Poznata britanska novinarka "Tajmsa" Iv En Prentis rekla je danas da joj je Dejvid Oven "prije pet-šest mjeseci potvrdio da ima dokaze da su masakr na Markalama u avgustu 1995. godine počinili muslimani".
Iv En Prentis, dugogodišnji dopisnik "Tajmsa" sa Balkana, kao drugi dokaz navela je da su eksperti britanskog vojnog časopisa "DŽejn difens", čiji su forenzičari vršili uviđaj na Markalama, nedvosmisleno pokazali da je eksploziv postavljen ispod tezgi.
Prentisa navodi da joj je jedan zapadni diplomata, koji je u to vrijeme bio u Sarajevu, rekao 1999. godine da je uvjeren da je muslimansko rukovodstvo postavilo bombu. On je vidio izvještaj UN o incidentu, koji bez ikakvih rezervi okrivljuje muslimane, ali kao diplomata nije mogao da iznese ovu informaciju.
Zapadni diplomata joj je rekao da ujutro kada se dogodila eksplozija nekim ljudima rečeno da "nije baš zgodan dan da idu na pijacu".
"Toga dana nije bilo ni granatiranja sa srpskih pozicija, a rane su bile uglavnom ispod pojasa, kao da je bomba eksplodirala na mjestu", navodi Prentisova riječi ovog neimenovanog diplomate. Diplomata je rekao da je drugi znak da je muslimanska vlada bila odgovorna taj što su državni mediji "s kamerama bili na mjestu u roku od nekoliko sekundi".
Prentisova navodi da portparol vojnog časopisa "DŽejns difens vikli" Pol Biver ima dokaze da su UN bile ohrabrivane da prekinu svoju istragu o masakru.
Biver je rekao da mu je jedan od pripadnika britanskih vojnih ATO /oficir stručnjak za eksplozive/ tvrdio da su izvještaji UN snaga bili zataškani, jer su inkriminisali Armiju BiH. "Vojnici NATO pri snagama UN bili su uvjereni da Srbi nisu ispalili sudbonosnu granatu, koja je pobila i ranila toliko ljudi", rekao je ovaj oficir.
Tajms - Markale
-
DonDavudes
- Posts: 814
- Joined: 09/12/2003 00:00
- Location: sarajevo
#2
daj banujte ovog majmuna!!! 
ovo prevazilazi sve granice
ovo prevazilazi sve granice
-
Glumica
- Posts: 590
- Joined: 15/03/2002 00:00
- Location: Sarajevo
#6
ja ne znam sa cim se banjaluka sam u sebi bori, ali nesto u njemu ocito urla tako jako, da mora i ovim putem da se odupire i pokusa to nadglasati... sta je to banjaluka sto tebe stvarno boli? kome pokusavas dokazati sta?
ja ovo ne shvatam kao provokaciju uopste... ali shvatam da toj osobi nije lako uopste...
ja ovo ne shvatam kao provokaciju uopste... ali shvatam da toj osobi nije lako uopste...
-
weasel
- Posts: 284
- Joined: 07/02/2003 00:00
#7
jos da je on sam? Pa bar 90% vjeruje da su Bosnjaci sami sebe pobili.Cujem saputanje i za Tuzlu.A i Srebrenica je jedan veliki blefGlumica wrote:ja ne znam sa cim se banjaluka sam u sebi bori, ali nesto u njemu ocito urla tako jako, da mora i ovim putem da se odupire i pokusa to nadglasati... sta je to banjaluka sto tebe stvarno boli? kome pokusavas dokazati sta?
ja ovo ne shvatam kao provokaciju uopste... ali shvatam da toj osobi nije lako uopste...
-
DonDavudes
- Posts: 814
- Joined: 09/12/2003 00:00
- Location: sarajevo
#9
ko zna, kravice, mozda ti je kolega iz kancelarije
mislim ti su najgori, kad s njima pricas puna usta multikulture, lijepo obuceni, ma istog trena bi ih u EU poslao
a cim ostanu sami odmah im kama u ocima zablista
ljigavi dvolicnjak, garant ovakve price ni po BL ne prosipa
mislim ti su najgori, kad s njima pricas puna usta multikulture, lijepo obuceni, ma istog trena bi ih u EU poslao
a cim ostanu sami odmah im kama u ocima zablista
ljigavi dvolicnjak, garant ovakve price ni po BL ne prosipa
-
BECHO
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: 03/02/2003 00:00
- Location: Zürich, CH
#10
Naravno, Srbi su na Kosovu sami sebi palili manastire da bi se optuzili *jadni* i *nevini* Albanci! Srbi i Zidovi su sami sebe poklali na Jasenovcu da bi optuzili Pavelica i NDH ustasku demagogogiju! Kako ovo *lepo* zvuci? Jel tako Banja Luka? 
