Wessel's defense tries to help witness Halitijaha, he completely misunderstands

When Sadik Halitjaha was waiting in the hall on Monday to begin his testimony before the court in The Hague in the process against the leaders of the Kosovo Civil Army, Kadri Veselini's lawyer stood up to discuss a point of importance for Halitien himself. Based on judicial procedures, when there are issues to be discussed before questioning or even longer, the witness is taken out of the hall. And so it was Monday with Halitay.

What Ben Emmerson was trying to do was protect Sadik Halitay from the possibility of self-inference during giving testimony and advice for him to consult even a lawyer.

The British lawyer was seeking to ensure that the prosecution has acted in a conform of witness rights when he has given his testimony, which he will then give. This, after Emmerson explains even in his speech, that the witness in question against UCK leaders is mentioned in a case of order in the arrest of three.

That was what Emmerson said that day at the session:

If you may know the court, this witness is quoted as what you in America call a co-conspirator without an indictment, and this is further expounded in paragraph 155 of the indictment and further expounded in paragraph 329 of the prosecution's preliminary court file.

It has to do with a tape you've taken earlier and it's related to a claim this witness has ordered the kidnapping of three members of witness families, three women who were later found dead. Taking advantage of this story, this background, and here, of course, we are in paragraph 97, paragraph 5 of the protocol for the development order of the judicial process, on the 25th of January, which says that during the preparation hearing, the questioning by Mr. Pach, so he has to do the questioning by telling the witness that the information he gives can be inflammatory and allow him to take counsel from a lawyer. Also, by taking your previous practice, I am referring to a July 12th example in the testimony of witness 04323, you give a reminder to give a witness advice so as not to give a disparaging witness unless you are forced by the court to do so. And the witness must be treated that if such a case comes up, then this case will have to be raised with the jury.

I know that in the note one or two says somewhere that the witness who said I hadn't mind whether I'm going to be punished or not, however, it's not clear to us that the prosecution has let the witness know that not only remains in doubt, it's a very important element against the accused, so if I told him before it was said to be the person who ordered him to commit one of the crimes that's part of the act”.

That there was no such purpose, Emmerson clarified it today by conveying the words of Kadri Wessel.

He said his client has asked him to make it publicly clear that he has not made and made no claim against the witness Sadik Halitijaha.

Mr. Vessel asked me to make it very clear publicly that he has not made and made no claim against this witness on issues that we mentioned yesterday”, Emmerson said.

But, apparently, Sadik Halitijaha after hearing from the media what was declared in the hall when he was not for a moment present at the order of the judges, misunderstood Ben Emmerson's word. And instead of interpreting it as it was, an attempt to protect it from identity, he claimed it was an unnecessary disgruntledness and a tendency to attack it. He has also misunderstood communication between the lawyer and the card client. In fact, this approach to communication is the judicial practice that applies to most trials, as the lawyer and client are not allowed to speak directly in the hall.

That was what Sadik Halitijaha said:

I had to split the time. To give me the time of the lawyer who's going to use his time of speech, and I don't want things without re-replayed, so I don't want them to be thrilled. I'm sorry for the dynamism of this stumbling court. As far as I'm going to ask, since I'm born, I answer. I'm prepared for that job. I have knowledge. The day you kicked me out, it was yesterday, Mr. President. Emmerson has made a diversion against me as it seems with the influence of Kadri Wessel, that so came her assistant with a letter, said I'm blackmailed. That then they gave the order somewhere to kill a man and two women, and the head complained that why I don't have a lawyer. I'd like to address you to college chairman, not to the lawyer that she was a knife to me in the back. He needs to explain it correctly and be fair not to hit down the belt. Let him tell you where the order is, where he saw it, where he had it. Where is that copy of the order? He shouldn't tell me blackmailed, because I've never been blackmailed in my life. There is no force in the world that blackmails me. They could kill me, they could lock me up, but they could put me up for the mean thing, and they'd put me in charge of forgetting Emmerson and Kadria who ordered him to say that. For the lawyer's business, I know the lawyer is normal because he's probably been inside until I got out. I didn't want to spend any more of Kosovo's budget, because I believe big money is getting Emmerson. Once, let's get this thing straight, we're going to get on with the <x1.

After that, the judge told him that it is only his duty to answer questions, not to pronounce, for that is the duty of judges.