Can I say straight away I'm not going to commit anyone to deal with anything in their submissions tomorrow, but we will do our best to answer all of your questions.

Certainly. Again can I put that over to tomorrow?

I'm sorry I used the wrong word when I said received, I really meant addressed upon. Are you asking if there is any other material that you weren't addressed upon?

Madam President, are you asking for more documentation in addition to what you've received or are you asking for clarification?

Madam President, are there any other questions from the Bench?

That would not be the first time - I suspect it probably is the last time, however - when Mr Griffiths has put something forward on behalf of the Defence team about which perhaps not all of them knew. I have in mind court sitting hours, by way of example. However, I ...

I can't. We'll seek to give you an answer to that tomorrow.

I don't think we put it in quite those terms. I've certainly put it in those terms this morning and I would invite the Court to take on board my approach to the witnesses listed in the final section of the brief, together with 338, who is not ...

Yes.

Yes, certainly I just need to get it TF1-338 is another example of a witness who was so discredited in Prosecution - who so contradicted his previous statements with his testimony.

Your Honour, certainly those at the back. There are others referred to, and I'm just anxious that I don't call out a name when I should be calling out a number but can I mention two numbers to you? If you'll give me a moment to put ...

Madam President, a change on the Defence bench; our case manager, Mrs Moilanen, has now left us.

May I answer Justice Sebutinde's first question? Moses Blah, Prosecution witness, said the border was closed in effect until 1997, I am reliably informed. I haven't in the short time been ...

What I was actually suggesting is if you give the questions to me now, then it would probably speed things up if we give you the answers tomorrow. In other words, it would eat less into our two hours.

Yes, that's the way I was suggesting of getting your questions on the record tomorrow.

Very well. I was going to suggest a possible solution that Justice Sebutinde gives me her questions now and that we deal with them tomorrow in our rebuttal. And so obviously the questions would be repeated on the record tomorrow and then we could supply the answers as well. I ...

Again, there is contradictory evidence on this. Some of the evidence is to the effect that by the time ULIMO split into the two groups, between them they contained the whole of the border. Some in the north and some in the southern counties.

Your Honour, I think the position is that there is evidence to both of those effects. There is evidence from some witnesses, and indeed, a document to the effect that at the very least it was until 1996. There is other evidence that it was until Mr Taylor's election ...

Certainly.

It was all open session, Madam President.

Despite the fact that there's all these screens in front of me the one that it appears on is at the far end of the bench. I will go from my hard copy here. 6765. I'll start at line 9. I ...

Thank you.

Well, no, I didn't mean Foday Sankoh recruited me. I mean Mr Taylor sent me there and then I had a chat with Foday Sankoh. And the Prosecution interviewers got it all wrong when they wrote down that Foday Sankoh recruited him via the good offices of ...

Certainly.

And my last point on that witness is just as he starts to talk about 032, so the Prosecution then start to lavish money and attention on 032. The link is obvious. The method is the same.

Now, I'm going to mover to a completely different witness now by ...

Well, the way I was hoping to phrase it, I don't think it would, but I think it's going to be clearer if we go briefly into closed session and I deal with it in that way.

Yes.

I'm going to quote something that a witness said. It was said in closed session and if you wish me to go into closed session for this, then I'm happy to do so. It won't take long.

Can I simply reiterate that I'm being -

I -

Oh, from the Prosecution's fund.

That money was paid to him whilst he was said to be providing information, and it covers transport, lost wages, but essentially it is for information and support, financial support, to him.

I should say that on the 5th occasion when he was paid ...

Because you have it, Madam President, I'm going to come to that. You have it actually in the form of certain documents admitted under rule 92 bis. And there is a history here that is illustrated by the documents admitted through the Appeal Chamber under rule 92 bis. This ...

Yes, but he -

Yes. May I, before I start taking the Court through examples, make this point? Where a culture has arisen where witnesses expect to be paid sums of money, not merely their expenses, but a very generous amount of money in relation to their expenses, what is the effect of that ...

Can I say - ah, there it is.

I'm happy to proceed. I can't see anything on any of the array of screens in front of me that shows the transcript.

Madam President, normally when this has happened the Court officer has been able to stream her LiveNote on a screen. Like Mr Koumjian, I've now forgotten which button to press to get that, but no doubt we'll receive some assistance.

Yes.

Thank you, Madam President.

Madam President, your Honours, the area that I want to deal with principally this morning is a fairly discrete area and relates to matters of credibility. And, in particular, specifically to the credibility of some of the Prosecution witnesses.

We have, in our final trial brief ...

Good morning, Madam President, Your Honours, counsel opposite, for the Defence this morning, myself, Terry Munyard, we are joined by our legal officers, Kimberley Punt, Kathryn Hovington, Michael Herz, our case manager, Salla Moilanen and our new intern, Peter Katonene.

No, thank you.

Yes.

Your Honour, all I can say is we always do our very best to make sure that we don't reveal any identifying evidence. However, where there is a dispute between Prosecution and Defence, and we take the view that in referring to something we clearly aren't identifying the ...

Yes. I'm aware that there are currently filings before the Court, not yet resolved, in which the Prosecution take one view on what is confidential, in particular in relation to closed session testimony, and the Defence take another view, and we need to know whether or not reference can ...

Would your Honour give me just a moment?

Ah, very well. I was hearing things from two different places at that time. Thank you. That is now clear.

One thing we do need to know, when we file a public version of our final trial brief we need a decision on what exactly is said to be confidential ...

If you say 4 p.m., then personally I would prefer if you simply say by 4 p.m., rather than by close of business, because --

Can I reply in relation, first of all, to the option of having a written response? It's an option that we have asked the Court to grant us, but the option is equally open to the Prosecution, and so when they say they want to truncate the time for ...

Mr President, may I inquire of your definition of close of business? When you were dealing with Defence written response, you said that we can do so provided it's no later than - by close of business, i.e. no later than 4 p.m. on Thursday, the 10th. You ...

Your Honour is absolutely right.

I'm very grateful you did and I'm now clear as to what we said. The point about those annexes is they refer the Court to the areas of the evidence which we refer to in the final trial brief itself. So that the Court can then look at ...

Would your Honour give me a moment? Because it seems to me to contain an inherent inconsistency. I think there may have been a typographical error. Would you give me just a moment for me to respond to that while I look at it?

Briefly, but importantly in our submission, these annexes are, if you like an index to where the Court will find the evidence on this point. Mr Koumjian's argument seems to us to be a good argument for the need for written responses because there is much that is - we ...