-
korto_malteze
- Posts: 83
- Joined: 01/12/2002 00:00
#13
unaprijed se duboko izvinjavam svima zbog dužine dolepostavljenog teksta i zbog činjenice da je na engleskom (nadam se da će tekst ubrzo biti dostupan i na našem jeziku), ali mislim da je vrijedno pročitati ako razumijete engleski. evo i link za čitavu presudu
http://www.un.org/icty/galic/trialc/judgement/index.htm
nisam postirao ovaj citat zbog krebila koji je postavio temu, već zbog činjenice da je presuda tribunala galiću po prvi put raščistila sve dileme oko toga šta se na markalama desilo, odakle je granata došla, šta su rekli un-ovci, itd, itd. niko nikad tako studiozno nije predstavio istinu o masakru na markalama jednostavno zbog toga sto niko do ovog sudjenja nije uzeo u obzir sve tvrdnje, elemente, jasne cinjenice i zamućivanja istine, izvagao ih i utvrdio istinu. krebilima popt ovog gore to nije dovoljno niti ce ikada išta biti dovoljno. njima će uvijek biti bliža 'istina' štokakvih hohštaplera i novinara sumnjivog kredibiliteta, jer ne mogu prihvatiti da su pripadnici njihovog naroda činili ovakva zlodjela. ne treba ih kriviti, jer nije lako suočiti se sa zločinom spostvenog naroda. karl jaspers to lijepo
opisao.
. Direction of Fire
Sabljica measured the dimensions of the elliptical imprints caused by the explosion on the ground of Markale market to be 56 centimetres by 26 centimetres. Photographs and sketches tendered into evidence and depicting the crater and the imprints left by the explosion establish the elliptical shape of these imprints. From the dimensions of the ellipse, Sabljica derived the bearing of the mortar shell and concluded that it had been fired from a north north-eastern direction or at a bearing of approximately 18 degrees, with an accuracy of plus or minus 5 degrees. The Zecevic Ballistic Report does not report the dimensions of the imprints left on the ground but does point to a similar bearing of approximately north north-east. UN representatives (Grande, Hamill, Khan) found a similar bearing after examining the traces on the ground. The UN representative Dubant reported the dimensions of the imprints of the explosion but one of the dimensions of the ellipse is illegible. However, Dubant also established the same bearing as Sabljica, Zecevic, Hamill, Khan, and Grande. The Frebat 4 team, Verdy and Russell measured the bearing of the shell, but the UN Report only endorsed the conclusions reached by Hamill, Khan, Grande, and Dubant that the mortar shell had been fired from the direction north-northeast of Markale market, at a bearing of 18.5 to 23.6 degrees. The Chamber rejects the measurements of Frebat 4 team ( 620 mils) and Verdy (800-1000 mils) on the same basis as the UN report rejects them : they are inherently inaccurate and Verdy made a mathematical error. The measurements of Russell (450 mils) has been considered in the UN report as among the eight analysis done in a conventional manner. The Majority understands however that because in its conclusion, the UN Report (p. 12/46) adopted a bearing outside the range determined by Russell, it implicitly rejected that estimated bearing of 330-420 mils. Non-technical evidence in relation to the direction of fire of the mortar shell was also adduced. Suljic testified that he interviewed persons living along the shell’s estimated flight path, who told him that seconds before the Markale market incident, they heard a shell coming from the northeastern direction. The Majority of the Trial Chamber is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the 120 mm mortar shell that exploded in Markale market on 5 February 1994 was fired from the direction north northeast of the market or at a bearing of approximately 18 degrees.
ii. Range of Fire Related to the Angle of Descent
Following a variety of methods, several investigators and experts drew conclusions on the angle of descent of the mortar shell. By measurement and reconstruction of the impact site, and by interpretation of the shrapnel’s impact pattern, most experts were led to the conclusion that the angle of descent was close to 60 degrees.1676
The method of repositioning the tail fin in the tunnel and measurements on the tunnel after extraction of the tail fin have been challenged by Vilicic as unreliable. The Majority accepts that the removal of the tail-fin may have caused some disturbance to the shape of the tunnel. However, the shrapnel imprints recognized by experts as typical for an angle of descent of approximately 60 degrees, as well as the range calculated by Vilicic (55.6 to 62.5 degrees) based on measurements of the elliptical imprints by Sabljica, were not influenced by the disturbance of the tunnel and were consonant with the measurements performed by Zecevic, using a quadrant after having replaced the tailfin. The Majority notes that Zecevic has shown awareness of the possible disturbance of the tunnel and has testified that the lower part of the tunnel was relatively well preserved.
In its conclusions, the UN report rejected the measurements of the shell’s angle of descent (about 80 degrees) made on 5 February 1994 by Verdy who made a mathematical error, ignored the measures made by Russell (68-73 degrees) on the same day, and gives a range of 950 to 1,100 mils (53.4 to 61.9 degrees), which the report emphasised was determined on 11 February 1994.1677 The Majority understands that the UN Report endorsed the findings made by Khan and Hamill although it cautioned that on the basis of the condition of the crater it was not possible to estimate with any “acceptable degree of accuracy” the angle of descent. On this basis, the Majority rejects the measures of the shell’s angle of descent made by Verdy and Russell and accepts the range determined by Khan and Hamill, which is consistent with the results obtained from calculations based on measurements of earlier investigations.
The certain lower limit of the angle of descent is approximately 50 degrees, since at a lesser angle the shell would have collided with the surrounding buildings. On the basis of the evidence presented, the Majority finds that the shell’s angle of descent was approximately 60 degrees. Allowing for a margin of error of 5 degrees, the Majority finds that the angle of descent was not greater than 65 degrees.
