started stuttering seriously.

But, when Tapuskovic got his time as amicus curiae, Kriste was demolished. Tapuskovic presented the written statement of the Croatian General Nojko Marinovic, who was announced as yet another witness re Dubrovnik, but who perhaps will not testify after all. Marinovic was the former JNA officer who deserted from the position of Trebinje garrison Commander and came to Dubrovnik to organize things well in advance and became the defence commander of the town. This whole statement is one big damage to the Croatian side; perhaps this guy is plain stupid or just boastful. Whichever he is, Tapuskovic quoted just few paragraphs and it destroyed Kriste. The Croatian delegations never really negotiated truce with the JNA, as the naïve Kriste claimed, but 'our strategy was always just to gain time, in order to smuggle in additional men and weapons during the ceasefire', as Marinovic wrote. May tried to save the witness: 'maybe that was something that only the General was involved in', but Tapuskovic held forth: "Marinovic was the defence commander, Krste came to negotiate for the Croatian Government." Re the number of soldiers in the town at the very beginning, it was not 50 as Poljanic said, nor 300 as Kriste testified, but 680 as Marinovic wrote. Tapuskovic established that Marinovic treated Kriste as he would mushrooms: kept him in the dark and… never told him any specifics before the negotiations, only the most general notions ('our forces are inferior'). He didn't inform the negotiator about his forces deployed at the border with Montenegro, about cannons at the town hotels, buildings and fortresses (all specified in his statement). May again tried to stop that embarrassment, but Tapuskovic said: "Your Honours, Marinovic may not testify at all and I believe all this has to interest you." May said: "Mr Tapuskovic, the time is limited. The accused asked questions for more than 2 hours, you have used up already 20 minutes…" Tapuskovic just proceeded, I couldn't believe the nerve of the man: "You have testified you brought a truckload of mines and explosives; did Marinovic tell you he used all that to mine the roads to Montenegro?" He quoted from Marinovic's statement that 'the artillery was mainly directed at Mt. Srdj'. May went crazy: "Do you claim that Dubrovnik was not shelled? Let's stick to what this witness saw, he was just an observer." Tapuskovic calmly responded he wasn't claiming anything, but just asking the witness precisely that. Tapuskovic said that he himself was in Dubrovnik may times, since Kriste was at the terrace of the 'Argentina' hotel with a good view of Srdj, 'did you see that the artillery shelled Srdj from Dubrovnik?' Kriste denied he saw that. [Remember this; the next witness will show a video explaining it and indirectly confirming Marinovic's statement.]

Uertz-Retzlaff got a chance to patch up the damage, but her additional questions twirled around those two stupid corridor-conversations with Tudjman and Susak; she made Kriste state that he 'was not a close collaborator' of Tudjman (?!). And she even made him explain the second passing conversation with Susak, this time the latter being sour-faced, and explaining it by the current bad relations with the Muslims; when the well-meaning Kriste asked was there anything that could be done to improve that, the mean Susak answered that one unit is now on the move from Prozor and 'there will be no prisoners'. The clever Kriste thereby concluded that 'the escalation is on the way'. I really don't understand why the Prosecution had to pull out such a conversation, quoting these damning things by leading Croatian officials. Perhaps to prove that Kriste 'was not a close collaborator' of Tudjman? Who cares?

The second of the last two witnesses for Dubrovnik, Ivo Simunovic, is the total opposite to meek Kriste: a former Managing Director of a company, then a private businessman (an occupation bordering on gangster in all of the ex-YU), a reserve officer of the JNA and a wartime deputy defence commander of Dubrovnik. He began testifying on Tuesday and finished on Wednesday, a lot less confident and cocky than when he started, causing headache to the Prosecution. The apple of discord was a witness/non-witness, the Croatian General Nojko Marinovic (defence commander of Dubrovnik) and his written statement amply quoted by Milosevic and Tapuskovic.

Simunovic is clearly quite common, rude person, who tries hard to sell himself as refined. Yet, his rudeness and his vulgar type of chauvinism seeped through while he was asked about the Serbs: he explained twice how he regards them as 'the Croats of another religion'; when a Serb name was mentioned as the one who gave a statement to the Prosecution, he would dismiss it with a scorn of the type 'this one can not be trusted'. Simunovic was gradually becoming so enraged that he started to address Milosevic as 'Mister Accused', acted out fits of forced laughter and tried to stop by himself the line of questioning that was cornering him, so that May had to sharply reprimand him.

