[cryptome] Re: I have been investigating this incident since 2000 it involves taking bones.doc

  • From: Kathy Wittig <kmwittig@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 02:15:29 -0400

It's ok by me. Keep up the great work. 

Kathy
Sent via Mobile


On Apr 25, 2013, at 14:25, "Dave Belgard" <dbelgard@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Sorry several readers suggested I do this as one document avoids clouds and 
external links. So I apologize for the reposting. Its only 3,222 words

Thank you for the encouragement so far db.

I have been investigating this incident since 2000 it involves taking bones, 
body parts and artifacts from victims of the war in Kosovo and FRY.
 
The magic key words are` `Jose's work as far as I can see is good work ... It's 
taking little tiny pieces of bone that no one would ever miss.” ( articles 
attached next.) For 10 plus years, I have called and written to the ICTY, the 
United Nations, OSCE
 Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and others to, finally 
account for the actions taken by ICTY. . l I have written and spoken to 
everyone I could basically the answer has been "Nun sacciu, nun vidi, nun ceru 
e si ceru durmiv."
"I know nothing, I didn't see anything, I wasn't there, and if I was there, I 
was asleep" Most of those who know have assured me they will buy a tee shirt if 
I make one.
 
I have a list of questions ( attached Questions.doc at bottom ) that I have 
been trying to get ICTY to answer which is why was this was done and why this 
still has not been fully fixed.
It is my understanding there are still lawsuits pending against ICTY 
International  Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia and many bones taken by the 
ICTY and others, still  have not been returned to the victim families and 
friends, as well as artifacts that were taken its now 10 years and it is time 
to make this right.
 
 
 My wants are simple help the victims who are double victims now and call to 
account those who allowed this to happen. I saw the samples while in Kosovo. I 
was there I know who knows but no one wants to be a rat and in a business where 
going along to get along is preferred no on wants to be a hero, and yet they 
are there to protect human rights.
 
I will end this intro with a statement One day let us call us the ICTY diggers 
we were told with a strong   admonishment which was “remember that when you do 
an exhumation take everything from the grave finger nails, hair everything, and 
put it into the body bag leave nothing behind. Bring everything back to the 
morgue, never take anything, and not turn it in and again, it is the Muslim 
religion so remember bring everything even a fingernail. You have already read 
the key words above. Need I say more?  I will say more I am not a Muslim and 
have no family ties to the region only a strong belief in human rights and 
protecting them.
 
Anyone who knows anything, please contact me send documents and pictures 
anything in this matter dbelgard@xxxxxxx
 
Thank you
Respectfully
David Belgard
 
 

 

Both

Bones Row Hinders War Crimes Tribunal

The Age

Wednesday October 31, 2001

SIMON MANN, EUROPE CORRESPONDENT

LONDON

A controversy over body parts is causing discord in the United Nations war 
crimes tribunal in The Hague, with international forensic scientists angry 
about ``unethical" practices involving samples taken from Balkan graves.

The issue involves bone and tooth samples taken from thousands of victims of 
the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo.

The deputy prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former 
Yugoslavia, Australian Graham Blewitt, described the controversy as a 
professional clash.

It revolves around the retention by the tribunal of bone and tooth samples used 
for estimating the age of victims. The samples were collected during 
exhumations in the Balkans over the past several years as part of a research 
project being conducted for the tribunal by a senior forensic anthropologist.

But experts from Europe and the United States who have worked for the tribunal 
on secondment say the samples do not need to be kept in The Hague and fear that 
many will not be returned to their correct graves.

The experts say this has presented the tribunal with a huge ethical quandary. 
They say some samples were taken from bodies that had been presumptively 
identified, without the consent of relatives.

Several forensic experts learnt of the controversial practice during field 
work. They said that, on occasions, categorizing body samples was a shambles.

Some staff working for the International Commission for Missing Persons in 
Bosnia became aware that the tribunal was removing the bone and teeth samples 
when they tried to narrow down tribunal estimates of the age of individual 
victims removed from mass graves around Prijedor.

