“Those prisoners who refused to confess […] would be tortured”, S-21 Interrogator Tells the Court

Today, witness Tay Teng concluded his testimony. Under questioning of mainly the Nuon Chea Defense Team, he gave the Court more information about Choeung Ek and Tuol Sleng. The remainder of his testimony mainly consisted of clarifications that he gave about dates and locations. Next, former S-21 prison guard and interrogator Lach Mean took his stance. He told the Court about detention conditions, types of prisoners, interrogations and torture at S-21.

 

Follow-up questions by Civil Party lawyers

The President announced that the remainder of witness Tay Teng’s testimony would be heard, followed by witness 2-TCW-898. All parties were present, with Nuon Chea following the hearing from the holding cell. The floor was granted to the Civil Party lawyers. Lor Chunthy form Legal Aid Cambodia started his line of questioning by asking about his school education. He replied that he attended Grade 11 in the old education system. He joined the army in 1973. His older sibling or relative asked him to join the army with him. He was more than ten years old when he joined the army, but he could not remember his exact age.

Turning to the next topic, Mr. Chunthy inquired about his time at S-21. Mr. Teng said that the 50-men-unit assigned him to work at S-21. It was in Division 12. He could not remember how many people went to S-21.

The main building was around 200 or 300 meters apart from where he stood guard. He saw Chinese cars transporting prisoners. They were big trucks with six wheels. He did not know how many people were on each vehicle, since the vehicles were fully covered. He did not see people getting off the vehicle, since the vehicles usually went inside the compound where he could not see them.

He had never heard of any person escaping from S-21. Prisoners were taken out of their cells for interrogation. The houses of the security guards were former houses of residents in the area. He did not know what happened in these houses. He never heard the cry or shouting of women. He heard the sound of torture and interrogation from where he was stationed.

There was a stupa. There was a wooden house that had already been built at Choeung Ek and he was asked to live to the west of the stupa. There were residential houses to the west and south of Choeung Ek. People would usually be killed on the night of the day they arrived. There were iron bars. They were from the cars. There were between twenty and hundred meters away.

The President interrupted the lawyer’s questioning and said that he ran out of time. The floor was granted to the Nuon Chea Defense Team.

 

Clarifications on dates

Nuon Chea Defense Counsel Victor Koppe asked whether it was correct that he had given testimony having been a member of Division 12, which the witness confirmed. Mr. Koppe asked whether he was 15 years old at that time. The witness could not recall well. Mr. Koppe asked whether he was born in 1958. He replied that he was born in 1959. When asked why his Written Record of Interview indicated that he was born in 1959, he said that he may have told the investigators that he was born in 1959. “I did not tell them lies”. Mr. Koppe asked whether he joined the 12-Year-Old-Group. He replied that he joined the group when he was assigned to carry packages. He remained part of the division until the fall of Phnom Penh. He could not recall his transfer from one place to another clearly. Before he was sent to S-21, he used to do farming, but he could not recall the exact place where he did so. This prompted Mr. Koppe to refer to his Written Record of Interview, in which he had said that he was working at Au Bek Kham, before being sent to S-21 by the chairman of the 100-Men-Unit.[1] He answered that the statement that he had given to the investigators had been clear. He did not do anything else than rice farming during that time. He did not hold any position during his time at S-21, he said. “I was simply an ordinary guard under the supervision of Huy”.

Mr. Koppe said that the witness had indicated that he had been sent to S-21 at the beginning of 1978 and asked the witness to reflect whether this indeed happened. He could not recall this well, but insisted that his answers were clear during his interview with the investigators. Mr. Koppe wanted to know whether he was sent to S-21 before or after his cousins Uk Tem and Uk Saroeun were arrested. He replied that he went there before. He could not recall the exact month it happened.

 

Prey Sar and Choeung Ek

Mr. Koppe referred to two lists of S-21 prisoners, which indicated that Uk Tem and Uk Saroeun were arrested on 25 September 1977.[2][3] When Mr. Koppe asked whether he would confirm that he therefore went to S-21 in 1977 already, he replied that he could not remember.

Mr. Koppe red an excerpt of his statement, in which he had said that he was sent to Prey Sar, because he had been implicated by Uk Tem, Uk Saroeun or Uk Savan.[4] He answered that it was not because his brothers implicated him, but because the interrogators were aware of his background. He did not know whether Uk Tem or Uk Saroeun removed him. He thought that he was removed from his unit because of his relationship with the two cousins. The work at Prey Sar worksite was conducted in order to temper the people, the witness said. They received meals twice a day and had to work all day. He remained at Prey Sar until the liberation of Phnom Penh, Mr. Teng said.