Simunovic started merrily enough, describing the 'defence strategy' of Dubrovnik under the command of Marinovic, a JNA defector from Trebinje, 'a Croat by his nationality', as the witness felt the need to add. He stated the defenders had 300 men, 3 faulty cannons and some hand guns, while the JNA had up to 8,000 men, artillery, tanks, warships, airplanes…, 'an intimidating force, but we were not to be intimidated easily'. His thesis was that the JNA was not a good army and that's why Dubrovnik was not conquered. It took them some 15 days to come through from the Herzegovina direction and more than 20 from the Montenegro direction, to join forces and to start attacking the town itself, i.e. the Mount Srdj. Simunovic said Srdj was heavily shelled by cannons (in clear contradiction to what was seen on the video shown by Kriste the day before: mere firecrackers). This Srdj is a crucial point: the only rise in the area never conquered by the JNA. Even Nice, during his examination-in-chief, said that the 'Mt. Srdj remained unconquered, with good luck and various other circumstances'. That's just the point: the JNA never wanted to conquer it, it is too close to the Old Town and the Croats themselves shelled Srdj, as Tapuskovic quoted from the statement of General Marinovic!

So far, Simunovic calmly described their civilian casualties, his own participation in the negotiations with the JNA, the famous JNA attack on 6 December, the subsequent agreement to send in 2 JNA officers and a cameraman to film the alleged damage and his own escorting them around the town. Then, a rather long piece of video was shown (some 15 minutes), capturing the Old Town damage already known, showing also those 2 JNA officers in plain clothes, taking notes all the time in their little booklets ('people didn't know who they were, we had to take care of their safety'), the witness himself in uniform, looking like a sausage, the JNA cameraman while filming… and then, the most telling frame: the Minceta tower and just above it, Mount Srdj. You have to picture this: a smallish mountain, more a larger rock, denuded of greenery, with an ancient fortress on top, and the Old Town literally plastered to its base. And now imagine the shelling going on between Srdj and the JNA positions, across the Old Town. It is a wander that the Old Town was damaged so slightly with all that going on. Until I saw that video, I have simply forgotten the actual position of Srdj in relation to the Old Town: they are glued together. So, the Croatian side can claim all it wants that there were no forces within the Old Town. Maybe it's true, but they were on Srdj all the time, shooting at the JNA. Another important fact: on the video the various fragments of shells were shown: they were all small-calibre mortar shells, you know, the ones with a star-shaped tail, like the feathers on an arrow at the end (stabilizers I think it's called), only few centimetres in diameter. The damages shown were consistent with that: it would most certainly look quite different if the heavy cannons did hit those railings, ramparts, tiles and pavement slabs. And you should have heard the rage of Simunovic when Tapuskovic quoted an EU observer, describing ricocheted shells in another similar situation later on! The famous under-the-ramparts car park was shown, too, all the while with the running comment of the witness how 'as you can see, the cannon shells fell there and all the cars were burnt'. Well, I looked hard, and no, there were no shell damage to be seen at all.

After 15 minutes of that telling video, Nice asked few more rhetoric questions of the type 'were there soldiers in the Old Town?', to which it was duly answered 'no', Robinson wanted to have some 'proofs that the town is actually protected by UNESCO' (the first time that I heard Robinson to ask a wool-gathering question) and the witness was handed over to Milosevic.