Bunfight Breaks Out At UN Tribunal Over Use Of Body Parts

Simon Mann

702 words

31 October 2001

Sydney Morning Herald

SMHH

14

English

Copyright of John Fairfax Group Pty Ltd

Claims of unethical practices are jolting the war crimes court, reports Herald 
Correspondent Simon Mann in London.

A body parts controversy is embroiling the United Nations war crimes tribunal 
in The Hague, with international forensic scientists outraged by what they say 
are unethical practices involving samples taken from Balkans graves.

The issue involves bone and tooth samples taken from thousands of victims of 
the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo. So far, the tribunal has kept the controversy 
under wraps for fear that it could compromise its efforts in bringing war 
criminals to justice.

The revelations come as the tribunal's most high-profile suspect, the former 
Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic, returned to court on charges of crimes 
against humanity, including mass murder in Kosovo and Croatia.

Graham Blewitt, the tribunal's Australian deputy prosecutor, called the body 
parts controversy a professional ``bunfight''.

It centres on the tribunal's retention of bone and tooth samples used for 
identifying the age of victims. The samples were collected during exhumations 
in the Balkans over the past several years as part of a research project being 
conducted by a senior tribunal forensic anthropologist.

However, experts from Europe and the United States who have worked for the 
tribunal on secondment say the samples did not need to be kept in The Hague and 
fear that many will be unable to be returned to their correct graves. They say 
some samples were taken from bodies that had been presumptively identified, 
without the consent of relatives, and that keeping the samples contravenes the 
Muslim customs of many victims.

One scientist, who asked not to be identified, said: ``I try to be supportive 
of the tribunal whenever possible ... but they really do have a major problem 
on their hands.''

Some staff working for the International Commission for Missing Persons in 
Bosnia only became aware that the tribunal was removing the samples when they 
tried to narrow down the tribunal's estimates of the age of individual victims 
pulled from mass graves around Prijedor.

``Some of the age ranges were ridiculous: from 17 years to 70 years, for 
example,'' said a commission worker involved in identifications. ``When we 
decided we would have to make a more accurate assessment, we discovered that 
the bones used by forensic anthropologists for this very purpose weren't in the 
body bag.''

Post mortem reports indicated the tribunal had removed routine samples for DNA 
testing as well as ``other samples'' during work at its morgues in Visoko, 
Bosnia, and in Urosevac, southern Kosovo.

These additional samples taken from each body were a rib, incisor teeth and 
parts of the clavicle and pubic bone components that provide investigators with 
critical clues about a person's age and sex.

The scientists say that by removing these parts the tribunal has undermined the 
work of the Balkan organisations whose primary role is to identify victims. In 
Kosovo neither of the two groups involved in identifications the Organisation 
for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the UN mission's Victim Recovery 
Identification Commission were notified in advance about the research project.

Some scientists also argue that the research into identification techniques by 
the tribunal forensic expert, Jose Pablo Baraybar, which was approved by the 
tribunal's senior management, was invalid because results could not be verified 
by cross-checking with victims' identities.

Mr Baraybar could not be contacted for comment. But a tribunal source said on 
his behalf that the aim of the research was to develop a new system for 
identifying age ranges of bodies.

``Jose's work, as far as I can see, is good work, and it's not harming 
anyone,'' the source said. ``It's taking little tiny pieces of bone that no-one 
would ever miss ... For each one of these people complaining, he's probably had 
five anthropologists over the last two or three years who are in full support 
of him.''

Mr Blewitt said: ``We believe we are conducting a legitimate forensic exercise, 
part of which was aimed at identifying the victims of crimes that we're 
investigating. That's the purpose of it.''

``Some of the age ranges were ridiculous, from 17 years to 70 years, for 
example," said a commission worker. ``When we decided we would have to make a 
more accurate assessment, we discovered that the bones used by forensic 
anthropologists for this very purpose were not in the body bag."

 

Autopsy reports indicated the tribunal had removed routine samples for DNA 
testing as well as ``other samples" during work at its morgues in Visoko, 
Bosnia, and in Urosevac in southern Kosovo.

 

These additional samples taken from each body were a rib, incisor teeth, and 
parts of the clavicle and pubic bone - components that provide investigators 
with critical clues about a person's age and sex.