Mr. Koppe then asked whether there were any guards or workers who were 19 years old at S-21 and called Tuy Teng and not Tay Teng. He answered that he did not pay attention to this. Mr. Koppe pointed to a list of people arrested under the office surrounding the general headquarters and the OCIJ list (entry 6586), which indicated that someone called Tuy Teng was arrested on October 14 1977.[5] He showed the witness the Khmer version of the document and asked whether he recognized his name. The witness replied that it was not his name. The surname was different. Mr. Koppe said that Duch had referred to a person Tuy Teng in court.[6] He asked whether his name was sometimes mispronounced as Tuy Teng back then. He said that he did not accept this name as his name. He used his name Dy Teng during those days. During the days of Democratic Kampuchea he changed it to Tay Teng. Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyer Pich Ang interjected and said that the name in the statement by Duch was Tay Teng in the Khmer version, but that the English version had transcribed Tuy Teng. The witness had not heard the name Tuy Teng. The President said that the S-21 prisoners list indicated that Tuy Teng was imprisoned in section D. Mr. Koppe said that it was also indicated that this person was imprisoned under the section of general staff.[7] Mr. Koppe asked whether he could explain why he was taken away from Prey Sar and then made chief of a killing unit at Choeung Ek. The witness said that he was not involved in the killing but only as a guard. He could not remember when he went to Choeung Ek, since something dropped onto his head and he had memory problems. Mr. Koppe inquired whether he remembered having been at the re-enactment of Choeung Ek with Duch and others, which he confirmed. Mr. Koppe said that the investigators had written that Tay Teng was “somewhat disoriented” during this re-enactment, because of the changed surroundings.[8] The witness answered that he did not recall whether he was disoriented or not. The judges had written that he had “difficulties identifying exact locations”, since the trees had grown since then.[9] Mr. Koppe asked whether he had difficulties identifying exact locations. Mr. Koppe wanted to know whether “there was anything happening to you while you were there”. Senior Assistant Prosecutor Travis Farr interjected and said that the investigating judges had also clarified that the witness had also pointed to some locations. Mr. Koppe said that the witness had been with a big group. He then asked whether there was any reason why he had troubles on that day remembering the exact locations, such as having struggled with the heat, not having eaten enough or not having slept well. The witness apologized for having troubles with his memory. At this point, the President adjourned the hearing for a break.

 

 

Prey Sar

After the break, Mr. Koppe resumed his line of questioning by asking about his being sent to Prey Sar. He had said in his Written Record of Interview that he was sent to Prey Sar because of an implication by his cousins. He wanted to know how much time after the arrest of their cousins he were sent to Prey Sar. The witness replied that he did not remember the date. He said that he was “removed and transferred to Prey Sar” after their arrest. Their arrest happened “long before I was sent to Prey Sar”. He did not know what exact month or year it happened or how many months after their arrest.

When Mr. Koppe asked what happened the day of his arrest, the witness replied that he was not arrested. He was removed and sent to Prey Sar “probably” because he was related to his cousins. He was informed that he would be sent to do rice farming at Prey Sar. After a brief discussion on the correct phrasing of his question, Mr. Koppe asked whether he was a guard of S-21 when he was sent to Prey Sar. Mr. Teng replied that he guarded S-21 in front of a building of the compound. When Mr. Koppe repeated his question where he was when he learned that he would be sent to Prey Sar, Mr. Teng answered that he could not remember well. Mr. Koppe explained that he asked this question, since it did not seem likely that he would be sent from Prey Sar to Choeung Ek. At this point, Mr. Farr interjected and said that this summary was not consistent with what the witness had said: the witness had said that he was sent to Prey Sar “long” after his cousins had been arrested. He might have been sent to Choeung Ek in the meantime.

 

Choeung Ek

Mr. Koppe said that this was well-argued and asked the witness when he was sent to Choeung Ek. He answered that he worked at S-21 when he was sent to Choeung Ek. He could not recall clearly whether he was sent there after Prey Sar. Mr. Koppe asked what made him sure that he had been digging graves at Choeung Ek and not somewhere else. He replied that “I tell the truth”. He could recall “many aspects that related to that place” when he went back to Choeung Ek. Asked about examples, Mr. Teng sought details by the counsel to jog his memory. He insisted that he could recall many aspects of the place during the re-enactment. He had showed the people the place where people were detained. When Mr. Koppe repeated his question, Mr. Farr interjected and said that there were photographs from the time of the re-enactment and that they could show the photographs.[10] Mr. Koppe said that the human brain functioned differently: if a photograph, this would lead the witness. He again repeated his question and asked what exactly jogged the witness’s memory during the re-enactment. The witness answered that the investigators had asked him whether this was the place where he worked, which he had confirmed. He then recounted that there was a specific tree to the west of the fence that he recognized. He could recognize clearly that this was the place where people were executed.

