September 10
After a three-week break following the prosecution resting its case, the defense of Dusko Tadic began with a motion to dismiss most of the charges.

This motion took the tribunal into uncharted territory. Under the court's rules of procedure, there are no provisions for such a motion. Prosecutors argued that the motion ought not to be considered for this reason. The defense replied that fundamental justice demanded that an accused be cleared of baseless charges as soon as possible.

In his argument to the court, defense lawyer Michail Wladimiroff took a new tack on the evidence against Tadic. Up to this point, the defense has been claiming Tadic wasn't at the places where witnesses say he committed war crimes. But as the prosecution evidence came in, it turned out that many of the witnesses who place Tadic at the scene of crimes don't actually identify him as an active participant.

This evidence, Wladimiroff said, does not show Tadic actually committed crimes. It is not enough to show that Tadic was there, he said. Prosecutors must show that he did something.

Judge Gabrielle McDonald told the lawyers there would be a decision Wednesday or Thursday.

Defense Witness 1: Robert M. Hayden
A professor of anthropology at the University of Pittsburgh, Hayden was called as a policy witness, to refute the prosecution expert, James Gow, on the origin of the war in Bosnia.

The war was a byproduct of the break-up of Yugoslavia, he said. His description of the conflict as a domestic civil war, rather than an international war, supports the defense position that international law ought not apply in this case. His testimony will continue Sept. 11.

September 11
Robert Hayden, a cultural anthropologist and constitutional lawyer, took the court through the history of the war in Bosnia.

In the prosecution's version, Serbia, one of six constituent republics, embarked on a vast land-grab led by Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic. He ignited the tinderbox of Serbian nationalism to consolidate his own power, and then -- part leading, part following a mass movement -- he sought to create a "Greater Serbia," by tearing chunks of territory from other republics, plunging Yugoslavia into war and wrecking the federation.

Robert Hayden came to court on behalf of Dusko Tadic with a very different story to tell. He begins with a question: What would come after state socialism in Yugoslavia? After Marshal Tito died in 1981, and the failure of socialist economics became evident, the pressing issue was how the Balkans would organize themselves.

The answer, Hayden said, was tragic. The people of Yugoslavia chose -- fairly and freely -- to partition themselves into ethnically exclusive cantons. And when it came time for Bosnia's turn to decide, the people of that divided land made the same choice -- with horrible results.

The Serbs, Croats, Slovenes and Muslims all embarked on the path of destruction.

This balance in his account was turned against him on cross-examination when prosecutor Grant Nieman cited passages from Hayden's writing that seemed to confirm the prosecution's version of events.

September 12-13
Court was not in session.