The Defence claims that an exact angle of descent should be measured in order to determine whether the shell was fired from ABiH- or SRK-controlled territory. The Majority rejects this claim. Every measurement is by its very nature a measurement within a range. The more precise the measurement, the smaller the margin of error. The Majority considers that its finding as to the angle of decent are based not on one measurement method but on calculations based on the measurement of elliptical imprints, the interpretation of the shrapnel pattern by experts, and on other methods reviewed above. The Majority has also taken into consideration that measurements of a lesser precision were already adjusted to reflect the margin of error.
The UN report gives a range of 300 to 5,551 meters as the horizontal distance over which the mortar shell could have travelled. This stated range covers all possible angles of firing and charges.
The Majority accepts that from the angle of descent alone it is not possible to calculate the distance a shell travelled.1678 The number of charges (1 to 6) used in addition to the initial (0) charge progressively increase the distance a shell travels.1679
Thus a 120 mm mortar shell fired across a level field at an 0+1 charge at a steep angle (85°) and also landing at a steep angle (85.3 degrees) travels horizontally no more than 275 metres, whereas the same shell fired at an 0+6 charge at the same launch angle (85 degrees) and a similar angle of descent (86.2 degrees) travels more than 1,160 metres. If fired at a low angle (45 degrees) with a 0+1 charge the shell travels horizontally no more than 1,574 metres (and lands at around 47.3 degrees ), whereas the same shell fired at an 0+6 charge travels more than 6,400 meters (landing at around 55.6 degrees).1680
It was not until the trial stage that both Prosecution and Defence experts introduced into their analyses the relation between the tail-fin’s penetration into the ground of the market and the speed of the projectile at impact, an element ignored until then by any investigator or expert.
The experts’ reasoning is based upon the following. The depth of penetration of the tail-fin is indicative of the velocity of the shell upon impact. This velocity is of course related to the velocity of the shell at the moment it was fired1681. The velocity at firing depends on the number of increment charges used. As indicated above, the greater the velocity, the greater the distance travelled, where the shell’s launch angle is kept constant.
The mortar shell used in this case exploded on impact. The experts for both parties agree that the explosion creates a backwards thrust against the tail-fin. If the velocity of the shell, and therefore of the tail-fin, on impact had been 150 m/sec (taking the lowest figure presented to the Trial Chamber), the tail-fin would have just fallen to the ground. If the impact velocity was lesser, the tail -fin would have been propelled backwards. If the impact velocity had been greater, the tail-fin would have overcome the backwards thrust and continued forward.
In the present case, the tail-fin continued its trajectory in the forward direction at a speed reduced by 150 m/sec, but still sufficient to embed itself in the ground.1682
Zecevic estimated that the impact velocity of the shell must have been greater than 200 m/s for the tail-fin to have embedded itself at the depth he measured. In Zecevic’s opinion, such a velocity can only be achieved by a shell fired at a 0+4 charge or more. At an angle of descent of 65° the shell would have travelled more than 4.5 kilometres on an 0+4 charge. (As the Majority will explain below, even if, by taking the most favourable figures, an impact speed greater than 200 m/s could be achieved by the lower charge 0 + 3, this does not change the final conclusion.)
The Majority pauses here to note that Markale market is at an altitude of approximately 550 metres.1683 The confrontation line to the north-east of the market was at an altitude of some 400 metres higher. Continuing in the same direction past the confrontation line, the ground further rose to reach heights of up to 500 to 650 metres above the market at around 2-2. 5 kilometres past the line.
As discussed above, Vilicic at first stated that for the tail-fin to embed itself at the depth measured by Zecevic, the shell would have needed an impact velocity of 528.8 m/sec. This speed cannot be achieved by any known mortar. Vilicic based this calculation on the assumption that the ground of impact was of solid concrete for the entire depth of the tail-fin’s penetration. Confronted with evidence that the market had a top layer of 2 centimetres of asphalt resting on soil consisting of sand and stones,1684 Vilicic then reviewed his calculations and concluded that penetration of 20 cm by the tail -fin would require an impact velocity for the shell of 268.4 m/sec. A 120 mm mortar shell can achieve a speed of approximately 260 m/s if fired at an 0+6 charge and if the altitude of the impact site is 500 metres below the position from which the shell was fired.1685
In brief, both experts, basing themselves on a drop angle of 55 to 65 degrees, concluded that an 0+4 or greater charge would be required to attain the impact velocity necessary for the tail-fin to penetrate the ground to the extent it did. At the 65 degrees angle of descent (which is, according to the Majority, the maximum conceivable angle on the evidence), tables provided by both experts show that the horizontal distance the shell would have travelled comes close to 6,000 metres at charge 0+6 and more than 4,500 meters at charge 0+4.1686
It follows that the shell which exploded in Markale market travelled a distance considerably greater than 2,600 metres from the north-east direction, placing the position from which the shell was fired well within SRK-controlled territory.
