01005744 Case File No. 002/19-09-2007/ECCC/TC E313 not with her when she gave birth to her child on 6 June 1974 and that he returned from China only one month later. However, she then stated that KHIEU Samphan was in Cambodia with her in June 1974, asserting that he stayed with her at K-17 and B20 and went to Meak village only when Phnom Penh was close to being liberated.400 After the birth of her first child, she said that KHIEU Samphan stayed by her side for about one month to assist her.401 However she had also mentioned previously that she went to Meak’s office in the early days after the birth of this child.402 She again contradicted herself, saying first that KHIEU Samphan had stayed with her for four or five months, then correcting herself to state it was three months.403 In addition to these contradictions, and the implausibility of some aspects of her testimony, 404 the Chamber views SO Socheat’s testimony in the light of her desire to assist her husband and to absolve him of culpability for the criminal conduct for which he is charged. 140. While SO Socheat’s statements concerning the date of KHIEU Samphan’s travel to Meak village are contradictory, she has confirmed that KHIEU Samphan did in fact travel there. The Chamber further notes that Meak village was located in Kampong Cham very near to B-20405 and travel between these places was feasible. Therefore the Chamber does not find that her testimony raises a reasonable doubt as to KHIEU Samphan’s presence in Meak village in June 1974. 400 T. 10 June 2013 (SO Socheat), pp. 69-70. T. 10 June 2013 (SO Socheat), pp. 61-62. 402 T. 10 June 2013 (SO Socheat), pp. 63, 69-70. 403 T. 10 June 2013 (SO Socheat), pp. 69-70; T. 11 June 2013 (SO Socheat), p. 80. 404 Ms. SO Socheat’s testimony was also implausible in many respects. She stated that it was only after she arrived in Phnom Penh (more than one week after 17 April) that she realised that the city had been ‘evacuated’. T. 11 June 2013, p. 19. She also stated that during NORODOM Sihanouk’s visit to the liberated zone in 1973, she was not aware that her husband was officially in charge of welcoming the prince. T. 11 June 2013, pp. 15-16. Neither assertion is credible. 405 SUONG Sikoeun Book manuscript, E3/40, ERN (Fr) 00078996 (there were many CPK camps in the area of Stung Trang, Kampong Cham province, including B-20, a re-education camp for intellectuals returning from abroad, which was about 10 kilometres away); T. 26 July 2012 (ROCHOEM Ton alias PHY Phuon), p. 28 (“S-24 was […] near Phum [village] Meak, near the Dei Kraham area, which was situated close to the district town of Stueng Trang”); T. 13 June 2012 (OEUN Tan), pp. 28-29 (former Khmer Rouge guard who joined the Khmer Rouge in 1968 when he was in Rattanakiri and who moved with Pang and POL Pot from Rattanakiri to Kampong Cham province in 1970. IENG Sary, NUON Chea, KHIEU Samphan attended meetings chaired by POL Pot from 19701975 at Trapeang Thum village, Kampong Cham); KHAM Phan alias PHAN Van Interview Record, E3/58, 21 November 2008, ERN (En) 00250087-88 (B-20 was next to kilometre 10, Boeng Kêt, in Stung Trang district, Kampong Cham province); See also, Book by P. SHORT: POL Pot: The History of a Nightmare, E3/9, 2004, ERN (En) 00396191 (map). 401 Case 002/01, Judgement, 7 August 2014 - Public 77