Mr. Koppe wanted to know whether he was ever sent to prison by the prison authorities after 1979, which he denied. Mr. Koppe asked whether he had ever heard that Him Huy had served a ten-month sentence for his involvement, which he also denied. The authorities had not tried to speak to him. Mr. Koppe asked whether he knew why Him Huy was arrested and not the witness himself, to which Mr. Farr objected: if not having known that Him Huy was imprisoned, he would not know about the reasons. Mr. Koppe rephrased his question and asked whether he knew of anyone of the people who worked at Choeung Ek who was prosecuted. The witness said that no one was prosecuted and that he would be aware of it if that had happened.

Mr. Koppe asked about a person called Chhuon who he had mentioned as being the only person having worked at Choeung Ek whose name he could remember.[11] The witness confirmed that he knew Chhuon. “He was a combatant, just like me.” He confirmed that Chhuon was responsible for digging pits and covering them as well. In his team, Huy had overall supervision. He was in charge of a group of seven or eight people.

 

Supervision of Choeung Ek

Mr. Koppe said that Duch had said that a group of a hundred combatants was in charge of Choeung Ek.[12] The witness said that he was only responsible of seven or eight people. “I was not in charge of a group of many combatants”. The rice fields at Prey Sar and Choeung Ek are “huge”, the witness said. Mr. Koppe inquired whether the rice fields at Choeung Ek were “just as large” as the rice fields at Prey Sar. Mr. Teng answered that he could not recall. The rice fields at Prey Sar were larger than the ones at Choeung Ek. Mr. Koppe asked whether it was correct thatit was 100 times 100 hectares. Judge Fenz instructed him to first ask open questions. Mr. Farr also objected. Mr. Koppe withdrew his question. He asked who was in charge of the rice field in Choeung Ek. He answered that the part of the rice field at Choeung Ek that he was responsible for was “quite small”. There was a small area that they grew vegetables at. Mr. Koppe asked about the division that was responsible for Choeung Ek. When the witness could not remember, Mr. Koppe asked whether it was under the supervision of Division 703. [13] The witness said that he did not know. The divisions were usually involved in the military. There was also a division at S-21. “They did not come to get into the tasks performed at Choeung Ek”. Mr. Koppe asked whether he knew anything about an issue of conflict related to competence between Division 703 and 20. He denied this. Mr. Koppe referred to another document, in which he had said that he had not seen any freshly dug pits when he arrived at Choeung Ek.[14] He confirmed this. Mr. Koppe wanted to know how he reached this conclusion. He replied that he did not pay attention whether the pits were newly dug or not. He was not asked to “do the search or pay attention to all those pits”. He was assigned to go to and worked at that prior established location. Mr. Koppe asked whether this meant that there was no one who instructed him not to dug pits at specific locations, because this had already been used. He replied that no one told him how to dig and how to bury the pits. Mr. Koppe asked whether it was correct that there were 20 or 30 pits there were.[15] Mr. Farr said that open question should be asked first. Mr. Koppe repeated his question. The witness replied that he could not remember well, but that he stood by his previous statement. Mr. Koppe inquired whether he knew if there were nay grave-pits before he arrived. He answered that he saw a few old graves close to where he walked passed. He confirmed that these were the two or three Chinese graves.

He first went to S-21 before working at Choeung Ek. Mr. Koppe said that Duch said that Choeung Ek was already in use at the beginning of 1977 or end 1976. When Mr. Farr asked for references, Mr. Koppe sighed, saying that this was everywhere on the case file. Mr. Farr said that Duch had given several dates. If relying on a specific quote, references had to be given and that he could not sigh about the court rules. Mr. Koppe said he would give the references after the break.