Noting however that the Defence disputes the measure of the depth of penetration of the tail-fin in the ground, submitting that an error in that measure could lead to serious miscalculation of the range of fire, the Majority, out of an abundance of caution, will consider the possibility that the tail-fin penetrated the soil to a lesser depth than the one found by Zecevic and that the shell was fired with an 0+3 increment charge, and therefore that the shell travelled a shorter distance than the one determined above.
The Majority recalls briefly that on the day of the incident, Sabljica and Cavcic did not measure the depth of penetration of the tail-fin in the ground but measured a 9-centimetre deep crater. The day after the incident, Zecevic and his colleagues measured the depth of penetration of the tail-fin in the ground from the top asphalt layer to the bottom of the tunnel where the tail-fin had been embedded to be 200 to 250 mm, depending on the side of the hole measured. The UN representatives did not measure the depth of penetration of the tail-fin in the ground giving the reason that such a measurement should have been taken right after the tail-fin was removed from the ground of Markale market. However, Dubant noticed that during his crater examination conducted on 11 February 1994, the crater was still sharply defined and was 11 centimetres deep. There is no evidence in the Trial Record which casts doubt on the measurements made by the local investigative teams. The Majority is convinced that the crater caused by the explosion was approximately 9 centimetres deep and that the depth of the tunnel of the tail-fin and the depth of the crater were together 200-250 mm.
The Majority will allow that the shell which struck Markale market impacted on ground consisting of a mixture of soil and stones, thus ignoring the force that would have been required to overcome the higher level of resistance presented by a top layer of asphalt. This favours the Defence case. The Majority also uses the most conservative measurement of the depth of the tail-fin’s penetration, taking the length to be 10 cm. This, again, favours the Defence case.
To penetrate 10 cm of ground consisting of soil and stones, the tail-fin would need a post-explosion velocity of 57 m/sec.1687 This gives a shell impact velocity of 150+57=207 m/sec.
The firing velocity of a shell on an 0+3 charge is 211 m/s1688. The Majority understands from the evidence of the experts that the impact velocity of a shell fired over a level field is slightly less than its velocity at firing. A shell fired at the 0+3 charge will lose about 30 m/s of its velocity between firing and impact. However, where the altitude of the impact site is less than that of the firing site, the shell will also gain about 30 m/s from having a longer drop trajectory. As always, in choosing these figures1689 the Majority has interpreted the evidence in a fashion favourable to the Defence case.
A shell on an 0+3 charge fired over the height differential applicable in this case would have an impact velocity of around 211 m/s. This would be just sufficient for the tail-fin to embed itself to the stipulated depth. But it would also mean that, at a drop angle of 65 degrees, and taking into account a difference in altitude of 400 metres, the shell would have still travelled about 3.6 km from its point of origin to its point of impact. Once again, this places the point of origin well within SRK-controlled territory.
This further consideration assures the Majority that the experts’ findings are buffered by a large margin of safety. There is no doubt that, given the characteristics of the remains of the explosion of the 120 mm mortar shell at Markale market, the shell could not have been fired from any place on the ABiH side of the confrontation lines in a direction north-northeast of Markale market.
Finally, the Majority notes that a shell fired at the 0+2 charge1690 could not attain the required velocity over the given height differential for its tail-fin to penetrate the surface of Markale market to the measured extent.
iii. Non-technical Evidence in relation to the Source of Fire
The Majority also emphasises that non-technical evidence supports the finding that a heavy weapon was fired from the direction north-northeast of Markale market from SRK-controlled territory at the time of the incident. The Trial Chamber finds reliable the testimony of Witness AF who heard at the time of the incident the sound of a heavy weapon being fired from behind an SRK position, Spicasta Stijena, at Mrkovici. The fact that Witness AF was at his mother’s house in Sedrenik when he heard that sound and not at his place in Vratnik does not cast doubt on his ability to assert a direction. The Majority is convinced by the evidence in the Trial Record, which establishes that the noise made by a firing mortar can be used to determine the approximate direction of fire.
The Majority wishes to address the Defence’s contention that a possibility exists that the shell was fired from within territory controlled by the ABiH because certain units of the ABiH were psychologically capable of firing unto their own territory. The Defence argues that in doing so, these ABiH units may have sought to attract international sympathy for the Muslim population of Sarajevo. The Majority finds not only unreasonable that ABiH forces would have fired in this case on their own civilians but also contrary to the material facts proved.
The Majority finds that the mortar shell which exploded at Markale market on 5 February 1994 was fired from SRK-controlled territory.
h. Conclusion on Deliberateness of the Attack
Evidence in the Trial Record establishes that a target, such as Markale market, can be hit from a great distance with one shot if the area is pre-recorded. Niaz testified that in the four months preceding the incident at Markale market, about 10 to 12 mortar shells fell around Markale market and that most of them were of a 120 mm calibre and originated from the direction north-northeast of Sedrenik. The UNMOs who wanted to investigate these attacks were not allowed access to the northeast area of the city controlled by the SRK. After the Markale incident, Hamill visited an SRK representative positioned in the northeastern area of the city, Colonel Cvetkovic, who confirmed to him that there were a number of 120 mm mortars in Mrkovi ci and along the estimated direction of fire to the north-northeast of Markale.