He wanted to know how come the JNA never conquered Dubrovnik, with all that power, and Simunovic arrogantly reiterated his belief in their poor quality: 'they had the power, but no courage'. Milosevic then put to him the well-known fact of the existence of the order by General Kadijevic that Dubrovnik is notto be conquered. Nevertheless, the witness continued to peddle his impressions as testimony. When questioned on the basis of what proof Serbia and Milosevic personally could be connected with the clashes between the Croatian paramilitaries and the JNA, the witness actually described how Milosevic used to come to Dubrovnik for his summer holidays and once at the restaurant 'Sarajevo' in 1989 he had the Army security protecting him! So, there you have it: the plot between Milosevic and the JNA! Milosevic explained he did regularly visit Dubrovnik, but was never protected by anybody, on the contrary he used to walk about the streets of Dubrovnik alone with his family and his Dubrovnik friends. Then he asked why Simunovic declared in his statement that the Serbs were over-represented in Croatia and in the Dubrovnik local power structures, and the answer was that he was 'just trying to explain the general situation to the investigators' and besides, he considers them 'to be the Croats, but of another religion'. This signified the beginning of a long string of documents that Milosevic submitted, all issued by CRO (police records and reports, customs documents, official letters, sworn statements of judges and officials); they were all very descriptive of the general situation in Dubrovnik way before any hostilities began. There were orders to demolish 'illegally built houses, but especially those of the Serbs', there were reports of houses demolished by bombs, of wounded inhabitants and released criminals incorporated in the Croatian armed forces. The witness tried to dismiss the statement by the local judge Dragan Gajic ('knowing him, I shouldn't say his reports could be accurate' - i.e. the guy is a Serb - or rather 'a Croat of another religion'). But here May stepped in and said the statement of Gajic has been already introduced as evidence. The witness retreated, but clumsily: "We were particularly trying not to violate the rights of the loyal citizens… of all the citizens of Croatia which are of another religions." Milosevic took the opportunity: "Mr Simunovic, you know very well that in those 10 years only in Serbia care was taken not to violate the rights of the citizens of other nationalities". There were more reports of 'sniper practice shooting' for which a permission from the police had been requested, to which Simunovic answered all is legit, because there were many hunters in the area (!?). Shooting rabbits with a sniper gun? Then followed documents telling about the systematic militarization of the Dubrovnik area, starting in February 1991: establishment of the Crisis Staff, calling out of the reserve police force and activation of TO. Simunovic tried to deny, saying this was done only in August and that he has 'no time to read the document now ant to burden the court'. Can you believe that May stepped in, saying 'just a moment' and ordering the witness to read the document and 'tell us what it is'! (This day was significant for that, too, because Robinson as well as Kwon, on the other hand, asked silly questions, the latter being recorded to ask whether "Gregoric was another name of Tudjman?' - he saw the name of the Croatian Prime Minister on one of the documents and he was patiently instructed these two are two different people and functions). Scolded that way by the judge, the witness tried to dismiss these Croatian documents by saying this was 'normal procedure' and that the reserve was that of the police, its special forces ZNG, and not TO, which were the armed forces. This is more than significant, because here the witness explains ZNG [Zbor narodne garde=National Guard Corps] as some kind of police force, but later on, when it suits him better, he speaks of them as the 'regular armed forces of Croatia'. Which is it?

So, Milosevic concluded sardonically, 'judging by the evidence, it seems that all didn't start with the alleged clashes with the Army, but with much earlier militarization', and he produced few more Croatian documents: ammo and weapons requisition lists, official customs note on imports, official complaints by the Staff Commander on the chaos in weapons procuring, individual weapons receipts… Simunovic went ballistic: "Mister Accused, I'd like to ask you not to present some evidence here, because this is not what this trial is about…" And May again stepped in heavily: "Mr Simunovic, it is ours to determine what is evidence." Witness kowtowed: "I'm sorry…I'll try to explain to you. This is nothing strange that the equipment has been issued… All airports have security services…I can't comment these reports…" Milosevic: "An automatic rifle and 200 rounds per person?!" May: "I believe we shall admit these documents." Wow! Is it due process emerging? Or is it just another whitewashing?

And the next document submitted by Milosevic was a bombshell: an Order by the Croatian Ministry of Defence of 30 July and 1 Aug 1991 to the local defence staffs to block all the JNA facilities, to disconnect electricity, water supply and telephones. Pretty much the same as the telegram-order that I have mentioned before when writing about the Stakic case, only that the wording of the Bosnian authorities was a bit more reckless: here the Croats avoided the words 'launch combat activities'. Simunovic tried to wiggle as he did once before, when May helped him by stating he's here to answer only about Dubrovnik: "Excuse me, does this apply to Dubrovnik?" Milosevic: "Of course this applies to Dubrovnik as well." So, Simunovic started to name some JNA facilities, said he's not aware whether they were blocked and disconnected, but that he does not see 'anything negative in this document', since this was only meant for the 'purpose of defence'. Milosevic: "Defence against whom, when you have not even been attacked?" Simunovic: "Well, we in Dubrovnik have not been." [Simunovic surely wanted to repeat his story from the examination-in-chief how they were looking at the events in Slovenia and therefore prepared themselves, but this would probably sound like a confirmation of the militarization, so he stopped.] Milosevic: "Thank you very much."

Another 2 documents submitted: an official letter from the Crisis Staff of Dubrovnik, putting at the disposal of the 116th ZNG Brigade all its men and equipment; and a detailed drawing of mine-fields network on the roads by the Montenegrin border. In his attempt to dismiss that, Simunovic now switched the nature of the ZNG, turning them to the 'armed forces of the Republic of Croatia', forgetting what he said only half an hour ago. According to him, it was 'normal and nothing terrible'. Except perhaps that the alleged police unit suddenly became an army. And as Milosevic put it: "Except that all this was happening in June, when you were not in any danger, as you yourselves just said." Please, note later when Tapuskovic questioned the total number of armed men, the police is again excluded, in order to explain the discrepancy with the statement of General Marinovic! As to the minefields, Simunovic tried to make Vitaljina, the mined village at Prevlaka peninsula, to be some 5-6 km away from Montenegro, so Milosevic had to remind him that 'the whole Prevlaka is not 5-6 km long.'