 

Establishment and location of Choeung Ek

After the break, Mr. Koppe resumed his line of questioning. He gave the missing references.[16] He asked the witness whether it was correct that Choeung Ek was established between 1976 and mid-1977. The witness replied that he could not recall the year that “the place was relocated”. Mr. Koppe asked whether it was correct that he may have gone to Choeung Ek in mid-1977 at the latest. The witness could not remember. Mr. Koppe then asked whether he was certain that he worked at S-21 before he went to Choeung Ek, which the witness confirmed. Mr. Koppe said that the witness had indicated in his Written Record of Interview that there were no children killed at Choeung Ek.[17] The witness said that he was sure that there were no children there.

Mr. Koppe asked him to describe the location of the former Chinese graves that he had mentioned earlier. He replied that he was not sure where the cemetery was located. When he was there, he did not focus on whether there were signs of former graveyards. Since he was not an expert in this, he said, he did not pay attention to this.[18] Mr. Koppe read an excerpt of a book by David Chandler, who had referred to a hamlet of Choeung Ek. He replied that he had not seen the hamlet but that he saw a stupa. Mr. Teng said that it looked like a coffin. He could not remember the exact location of that stupa. It was close to a kiosk, which was there for people to stand and relax. He clarified whether the kiosk was still at the same location during the time of the re-enactment. The place of the kiosk was also used to keep a generator. When Mr. Koppe was unsuccessful in gaining more clarification, he finished his line of questioning.

The President thanked the witness and dismissed him. He then ordered the court officer to usher in the new witness and his duty counsel.

---

 

New Witness: Lach Mean

Witness Lach Mean was born in 1957 in Spean Daek Village, Kampong Chhnang Province.

The floor was granted to the Co-Prosecutors. Assistant Prosecutor Andrew Boyle asked when he joined the Khmer Rouge. He replied that he did so in 1974. He was assigned to work at S-21 in late 1975 or early 1976. He was a soldier when he joined the Khmer Rouge. He was a commune militiaman initially. Later, he was part of Unit 12. He worked at Ta Khmao for around one to two months. He was reassigned from Ta Khmao to a former PS prison. Later, he was reassigned to Tuol Sleng. Because the old prison was “old and crowded”, they moved to Tuol Svay Prey. He did not know whether this was the reason for the relocation of the prison. He saw prisoners entering the prison almost on a daily basis, since he worked as a guard at S-21. They were transported to S-21 by fully-covered vehicles. Some of those prisoners only wore shorts. Ty and Lorn maintained the list of prisoners. The prisoners were handcuffed behind their backs and blindfolded. He also saw prisoners being taken away from the prison. He did not know where they were taken to, since his main task was to guard the compound. He did not know the drivers well. Sry was one of the drivers who transported prisoners in and out. He did not talk to Sry and only saw them drive the vehicles. He never met or saw those prisoners who were transported away again, since he did not leave the compound. They never returned.

 

Prisoners and detention conditions

There were both male and female prisoners. Some of the women were pregnant. He never saw any of these women giving birth. He did not see any women with young children. Mr. Boyle tried to refresh the witness’s memory by reading an excerpt of the witness’s Written Record of Interview. He had said that there were children together with women at S-21.[19] Mr. Mean denied this. “I was not aware of that fact”. Mr. Koppe said that the witness had said that there were no children on the page before and in his DC-Cam statement.[20] Ms. Guissé said that the French translation was not accurate.

Mr. Boyle then proceeded to ask whether there were any lawyers assigned to the prisoners, which the witness denied. He said that they were brought in without any legal representation. They did not have any means to defend themselves. There were three main buildings for the detention of the prisoners and one smaller detention building. There were small cells within the rooms. Prisoners would be put in separate cells when they arrived. After they had been interrogated, they would be placed in a common room where their ankles were shackled. He did not know about prisoners being detained at specific locations.  Mr. Boyle quoted his statement, in which he had talked about prisoners who were detained on the third floor and treated differently.[21] He replied: “For important prisoners, they did not want staff or guards to see them being detained”, the witness said. These important prisoners included former officials and S-21 staff members. “They were treated differently from other prisoners, since guards were not allowed to approach their location”.  They were shackled on their ankles. They would use a long piece of metal to go through these ankle rings.

Prisoners remained mostly in one place unless transported out. To bathe, prisoners would be hosed down in the detention room. The room would be cleaned and dried later on. They were not allowed to bath themselves. Prisoners slept directly on the floor and did not have any sleeping mat or pillow. He witnessed prisoners dying when he was in the “defense unit”. He thought that they died of diarrhea or other illnesses. “The guards never beat the prisoners, because the guards had no right to beat the prisoners. When the prisoners insulted the guards, the guards had only the right to advise or reprimand them, but not to beat them.” There were cases when prisoners yelled out while being interrogated and in pain. He never witnessed prisoners who refused to eat. Mr. Boyle read an excerpt of his statement. He had told the interviewer that some prisoners refused to eat.[22] Mr. Mean now said that these cases happened. He did not know why people refused to eat. “It was their individual reason”.

