Talk:Baćin massacre/Archive 1

Archive 1

2007

The statement of the events being a war crime must be sourced specifically from a definite place in the third party report. See further comments at the talk page for Saborsko massacre. An NPOV tag is appropriate. Editors are reminded not to insert unsourced material or personal opinion. DGG (talk) 20:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Baćin is explicitly mentioned in the sentence judgement in the ICTY site, on the www.un.org (UN's site).
A shorter version, [1] is titled "Milan Martić sentenced to 35 years for crimes against humanity and war crimes", on the same site.
This should be the "third party". Kubura 07:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

On ICTY's sentence judgement page (the case of Milan Martić), says:
"The Trial Chamber has taken particular note of the fact that the attacks on predominantly Croat areas during the autumn of 1991 and early 1992 followed a generally similar pattern, that is: the area or village in question was shelled, after which armed ground units entered. After the fighting had subsided, acts of killing and violence were committed against the non-Serb civilian population who had not managed to flee. Houses, churches and property were destroyed, and widespread looting was carried out as part of the forcible removal. On several occasions, the SAO Krajina police and TO organised transport for the non-Serb population in order to remove it from SAO Krajina territory altogether to locations under Croatian control. Members of the non-Serb population would also be rounded up and taken away to detention facilities, including in central Knin, and eventually exchanged and transported to areas under Croatian control.
Thus, the threat clearly expressed in Milan Martić's ultimatum in Kijevo was carried out in the territory of the SAO Krajina through the commission of widespread, grave crimes. This created an atmosphere of fear in which the further presence of Croats and other non-Serbs in the SAO Krajina was made impossible. The Trial Chamber has therefore concluded that the displacement of the Croat and other non-Serb population which followed these attacks was not merely the consequence of military action, but in fact its primary objective. "
This should be helpful. Kubura 07:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

On that same page Martić's sentence, says:
"The attack on Kijevo marked a turning point in the JNA's role in the conflict in Croatia , and from that point, the JNA participated in attacks on majority-Croat areas and villages together with SAO Krajina MUP and TO forces. From August 1991 and into early 1992, these combined forces attacked several Croat-majority villages and areas, including Hrvatska Kostajnica, Cerovljani, Hrvatska Dubica, Baćin, Saborsko, Poljanak, Lipovača, Škabrnja and Nadin. The evidence shows that the attacks were carried out in order to connect Serb villages and areas across non-Serb areas. During these attacks, the crimes of murder, destruction, plunder, detention, torture, and cruel treatment were committed against the non-Serb population. ". Kubura 07:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Request move

A vandal has moved this article (changed its name) without any consens or prior discussion. Please revert it back. --No.13 08:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

"Contacts with Serbs"

From Sentencing judgement of Milan Martić. This page was inserted as reference last time, which user Wermania ignored.
...By way of illustration, the Trial Chamber will describe the take-over of the Hrvatska Kostajnica area and the crimes committed there.
During August and September 1991, there was intensive fighting in the predominantly Croat area of Hrvatska Kostajnica. In mid-September 1991, SAO Krajina TO and MUP forces took control of Hrvatska Kostajnica and from there, as well as from Bosanska Kostajnica in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the village of Hrvatska Dubica was shelled and the Croatian forces withdrew. An SAO Krajina TO and MUP force was then set up in Hrvatska Dubica. In the same operation, the nearby villages of Cerovljani and Baćin were also taken.
In September and October 1991, houses belonging to Croats were torched in Hrvatska Dubica and the neighbouring village of Cerovljani , and widespread looting was committed by the TO, the Milicija Krajine, the JNA as well as by local Serbs. Local Croats were detained and subjected to mistreatment and were also used as live shields by the Serb forces. Serbs moved into the houses which the fleeing Croats had left.
In the morning on the 20 th of October 1991 , a truck bearing the insignia "Milicija SAO Krajina" driven and controlled by members of the SAO Krajina TO and MUP collected local civilians, who were almost exclusively Croats, under the pretext of holding a meeting in the local fire station. In total, more than 40 civilians were brought to this fire station. They were guarded by several armed Serb soldiers, and they were not free to leave. Every two or three hours there was a change of guard, and the detainees' names would be read out from a list to verify that no one was missing. Over the course of the day, eleven of the detainees managed to escape or were released because they had contacts with Serbs.
The following day, those detained in the fire station were taken by the soldiers to Krečane just outside of the village of Baćin , on the banks of the Una river, and were killed. Their bodies were buried in several graves, including a mass grave at that location. The Trial Chamber visited this location during its site visit in September 2006....
Admins, please. User Wermania has vandalised this page three times in less than a week. He obviously ignores the references and pushes his POV here. This behaviour is also trolling behaviour. His actions are severe: this is Wermania's mocking at victims of the war crime, as well as ignoring of international sources, that are supposed to be the most neutral. Kubura 12:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

56 victims

Here's the line Milan Babić - initial indictment. 15, a, i.
"On 21 October 1991, the Serb forces took the remaining forty-three detained Croats to a location near the village of Bacin. In addition, the Serb forces brought thirteen non-Serb civilians from Bacin and Cerovljani to the same location. All fifty-six victims were killed there. At approximately the same time, the Serb forces took away an additional thirty civilians from Bacin and twenty-four from the villages Dubica and Cerovljani into an unknown location where they killed them.".
Someone obviously doesn't read the references. Kubura 12:47, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Stop vandalising

Paulcicero, stop vandalising this page.
Wikipedia is not a place for your questioning of court verdicts and for you to fight your wars. Kubura 21:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Kobrua you can´t use a indictment as a source Paulcicero 12:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Paulcicero, you don't have to do this [2], as you did on 14 Sep 2007, 10:40. You should have discussed that here.
As a "final source", I agree with you. Till the verdict in which the accused is found guilty, indictment isn't so strong argument. Everybody is innocent until proven wrong.
But, if in a verdict the accused was found guilty, than it changes everything.
Note that sometimes the verdict has changed or refused certain parts of the indictment.
Also note, that it's important to have indictment as source, especially because, as I saw sometimes, verdict hasn't repeated whole text from indictment, but shortly said:
"The Trial Chamber finds X.Y. GUILTY pursuant to Article ...of the Statute on the following counts". or
"This Trial Chamber finds X.Y...NOT GUILTY of count...".
Like here [3].
On the other hand, it'd OK for others interested to see the indictment, because it's more profound, and gives more data (names and places). Just compare the texts, see annex [4]. On the other hand, it's good even for the accused person. Kubura 19:02, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Why don´t just base the article on the verdict instead to give it more credibility? Paulcicero 13:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Read the text I wrote again. Removing of reference to indictment is ordinary mutilation of article. Kubura 12:11, 26 October 2007 (UTC)