Kosovo/Kosova As Seen, As Told In the "Urosevac group" trial, the OSCE-KVM reported that the indictment was exclusively based on three statements given under torture by the accused during questioning by police. During the hearing these three indictees changed their statement and pleaded not guilty. They declared that after the torture they were in such a bad condition that they had signed everything the SDB wanted. The Presiding Judge ignored the new statements and did not exclude the confessions that were allegedly elicited under torture. Consequently, all the indicted were convicted and sentenced only on the basis of the first statements. In another case tried in Pristina, the OSCE-KVM reported that throughout the trial the lawyers tried to prove the allegations of torture, including by asking for an independent medical investigation. These demands were turned down, and the judges relied on the report of the prison doctor that gave no indication of any ill-treatment. 31 Allegations of mishandling or fabrication of evidence were also made against the Serbian authorities in cases where material evidence had been collected. These allegations included the improper conduct of 32 "scientific tests", such as the "paraffin glove test". ● ● ● ● ● ● ● The single statement which comprises the entirety of the prosecution's charges is a statement by a police captain about tests conducted on the total of 42 defendants from Orahovac, some of them before the court. Even without the close scrutiny born of knowledge of the Serbian legal system this document is, to say the least, defective and probative of nothing. Problems include but are not limited to: The forensic test, the so-called "paraffin glove" test, has been discredited for many years as an inappropriate means of determining culpability. One short statement covers all the accused. There is no adequate breakdown of how the test was conducted, either in the generality or with respect to individual cases. The statement is not made by a forensic scientist but by a police captain. If he is qualified in forensic science there is no indication of it in the statement. There is no indication as to the precise conditions under which the test was conducted, or whether there is any other potential cause for the results given than that surmised. The document states that "the majority of cases showed markings on various parts of the hand and fingers". Who precisely did and who did not display these features? Why might there be 33 these exceptions? To what degree were the exceptions present? There were allegations of possible falsification or fabrication of incriminating documents, the "Pec group" trial again being illustrative: http://www.osce.org/kosovo/documents/reports/hr/part1/ch10.htm (10 of 18)12/5/2003 11:52:22 AM