At this point, the President adjourned the hearing for a break.

 

Instructions from the upper echelon

After the break, the President instructed the witness not to speculate or provide his own conclusions. Mr. Boyle then inquired whether the witness used the name Lach Mean when working at S-21, which the witness confirmed. He did not know whether there was any other Lach Mean. To his knowledge, he was the only one. His initial position was a guard at S-21. He stood guard inside the compound of the prison and in the detention buildings. While he worked there, his role was to “make sure that I was vigilant about the prisoners”, making sure that they would not break their chains or “hang themselves”. Mr. Boyle wanted to know whether it was a big concern that prisoners might want to commit suicide. Mr. Mean replied that it was the order from the “leader in the center” that they “had to be constantly on the move to monitor the prisoners”. He said “because they felt hopeless or because they were scared, so that they might commit suicide” to Mr. Boyle’s question of why prisoners might commit suicide. Their primary concern could be that they would be tortured and interrogated. He did not see any prisoner actually committing suicide. However, the leadership had told them that a prisoner grabbed a gun from a guard and shot himself. Thus, the upper echelon instructed them to be vigilant regarding this matter. The upper echelon referred to Hor and Duch, and Phal and Pon, who were his unit chiefs. He saw bleedings, scars and wounds on the backs, hands and feet of prisoners. A medic would treat them in the room and bandage them. “They were tortured, they were beaten”. He did not know what education the medics had received. They distributed pills to the prisoners or cleaned their wounds. “They were not that young, they could be around 20.” Mr. Boyle said that he had testified in court saying that there were teenagers who were medics.[23] He estimated that they were between 17 and 20. After his guarding unit, he was trained how to use a type writer to type the confessions of the prisoners. Later, he was included into the interrogation unit. When he worked as a typist, his duty was to copy the confessions of the prisoners and to watch over the prisoners who were being interrogated. His direct supervisor was the one who interrogated the prisoners. He had to type the confession down. He confirmed that he was in the same room as the interrogator. “So I was there to learn how to interrogate and how to type the confession.” After having typed the confession, he would hand them to the squad chief, who would pass them on to Duch. He never handed the typed confessions to Duch himself. Instead, he delivered them to Hor.

 

Working as an interrogator

He worked as an interrogator in October or November 1978 for around two or three months. “I interrogated only about six or seven or maybe eight prisoners, or maybe ten at most”. Mr. Boyle sought leave to present a document to the witness to refresh his memory regarding the date, which was granted.[24] Mr. Boyle said that there was a column that indicated an interrogator called Mean. He denied having seen such a document at S-21. He said he did not understand the document. When pointed to the column, he said that he saw that there was an interrogator called Mean. He confirmed that it was him who conducted the interrogation. Mr. Boyle said that it indicated that it was dated February 2 1978. Mr. Boyle asked whether this refreshed his memory that he had been an interrogator at least already in February 1978. The witness replied that he could not recall the month clearly. “However, I worked as an interrogator for a short period of time”.

He could recall the “large influx of prisoners.” They were brought in with two or three trucks per day sometimes. He did not know where the prisoners were brought in from.

“However, there was a large influx of prisoners to the center in 1978”. He did not know whether they came from the East Zone.

Mr. Boyle presented an S-21 confession to the witness.[25] Mr. Boyle inquired whether he recognized the signature under the word interrogator on that page. He said he could not recall clearly whether he had actually provided the signature, although his name was his name. Mr. Boyle said that the English and French version had mistranslated it at Tych Mean. This confession had indicated that there was a large influx of prisoners from the East Zone. The witness replied that there had been an instruction by the Center that most of the East Zone collaborated with traitors and were therefore arrested. This instruction came from Duch. His instruction was to secretly interrogate prisoners and that prisoners should answer the truth only. The instructions were conveyed in study sessions. All interrogators attended these study sessions. The chief of the East Zone was Sao Phim and was considered the “chief traitor”. In Duch’s instructions, he had also mentioned traitors from the Northwest Zone. He saw the arrival of many Vietnamese prisoners. There were more than fifty but less than one hundred Vietnamese prisoners. They were transported to the prison with trucks.

During his testimony he had indicated that there were between 100 and 200 Vietnamese prisoners.[26] He now said that his memory was better during his testimony and that this number was probably correct.