 

The scientists say that by removing these parts the tribunal has undermined the 
work of the Balkan organisations whose primary role it is to identify victims.

 

Members of a British team of experts working in Kosovo are said to have 
complained fiercely about the removal of the body parts.

 

Some scientists also argue that the research into identification techniques by 
the tribunal's forensic expert, Jose Pablo Baraybar, was invalid because 
results could not be verified by cross-checking with victims' identities.

 

Some ``identified" bodies were exhumed in Kosovo last year with the consent of 
relatives. However, these bodies had not been positively identified by DNA, but 
just on relatives' hearsay.

 

``I think they basically just wanted an easy bank of samples on which to build 
a research project," said one person familiar with the Kosovo exhumations.

 

The tribunal is angry that the forensic experts have gone public with their 
complaints, claiming that what amounts to professional rivalry is distracting 
the tribunal from its work.

 

Some of the samples, taken from victims of the Srebrenica massacres, could be 
returned relatively easily because exhumed remains are being stored above 
ground in body bags in Tuzla, northern Bosnia. But re-interring other samples 
in thousands of graves may prove expensive.

 

A tribunal source said on Mr Baraybar's behalf that the aim of the research was 
to develop a new system for identifying age ranges of bodies. ``From my 
discussions with (Mr Baraybar) and other anthropologists, it appears to be 
bearing fruit," the source said.

 

He added: ``Jose's work as far as I can see is good work ... It's taking little 
tiny pieces of bone that no one would ever miss ... For each one of these 
people complaining he's probably had five anthropologists over the last two or 
three years who are in full support of him."

© 2001 The Age

 

 

 

Bunfight Breaks Out At UN Tribunal Over Use Of Body Parts

Simon Mann

702 words

31 October 2001

Sydney Morning Herald

SMHH

14

English

Copyright of John Fairfax Group Pty Ltd

Claims of unethical practices are jolting the war crimes court, reports Herald 
Correspondent Simon Mann in London.

A body parts controversy is embroiling the United Nations war crimes tribunal 
in The Hague, with international forensic scientists outraged by what they say 
are unethical practices involving samples taken from Balkans graves.

The issue involves bone and tooth samples taken from thousands of victims of 
the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo. So far, the tribunal has kept the controversy 
under wraps for fear that it could compromise its efforts in bringing war 
criminals to justice.

The revelations come as the tribunal's most high-profile suspect, the former 
Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic, returned to court on charges of crimes 
against humanity, including mass murder in Kosovo and Croatia.

Graham Blewitt, the tribunal's Australian deputy prosecutor, called the body 
parts controversy a professional ``bunfight''.

It centres on the tribunal's retention of bone and tooth samples used for 
identifying the age of victims. The samples were collected during exhumations 
in the Balkans over the past several years as part of a research project being 
conducted by a senior tribunal forensic anthropologist.

However, experts from Europe and the United States who have worked for the 
tribunal on secondment say the samples did not need to be kept in The Hague and 
fear that many will be unable to be returned to their correct graves. They say 
some samples were taken from bodies that had been presumptively identified, 
without the consent of relatives, and that keeping the samples contravenes the 
Muslim customs of many victims.

One scientist, who asked not to be identified, said: ``I try to be supportive 
of the tribunal whenever possible ... but they really do have a major problem 
on their hands.''

Some staff working for the International Commission for Missing Persons in 
Bosnia only became aware that the tribunal was removing the samples when they 
tried to narrow down the tribunal's estimates of the age of individual victims 
pulled from mass graves around Prijedor.

``Some of the age ranges were ridiculous: from 17 years to 70 years, for 
example,'' said a commission worker involved in identifications. ``When we 
decided we would have to make a more accurate assessment, we discovered that 
the bones used by forensic anthropologists for this very purpose weren't in the 
body bag.''

Post mortem reports indicated the tribunal had removed routine samples for DNA 
testing as well as ``other samples'' during work at its morgues in Visoko, 
Bosnia, and in Urosevac, southern Kosovo.

These additional samples taken from each body were a rib, incisor teeth and 
parts of the clavicle and pubic bone components that provide investigators with 
critical clues about a person's age and sex.

