30 year-old children?

My roommate was out of town for the past few days, so instead of playing Scrabble and being social I sat around reading The Time Traveler’s Wife and last month’s University of California, Berkeley War Crimes Studies Center report on the Charles Taylor trial. Here are some highlights. From the latter.

• Defense has been calling witnesses to discredit Prosecution witness testimony that RUF tactics mirrored NPFL tactics. Defense witnesses have testified that the NPFL “catered” to civilians (seriously), did not recruit child soldiers, etc.
• Prosecution has used their cross-examinations to: 1) Point out prior inconsistent statements made by witnesses. (Defense did the same thing during cross-examinations of Prosecution witness testimony.) And 2) Use TRC findings to show that the NPFL did not exactly, um, “cater” to civilians.
• When asked when they expect to wrap up their case, the Defense said August or September. Judges asked defense to move quickly and limit witnesses. Defense lawyers said they would, but they are taking orders from Taylor, who wants all of the witnesses called.
• The report has a very clear (albeit unconvincing) overview of Prosecution’s arguments for why they want Naomi Campbell to testify, along with Defense’s counterarguments.
• The Registrar has been slightly altering transcripts years after testimony to reflect more accurate translations. Judges criticized this practice, and ordered the Registrar to get Trial Chamber approval for any changes to transcripts post-publication. The Berkeley report argues that requiring a court order to make minor changes could slow things down: “[G]iven the late stage in the life of the SCSL, it is unusual that Judges should make changes in procedure that would arguably decrease the efficiency of the trial, rather than increase it.”
• “On direct examination, [Karnah Edward] Mineh indicated that the NPFL did indeed use ‘children,’ but during his cross-examination, he defined the age of children as being between 30 and 35. He qualified his earlier statement by indicating that he was not referring to ‘little children.’”
• Many witnesses gave non-answer answers, what I now think of as Shrek answers (thanks to the wonderful section on witness dissembling in Tim Kelsall’s book). eg “This matter, I did not see it because Nimba is large. Not everything reaches my desk.”
• Defense witness testimony supported Taylor’s claim that when he learned of NPFL support to RUF he punished culpable NPFL soldiers. (I really doubt this, but I wonder how Prosecution can prove otherwise.)