The Majority is convinced that the mortar shell which struck Markale was fired deliberately at the market. That market drew large numbers of people. There was no reason to consider the market area as a military objective. Evidence was presented in relation to the status of the “December 22” building located by the market, which manufactured uniforms for the police and the army. It is unclear whether manufacturing was still on-going at the time of the incident but in any case it is not reasonable to consider that the employees of such a manufacturing plant would be considered legitimate targets.
In sum, the Majority finds beyond reasonable doubt that the 120 mm mortar shell fired at Markale market on 5 February 1994, which killed over 60 persons and wounded over 140 others, was deliberately fired from SRK-controlled territory.
http://www.un.org/icty/galic/trialc/judgement/index.htm
nisam postirao ovaj citat zbog krebila koji je postavio temu, već zbog činjenice da je presuda tribunala galiću po prvi put raščistila sve dileme oko toga šta se na markalama desilo, odakle je granata došla, šta su rekli un-ovci, itd, itd. niko nikad tako studiozno nije predstavio istinu o masakru na markalama jednostavno zbog toga sto niko do ovog sudjenja nije uzeo u obzir sve tvrdnje, elemente, jasne cinjenice i zamućivanja istine, izvagao ih i utvrdio istinu. krebilima popt ovog gore to nije dovoljno niti ce ikada išta biti dovoljno. njima će uvijek biti bliža 'istina' štokakvih hohštaplera i novinara sumnjivog kredibiliteta, jer ne mogu prihvatiti da su pripadnici njihovog naroda činili ovakva zlodjela. ne treba ih kriviti, jer nije lako suočiti se sa zločinom spostvenog naroda. karl jaspers to lijepo
opisao.
. Direction of Fire
Sabljica measured the dimensions of the elliptical imprints caused by the explosion on the ground of Markale market to be 56 centimetres by 26 centimetres. Photographs and sketches tendered into evidence and depicting the crater and the imprints left by the explosion establish the elliptical shape of these imprints. From the dimensions of the ellipse, Sabljica derived the bearing of the mortar shell and concluded that it had been fired from a north north-eastern direction or at a bearing of approximately 18 degrees, with an accuracy of plus or minus 5 degrees. The Zecevic Ballistic Report does not report the dimensions of the imprints left on the ground but does point to a similar bearing of approximately north north-east. UN representatives (Grande, Hamill, Khan) found a similar bearing after examining the traces on the ground. The UN representative Dubant reported the dimensions of the imprints of the explosion but one of the dimensions of the ellipse is illegible. However, Dubant also established the same bearing as Sabljica, Zecevic, Hamill, Khan, and Grande. The Frebat 4 team, Verdy and Russell measured the bearing of the shell, but the UN Report only endorsed the conclusions reached by Hamill, Khan, Grande, and Dubant that the mortar shell had been fired from the direction north-northeast of Markale market, at a bearing of 18.5 to 23.6 degrees. The Chamber rejects the measurements of Frebat 4 team ( 620 mils) and Verdy (800-1000 mils) on the same basis as the UN report rejects them : they are inherently inaccurate and Verdy made a mathematical error. The measurements of Russell (450 mils) has been considered in the UN report as among the eight analysis done in a conventional manner. The Majority understands however that because in its conclusion, the UN Report (p. 12/46) adopted a bearing outside the range determined by Russell, it implicitly rejected that estimated bearing of 330-420 mils. Non-technical evidence in relation to the direction of fire of the mortar shell was also adduced. Suljic testified that he interviewed persons living along the shell’s estimated flight path, who told him that seconds before the Markale market incident, they heard a shell coming from the northeastern direction. The Majority of the Trial Chamber is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the 120 mm mortar shell that exploded in Markale market on 5 February 1994 was fired from the direction north northeast of the market or at a bearing of approximately 18 degrees.
ii. Range of Fire Related to the Angle of Descent
Following a variety of methods, several investigators and experts drew conclusions on the angle of descent of the mortar shell. By measurement and reconstruction of the impact site, and by interpretation of the shrapnel’s impact pattern, most experts were led to the conclusion that the angle of descent was close to 60 degrees.1676
The method of repositioning the tail fin in the tunnel and measurements on the tunnel after extraction of the tail fin have been challenged by Vilicic as unreliable. The Majority accepts that the removal of the tail-fin may have caused some disturbance to the shape of the tunnel. However, the shrapnel imprints recognized by experts as typical for an angle of descent of approximately 60 degrees, as well as the range calculated by Vilicic (55.6 to 62.5 degrees) based on measurements of the elliptical imprints by Sabljica, were not influenced by the disturbance of the tunnel and were consonant with the measurements performed by Zecevic, using a quadrant after having replaced the tailfin. The Majority notes that Zecevic has shown awareness of the possible disturbance of the tunnel and has testified that the lower part of the tunnel was relatively well preserved.
In its conclusions, the UN report rejected the measurements of the shell’s angle of descent (about 80 degrees) made on 5 February 1994 by Verdy who made a mathematical error, ignored the measures made by Russell (68-73 degrees) on the same day, and gives a range of 950 to 1,100 mils (53.4 to 61.9 degrees), which the report emphasised was determined on 11 February 1994.1677 The Majority understands that the UN Report endorsed the findings made by Khan and Hamill although it cautioned that on the basis of the condition of the crater it was not possible to estimate with any “acceptable degree of accuracy” the angle of descent. On this basis, the Majority rejects the measures of the shell’s angle of descent made by Verdy and Russell and accepts the range determined by Khan and Hamill, which is consistent with the results obtained from calculations based on measurements of earlier investigations.