The scientists say that by removing these parts the tribunal has undermined the 
work of the Balkan organisations whose primary role is to identify victims. In 
Kosovo neither of the two groups involved in identifications the Organisation 
for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the UN mission's Victim Recovery 
Identification Commission were notified in advance about the research project.

Some scientists also argue that the research into identification techniques by 
the tribunal forensic expert, Jose Pablo Baraybar, which was approved by the 
tribunal's senior management, was invalid because results could not be verified 
by cross-checking with victims' identities.

Mr Baraybar could not be contacted for comment. But a tribunal source said on 
his behalf that the aim of the research was to develop a new system for 
identifying age ranges of bodies.

``Jose's work, as far as I can see, is good work, and it's not harming 
anyone,'' the source said. ``It's taking little tiny pieces of bone that no-one 
would ever miss ... For each one of these people complaining, he's probably had 
five anthropologists over the last two or three years who are in full support 
of him.''

Mr Blewitt said: ``We believe we are conducting a legitimate forensic exercise, 
part of which was aimed at identifying the victims of crimes that we're 
investigating. That's the purpose of it.''

Questions

 
Questions
 
1.    Had the international and local staffs that had been engaged to work for 
ICTY during the period of time that the body parts and artifacts were taken 
been notified that they would be contributing to a project that they might have 
concerns for moral, religious, legal or professional reasons. Thus giving them 
knowledge to make an informed decision to join the teams or not..
2.    Had the countries that supplied the seconded or non- seconded workers 
been informed of the project so that if their countries had moral or ethical 
etc objections to the taking of body parts and artifacts they could make an 
informed decision to consent to send staff or funding?                          
                                                                                
                                                                                
            
3.    I would like to have the complete project proposal, which should have 
included a discussion of religious considerations, ethics, protocols, proposed 
standard operating procedures, job descriptions, review and supervision 
policies and health, safety and risk assessments as well as the value and need 
to conduct the research project.  This should have been approved in a written 
format, such as a contract, a letter or an email.  It would have the names of 
the individuals who signed off on it clearly printed and under international 
accepted scientific practices, must have been reviewed by a formal independent 
human subject’s ethics committee as well as a scientific panel created by the 
UN.
4.    The UN as a supervising/employing body would have been required to have 
been signed off on it, as well.  I should like to have copies of those 
documents as well. In addition, the written and standing protocol as well as 
all of the rules and standard operating procedures and job descriptions of the 
UN to conduct such research as was conducted The ICTY team.
5.    I would like copies of  the original proposal, which should have had an 
informed consent protocol along, with it and which should have included an 
information sheet for "participants" or their surviving kin, explaining exactly 
what would be done with the materials taken. Stating  that the material was not 
to be returned, including any harm being done potentially, etc. as well as a 
form or letter where the relatives explicitly gave permission for the work as 
described to be done.
 
6.    Because of the status of FRY and the various geopolitical entities 
involved, there should have been separate agreements made with each of the 
populations involved as well as the governments.  Can you arrange for access to 
those agreements and proposals as well?  There should be copies of the standard 
operating procedures, discussion of religious considerations, ethics protocols, 
proposed standard operating procedures. As well as reviews and supervision 
policies as well as health, safety and risk assessments and the value and need 
to conduct the research project.
 
7.    Graham Blewitt made certain assertions that for that for every complaint 
against the ICTY he had persons who supported the project. Please produce these 
letters.  I take it they are from people who are or were not reliant on Mr 
Baraybar for employment or other financial remunerations and are accredited and 
independent of Mr. Baraybar his schooling and employment. Etc. and are accepted 
as mainstream in the forensic anthropology field as experts and or expert 
witnesses. I mean in the article enclosed it refers to a tribunal source.  Does 
that mean a janitor or an anthropologist or someone who played one on 
television?
 
8.    What is the status of the all artifacts, and bone samples taken by Mr. 
Baraybar taken for questionable scientific purposes and removed or stored in 
Kosovo/Kosova  as well as other locations and then allegedly returned to the 
survivors  and family’s and or friends. According to statements made by ICTY 
staff, all of the removed items have been returned to the families and or 
relatives is this true?
 

 

 

 

Other related posts: