01005806 Case File No. 002/19-09-2007/ECCC/TC E313 6.1.2. Mail 251. The various organs of the Party Centre and the Zones, Sectors, Districts and sub-district entities also communicated with each other by letter. 789 Although telegrams were generally preferred for long-distance communications, lengthier messages and reports were sent by mail, which was delivered by messengers. 790 In Phnom Penh, incoming mail for the Party Centre was generally directed through K-7, the messenger unit.791 Zones, Sectors and Districts had their own messenger networks.792 6.1.3. Telephone 252. Evidence before the Chamber proves that some of the leaders, offices and units of the Party Centre and the DK Government communicated with each other by telephone.793 However, not all of the offices in Phnom Penh were connected to each other through the telephone network.794 253. The evidence before the Chamber is inconclusive as to whether officials at the Zone or Sector level also had access to telephone connections. 795 Certain military units, including Division 164 (the navy), occasionally reported to the Party Centre by 789 T. 13 June 2012 (OEUN Tan), p. 62 (recalling carrying letters between K-1 and K-7); T. 6 December 2011 (KLAN Fit), p. 61 (describing a letter being sent from the Party Centre to a subdistrict, via the Zone and Sector levels); T. 4 April 2012 (KAING Guek Eav), pp. 89-90 (referring to a letter from Witness KAING Gueak Eav to SON Sen); SON Sen Letter to KAING Guek Eav, E3/1047, 5 October 1977. 790 T. 14 December 2012 (SUON Kanil), p. 68. 791 T. 3 September 2012 (NORNG Sophang), pp. 15-16. 792 U.S. Department of Defense Report, E3/391, January 2001, p. 2, ERN (En) 00387344. 793 T. 26 March 2012 (KAING Guek Eav), p. 94 (describing telephone conversations between SON Sen and Witness KAING Guek Eav at S-21); T. 27 March 2012 (KAING Guek Eav), p. 37 (stating that a telephone connection was in place at the office near Borei Keila where Witness KAING Guek Eav met SON Sen); T. 28 March 2012 (KAING Guek Eav), p. 91 (referring to a telephone at K-7); T. 24 April 2012 (SALOTH Ban), pp. 10-11 (mentioning the receipt of telephone calls at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs); T. 16 August 2012 (SA Siek), pp. 102-103 (describing a telephone call received at the Ministry of Propaganda); T. 3 September 2012 (NORNG Sophang), pp. 59-60 (stating that telephone calls were made to the telegram encryption and decryption unit at Sothearos School); T. 17 June 2013 (LENG Chhoeung), pp. 12-13 (confirming that KHIEU Samphan had a telephone in his office at K-3). See also, T. 5 September 2012 (NORNG Sophang), p. 71; T. 10 June 2013 (SO Socheat), p. 76. 794 See e.g. T., 3 September 2012 (NORNG Sophang), p. 60 (indicating that the telegram decoding office at Sothearos School only had a telephone connection to three other Party Centre offices, and not to the Zones). 795 See e.g. T. 28 May 2012 (NY Kan), p. 41 (stating that the Sector 32 committee did not have access to a telephone). Case 002/01, Judgement, 7 August 2014 - Public 139