The certain lower limit of the angle of descent is approximately 50 degrees, since at a lesser angle the shell would have collided with the surrounding buildings. On the basis of the evidence presented, the Majority finds that the shell’s angle of descent was approximately 60 degrees. Allowing for a margin of error of 5 degrees, the Majority finds that the angle of descent was not greater than 65 degrees.
The Defence claims that an exact angle of descent should be measured in order to determine whether the shell was fired from ABiH- or SRK-controlled territory. The Majority rejects this claim. Every measurement is by its very nature a measurement within a range. The more precise the measurement, the smaller the margin of error. The Majority considers that its finding as to the angle of decent are based not on one measurement method but on calculations based on the measurement of elliptical imprints, the interpretation of the shrapnel pattern by experts, and on other methods reviewed above. The Majority has also taken into consideration that measurements of a lesser precision were already adjusted to reflect the margin of error.
The UN report gives a range of 300 to 5,551 meters as the horizontal distance over which the mortar shell could have travelled. This stated range covers all possible angles of firing and charges.
The Majority accepts that from the angle of descent alone it is not possible to calculate the distance a shell travelled.1678 The number of charges (1 to 6) used in addition to the initial (0) charge progressively increase the distance a shell travels.1679
Thus a 120 mm mortar shell fired across a level field at an 0+1 charge at a steep angle (85°) and also landing at a steep angle (85.3 degrees) travels horizontally no more than 275 metres, whereas the same shell fired at an 0+6 charge at the same launch angle (85 degrees) and a similar angle of descent (86.2 degrees) travels more than 1,160 metres. If fired at a low angle (45 degrees) with a 0+1 charge the shell travels horizontally no more than 1,574 metres (and lands at around 47.3 degrees ), whereas the same shell fired at an 0+6 charge travels more than 6,400 meters (landing at around 55.6 degrees).1680
It was not until the trial stage that both Prosecution and Defence experts introduced into their analyses the relation between the tail-fin’s penetration into the ground of the market and the speed of the projectile at impact, an element ignored until then by any investigator or expert.
The experts’ reasoning is based upon the following. The depth of penetration of the tail-fin is indicative of the velocity of the shell upon impact. This velocity is of course related to the velocity of the shell at the moment it was fired1681. The velocity at firing depends on the number of increment charges used. As indicated above, the greater the velocity, the greater the distance travelled, where the shell’s launch angle is kept constant.
The mortar shell used in this case exploded on impact. The experts for both parties agree that the explosion creates a backwards thrust against the tail-fin. If the velocity of the shell, and therefore of the tail-fin, on impact had been 150 m/sec (taking the lowest figure presented to the Trial Chamber), the tail-fin would have just fallen to the ground. If the impact velocity was lesser, the tail -fin would have been propelled backwards. If the impact velocity had been greater, the tail-fin would have overcome the backwards thrust and continued forward.
In the present case, the tail-fin continued its trajectory in the forward direction at a speed reduced by 150 m/sec, but still sufficient to embed itself in the ground.1682
Zecevic estimated that the impact velocity of the shell must have been greater than 200 m/s for the tail-fin to have embedded itself at the depth he measured. In Zecevic’s opinion, such a velocity can only be achieved by a shell fired at a 0+4 charge or more. At an angle of descent of 65° the shell would have travelled more than 4.5 kilometres on an 0+4 charge. (As the Majority will explain below, even if, by taking the most favourable figures, an impact speed greater than 200 m/s could be achieved by the lower charge 0 + 3, this does not change the final conclusion.)
The Majority pauses here to note that Markale market is at an altitude of approximately 550 metres.1683 The confrontation line to the north-east of the market was at an altitude of some 400 metres higher. Continuing in the same direction past the confrontation line, the ground further rose to reach heights of up to 500 to 650 metres above the market at around 2-2. 5 kilometres past the line.
As discussed above, Vilicic at first stated that for the tail-fin to embed itself at the depth measured by Zecevic, the shell would have needed an impact velocity of 528.8 m/sec. This speed cannot be achieved by any known mortar. Vilicic based this calculation on the assumption that the ground of impact was of solid concrete for the entire depth of the tail-fin’s penetration. Confronted with evidence that the market had a top layer of 2 centimetres of asphalt resting on soil consisting of sand and stones,1684 Vilicic then reviewed his calculations and concluded that penetration of 20 cm by the tail -fin would require an impact velocity for the shell of 268.4 m/sec. A 120 mm mortar shell can achieve a speed of approximately 260 m/s if fired at an 0+6 charge and if the altitude of the impact site is 500 metres below the position from which the shell was fired.1685
In brief, both experts, basing themselves on a drop angle of 55 to 65 degrees, concluded that an 0+4 or greater charge would be required to attain the impact velocity necessary for the tail-fin to penetrate the ground to the extent it did. At the 65 degrees angle of descent (which is, according to the Majority, the maximum conceivable angle on the evidence), tables provided by both experts show that the horizontal distance the shell would have travelled comes close to 6,000 metres at charge 0+6 and more than 4,500 meters at charge 0+4.1686
It follows that the shell which exploded in Markale market travelled a distance considerably greater than 2,600 metres from the north-east direction, placing the position from which the shell was fired well within SRK-controlled territory.