Then, Milosevic turned to the initial border incidents which were a provocation against the JNA. The witness vehemently denied. Milosevic introduced all those previously admitted statements of the Prosecuiton's witnesses and some ITN reports, describing the heavy weapons deployment in the town. The witness denied, denied, denied. Milosevic pointed out the discrepancies between the testimonies of Poljanic and Simunovic re the dates and the alleged number of shells, and finally introduced the General Nojko Marinovic's statement, quoting from it and asking the witness how come there are so many discrepancies, when 'you were his deputy'. Simunovic toiled among police and armed forces men and various types of artillery that he tried to represent as machine-guns (when the fact that Milosevic has finished the artillery military school emerged, and the witness actually praised his command of the topic!). But, despite the apparently friendly atmosphere, there remained a lingering impression that General Marinovic's spectre will haunt this procedure further.

May announced Milosevic will have another 25 minutes tomorrow for this witness and then they discussed the mountains of documents (the link that Gogol already provided). What I remembered the most was the irony of Milosevic's commentary: "I have no illusions, I just want this to be said for the record as the indicator of the equality of both sides, on which you so much insist." He also told the judges that their 'former friend Wladimiroff' continues to abuse his previous presence in these rooms, indicating his recent interview to WSJ. Gogol, can you pls check?

The next day, Milosevic and Simunovic were outwitting one another some more by trying to be smart and nonchalant, but the last quip by Milosevic was a nice cue for Tapuskovic: "You are talking about Srdj which was left empty at one moment, but the JNA have not conquered it after all. Is it not telling you they didn't even want to conquer it?"

Tapuskovic began by addressing the judges, reminding May of his inappropriate remark of whether Tapuskovic denied Dubrovnik was shelled, which is entirely for them to discuss and decide and of his actual task to help them do that. Then he reintroduced the crucial statement of General Nojko Marinovic. The great upheaval happened in the courtroom, maps and copies of the statement started to circulate, and when finally everyone had his copy, Tapuskovic quoted and quoted, and the witness practically never answered anything, just got more and more nervous. Check one of those quotations: "We had to direct our fire towards our own positions on Srdj, to prevent the JNA from conquering it. We ordered our men to hide within underground rooms." Particularly waxing for Simunovic was the quotation of the statement by the EU observer, one Paul Davis, about the incident when the Croats fired at the JNA position, the shells ricocheted into the harbour and some boats got burned. For Simunovic, all that was 'ridiculous". The statement was submitted. Tapuskovic returned to Marinovic statement, according to which 75 km of roads had been mined well before the fights. The witness jumped at Tapuskovic: "Yes, but not one of your vehicles was damaged!" Tapuskovic: "My vehicles?!" Simunovic: "Well, you are representing this other side…" Tapuskovic: "I'm not representing anybody, just helping the court." Tapuskovic ended by putting to the witness that 6 tanks actually were destroyed and many JNA soldiers killed, which Simunovic proudly confirmed.

Then, Nice got his redirect questioning, which started by his asking May to grant him few minutes of private session! Problems with General who is refusing to come, no doubt. When they came back, May stated that 'we usually do not admit statements', but this one has been used and claimed to contradict today's witness. He went on to say that 'we do not agree with the suggestion of Mr Kay to admit just its parts, which would additionally complicate things. Therefore we shall admit this statement, and we still advise to summon this witness after all.' What do you think of that? Nice used his half hour time completely in the attempt to smooth the discrepancies and he practically forced his witness to admit he agrees and accepts the data re men, weapons and their deployment as given by the General, and not his own, previously given data. Finishing this, he stated all's well and that he 'can not understand the cross-examination, claiming there were shooting from the Old Town, and as far as I can see, that was impossible'. Nice, this is not very nice, this is imputation: nothing like that was said, there were only some statements quoted. And if such a conclusion can be drawn out of them, who is to be blamed? 'Mister Accused'?!

The whole shebang ended in Robinson's solemnity: 'The Trial Chamber encourages you to try your best to make this witness come and testify after all.' And 'it is important to present evidence about the UNESCO protection of Dubrovnik'.