Challenges to Witness’ Credibility Continue

by Charles Jackson, Legal Intern with the Documentation Center of Cambodia and Candidate for J.D. 2011, Northwestern University School of Law
— 22 Jul, 2009

Prak Khan, a former interrogator at Tuol Sleng prison (S-21), returned to the witness stand today and continued to provide details about the operations of the prison, which was run by the Accused Person, Kaing Guek Eav (alias Duch).

The Co-Prosecutors seemed to recognize that the witness’s credibility may have been damaged by inconsistent statements given the day before. They used their time to clarify details of Prak’s testimony. Co-Prosecutor Tan Senarong began by introducing a map of S-21 and asking the witness to show the court specific locations mentioned yesterday, including where interrogations took place, where blood was drawn from prisoners, and where he saw a baby executed by a superior officer. At one point, Co-Prosecutor William Smith introduced a series of film clips from the documentary “S-21: The Khmer Rouge Killing Machine”, which highlighted an interview Prak Khan had given previously about his experiences at S-21. To help direct the witness’s testimony, Smith played each clip and then asked Prak if his past statements were accurate. This tactic proved beneficial, as the prosecution was able to develop a more consistent understanding of Prak’s testimony. However, it seemed unclear whether Prak actually remembered the events he testified to or whether he was confirming the statements to avoid appearing untruthful.

After the Co-Prosecutors finished, Civil Party Lawyers began a line of questioning that attempted to portray Duch as a leader who maintained absolute control over the actions of his subordinates. In response to their questions, Prak discussed how he was only allowed access to the dining hall, prison, and interrogation rooms at S-21 because of Duch’s strict rules limiting the staff to the areas where they worked. Prak also said that, in the three days prior to the Vietnamese entering Phnom Penh in January 1979, the interrogators did not receive any orders from Duch and therefore spent their days “sitting around doing nothing”…

Read more: ctm_blog_7-22-2009

Cambodia Tribunal Monitor’s Trial Observer posts are written according to the personal observations and opinions of the writer and do not constitute a transcript of ECCC proceedings or the views of Cambodia Tribunal Monitor and/or its partners. Official court transcripts for the ECCC’s hearings may be accessed at the ECCC website.