Noting however that the Defence disputes the measure of the depth of penetration of the tail-fin in the ground, submitting that an error in that measure could lead to serious miscalculation of the range of fire, the Majority, out of an abundance of caution, will consider the possibility that the tail-fin penetrated the soil to a lesser depth than the one found by Zecevic and that the shell was fired with an 0+3 increment charge, and therefore that the shell travelled a shorter distance than the one determined above.
The Majority recalls briefly that on the day of the incident, Sabljica and Cavcic did not measure the depth of penetration of the tail-fin in the ground but measured a 9-centimetre deep crater. The day after the incident, Zecevic and his colleagues measured the depth of penetration of the tail-fin in the ground from the top asphalt layer to the bottom of the tunnel where the tail-fin had been embedded to be 200 to 250 mm, depending on the side of the hole measured. The UN representatives did not measure the depth of penetration of the tail-fin in the ground giving the reason that such a measurement should have been taken right after the tail-fin was removed from the ground of Markale market. However, Dubant noticed that during his crater examination conducted on 11 February 1994, the crater was still sharply defined and was 11 centimetres deep. There is no evidence in the Trial Record which casts doubt on the measurements made by the local investigative teams. The Majority is convinced that the crater caused by the explosion was approximately 9 centimetres deep and that the depth of the tunnel of the tail-fin and the depth of the crater were together 200-250 mm.
The Majority will allow that the shell which struck Markale market impacted on ground consisting of a mixture of soil and stones, thus ignoring the force that would have been required to overcome the higher level of resistance presented by a top layer of asphalt. This favours the Defence case. The Majority also uses the most conservative measurement of the depth of the tail-fin’s penetration, taking the length to be 10 cm. This, again, favours the Defence case.
To penetrate 10 cm of ground consisting of soil and stones, the tail-fin would need a post-explosion velocity of 57 m/sec.1687 This gives a shell impact velocity of 150+57=207 m/sec.
The firing velocity of a shell on an 0+3 charge is 211 m/s1688. The Majority understands from the evidence of the experts that the impact velocity of a shell fired over a level field is slightly less than its velocity at firing. A shell fired at the 0+3 charge will lose about 30 m/s of its velocity between firing and impact. However, where the altitude of the impact site is less than that of the firing site, the shell will also gain about 30 m/s from having a longer drop trajectory. As always, in choosing these figures1689 the Majority has interpreted the evidence in a fashion favourable to the Defence case.
A shell on an 0+3 charge fired over the height differential applicable in this case would have an impact velocity of around 211 m/s. This would be just sufficient for the tail-fin to embed itself to the stipulated depth. But it would also mean that, at a drop angle of 65 degrees, and taking into account a difference in altitude of 400 metres, the shell would have still travelled about 3.6 km from its point of origin to its point of impact. Once again, this places the point of origin well within SRK-controlled territory.
This further consideration assures the Majority that the experts’ findings are buffered by a large margin of safety. There is no doubt that, given the characteristics of the remains of the explosion of the 120 mm mortar shell at Markale market, the shell could not have been fired from any place on the ABiH side of the confrontation lines in a direction north-northeast of Markale market.
Finally, the Majority notes that a shell fired at the 0+2 charge1690 could not attain the required velocity over the given height differential for its tail-fin to penetrate the surface of Markale market to the measured extent.
iii. Non-technical Evidence in relation to the Source of Fire
The Majority also emphasises that non-technical evidence supports the finding that a heavy weapon was fired from the direction north-northeast of Markale market from SRK-controlled territory at the time of the incident. The Trial Chamber finds reliable the testimony of Witness AF who heard at the time of the incident the sound of a heavy weapon being fired from behind an SRK position, Spicasta Stijena, at Mrkovici. The fact that Witness AF was at his mother’s house in Sedrenik when he heard that sound and not at his place in Vratnik does not cast doubt on his ability to assert a direction. The Majority is convinced by the evidence in the Trial Record, which establishes that the noise made by a firing mortar can be used to determine the approximate direction of fire.
The Majority wishes to address the Defence’s contention that a possibility exists that the shell was fired from within territory controlled by the ABiH because certain units of the ABiH were psychologically capable of firing unto their own territory. The Defence argues that in doing so, these ABiH units may have sought to attract international sympathy for the Muslim population of Sarajevo. The Majority finds not only unreasonable that ABiH forces would have fired in this case on their own civilians but also contrary to the material facts proved.
The Majority finds that the mortar shell which exploded at Markale market on 5 February 1994 was fired from SRK-controlled territory.
h. Conclusion on Deliberateness of the Attack
Evidence in the Trial Record establishes that a target, such as Markale market, can be hit from a great distance with one shot if the area is pre-recorded. Niaz testified that in the four months preceding the incident at Markale market, about 10 to 12 mortar shells fell around Markale market and that most of them were of a 120 mm calibre and originated from the direction north-northeast of Sedrenik. The UNMOs who wanted to investigate these attacks were not allowed access to the northeast area of the city controlled by the SRK. After the Markale incident, Hamill visited an SRK representative positioned in the northeastern area of the city, Colonel Cvetkovic, who confirmed to him that there were a number of 120 mm mortars in Mrkovi ci and along the estimated direction of fire to the north-northeast of Markale.