There were three teams of interrogators. Each teach consisted of eight to ten men. He did not remember what the types were of each team. His own team was the one responsible for interrogating ordinary prisoners. Other teams were responsible for interrogating senior prisoners. Mr. Boyle asked whether he remembered a unit called the Strict Unit. He replied that they were experienced interrogators. He was not sure why they were called the Strict Unit. “What I knew was that the interrogators in that team had a lot of experience and were very good at interrogating. So they were very good at their work. They were very firm with their assigned task”. This meant that “they had worked in that team for a long time. That’s why they had built their experiences and skills in interrogation. They knew how to extract confessions in their interrogations.” Prisoners who refused to confess were placed “aside for two or three months”, after which they would be brought back to be interrogated by another interrogator. Mr. Boyle referred to the witness’s interview with the investigators. Mr. Mean had told them that prisoners had to be taken “to be the other group” when they refused to confess.[27] He recounted that the prisoners were reported to the upper echelon if they refused to confess. They would then be questioned by someone else.

Asked who decided which prisoner would be interrogated when, he said that he did not know who was in charge of deciding on this matter. “As for me, it was my team leader who gave me the name of the prisoner to be interrogated.” He learned his skill to interrogate by “on the job training”. Moreover, Ta Duch also instructed them in some aspects during the study sessions. He could not recall Duch’s instructions well. The instructions took place frequently: sometimes weekly, sometimes monthly. He recalled that he would be called to observe for learn. He sat down to observe the techniques to interrogate the prisoners. Initially, he learned from his team supervisor Kak and then from Norn. When the prisoners were handed to him, he “followed the steps” that he had learned from his observations. When he was in the interrogation unit, there were confessions from prisoners, which linked to other people.

Mr. Boyle read an excerpt of his statement to the investigators.[28] Mr. Mean confirmed that they were instructed to find out the strings of the prisoners. The interrogators tried to discover the networks of the prisoners and their connections to the CIA and KTB. There were some instances that prisoners refused to give confessions and some did not indicate any truthful confession.

He confirmed that their instruction was that anyone who was brought into S-21 was considered a “traitor of the nation”. He went on: “that was the clear instruction”.[29] They considered those who were brought in were spies. He confirmed that he considered that his job was to interrogate and conceive information of those who had been determined to having conducted enemy activities. “It was their policy that enemies needed to be smashed. Every enemy needed to be smashed.” “Those prisoners who refused to confess, those prisoners would be tortured”.

The President adjourned the hearing. It will continue tomorrow at 9 am with the testimony of Tach Mean and reserve witness 2-TCW-931.

 

[1] E3/7663, at00163776 (KH), 00401841 (FR), 00401836 (EN).

[2] E3/2274, 37

[3] E3/2026.

[4] E3/7663, at 001163777 (KH)), 00401837 (EN), 00401843 (FR)

[5] E3/844, at paragraph F.

[6] E3/5805, at 10:15:52.

[7] E3/2026.

[8] E3/5764, at paragraph 4.2.

[9] ibid., paragraph 5.3.

[10] D86/15.

[11] E3/7617, 00401878 (EN), 00164403 (KH), 00401855 (FR).

[12] E3/564, at 00197997 (EN).

[13] E3/2117.

[14] E3/7617, at 00401879, (EN) 00164403 (KH), 00401886 (KH).

[15] E3/7616, at 00401879 (EN), 00164403 (KH), 00401885 (FR).

[16] Trial Chamber Decision of Case 001 paragraph 184 and 185.

[17] E3/7617, at 00164402 (KH), 00401878 (EN), 00401884 (FR).

[18] E3/1684, book by David Chandler, page 139, 00192832 (EN), 00357415 (FR), 00191997 (KH).

[19] E3/7660, at 00335292 (EN), 00057072 (KH), 00338010 (FR).

[20] 00335291 (EN), 00057072 (KH), 000338010 (FR).

[21] E3/7602, at 00146788 (EN), 00147730 (FR), 00145585 (KH).

[22] E3/7641, at 00363555 (EN), 00363677 (FR), 00162775 (KH).

[23] E3/7467, at 15:50:59.

[24] E3/8671 at 012131194 (EN), 00214288 (KH).

[25] E3/2469, S-21 Confession.

[26] E3/7467, 14:14:33.

[27] E3/9059, at 00180988 (EN and KH).

[28] E3/9059, at 00180994 (EN).

[29] E3/7467, at 15:05:52.