The Majority is convinced that the mortar shell which struck Markale was fired deliberately at the market. That market drew large numbers of people. There was no reason to consider the market area as a military objective. Evidence was presented in relation to the status of the “December 22” building located by the market, which manufactured uniforms for the police and the army. It is unclear whether manufacturing was still on-going at the time of the incident but in any case it is not reasonable to consider that the employees of such a manufacturing plant would be considered legitimate targets.
In sum, the Majority finds beyond reasonable doubt that the 120 mm mortar shell fired at Markale market on 5 February 1994, which killed over 60 persons and wounded over 140 others, was deliberately fired from SRK-controlled territory.
-
bezobraznik
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 11/06/2003 00:00
#14
"Toga dana nije bilo ni granatiranja sa srpskih pozicija, a rane su bile uglavnom ispod pojasa, kao da je bomba eksplodirala na mjestu", navodi Prentisova riječi ovog neimenovanog diplomate. Diplomata je rekao da je drugi znak da je muslimanska vlada bila odgovorna taj što su državni mediji "s kamerama bili na mjestu u roku od nekoliko sekundi".
- nije to jedini "miran" prekinut granatom
- granata kad padne na zemlju, ona uleti u zemlju i eksplodira, tako da geleri lete iz zemlje u zrak. kad padne na asvalt eksplodira trenutno i geleri se sire horizontalno. zato su rane uglavnom ispod pojasa (a ljudi su bili u blizini eksplozije).
- grad je bio pun novinara i kamermana a markale su u centru grada (kao sto je bio slucaj i 27. maja 1992 ferhadiji)
- nije to jedini "miran" prekinut granatom
- granata kad padne na zemlju, ona uleti u zemlju i eksplodira, tako da geleri lete iz zemlje u zrak. kad padne na asvalt eksplodira trenutno i geleri se sire horizontalno. zato su rane uglavnom ispod pojasa (a ljudi su bili u blizini eksplozije).
- grad je bio pun novinara i kamermana a markale su u centru grada (kao sto je bio slucaj i 27. maja 1992 ferhadiji)
-
weasel
- Posts: 284
- Joined: 07/02/2003 00:00
#18
Nema tu pomoci za pojedine hronicne bolesnike cak i ako "prevedes na cirilicu".Ja razumijem da vecina ljudi tesko moze povjerovati u to jer je bila pod pritiskom ratne propagande i sada kada imaju mogucnost da saznaju istinu vjerovatno budu sokirani...Ali brinu me ovi bolesnici koji vjerovatno nikada nece ozdraviti,a sto je najgore,broj takvih je na moje veliko zaprepastenje poprilican... 
-
Glumica
- Posts: 590
- Joined: 15/03/2002 00:00
- Location: Sarajevo
#19
mislim da tu nema sta da se "vjeruje", jer velika vecina ZNA iz prve ruke sta i kako je bilo... mislim da znaju sta je sta... i upravo je to to sto u njima urla, a pokusavaju nadglasati ovakvim temama... savjest je cudna stvar...jos da je on sam? Pa bar 90% vjeruje da su Bosnjaci sami sebe pobili.
-
banjaluka
- Posts: 131
- Joined: 05/01/2003 00:00
#20
mozda bi ipak najbolje bilo da banujete dejvida ovena, novinare tajmsa, jasusija akasija ili generala mekenzija.
ili se opet radi o srpsko - japansko - britansko - kanadskoj zavjeri protiv jadnih i nenaoruzanih, te nicim izazvanih muslimana. pardon bosnjaka.
ili se opet radi o srpsko - japansko - britansko - kanadskoj zavjeri protiv jadnih i nenaoruzanih, te nicim izazvanih muslimana. pardon bosnjaka.
-
weasel
- Posts: 284
- Joined: 07/02/2003 00:00
#22
Glumica wrote:mislim da tu nema sta da se "vjeruje", jer velika vecina ZNA iz prve ruke sta i kako je bilo... mislim da znaju sta je sta... i upravo je to to sto u njima urla, a pokusavaju nadglasati ovakvim temama... savjest je cudna stvar...jos da je on sam? Pa bar 90% vjeruje da su Bosnjaci sami sebe pobili.
hmm
Recimo da je to tacno sto ti kazes,a ja znam da nije,onda bi ti postavio samo jedno pitanje:
Ako je to savjest onda sta je bezobrazluk?
-
Soul_Sista
- Posts: 3751
- Joined: 29/01/2003 00:00
- Location: anybody seen my baby?
#23
"ili se opet radi o srpsko - japansko - britansko - kanadskoj zavjeri protiv jadnih i nenaoruzanih, te nicim izazvanih muslimana. pardon bosnjaka."
...lijeci se covjece iako mislim da nema spasa za tebe i takve kao ti..
...lijeci se covjece iako mislim da nema spasa za tebe i takve kao ti..