Legal Medicine 47 (2020) 101766

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Legal Medicine
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/legalmed

Could a “body fragmentation index” be useful in reconstructing events prior T

to burial: Case studies of selected primary and secondary mass graves from
eastern Bosnia
Igor Vaduveskovica,1, Andrej Starovicb, Roger W. Byardc, Marija Djurica,
⁎

a
Laboratory for Anthropology, Institute of Anatomy, School of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Serbia
b
National Museum in Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
c
School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, and Forensic Science South Australia (FSSA), Adelaide, South Australia 5005, Australia

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: This study analyses variable levels of body fragmentation among secondary mass grave sites with similar for-
Forensic science mation process history. The study is based on data from 10 commingled secondary mass grave sites and two
Forensic archeology primary sites related to the war in Bosnia in 1995. The aim was to investigate differences in level of body
Forensic anthropology fragmentation between mass graves of similar origin and taphonomy. In order to quantify the degree of frag-
Secondary mass graves
mentation (and level of commingling) within a grave, we introduced a fragmentation index (FI). FI represents
Commingled human remains
Fragmentation index
the ratio between the number of complete bodies and number of body parts from the same context. Results show
high discrepancies in body fragmentations between different sites. FI for secondary sites of similar formation
Article Classification: history varied from 0.01 to 0.59 (max = 1), while two primary sites have values 0.92 and 0.90 respectively.
Forensic Variable levels of fragmentation among similar secondary sites suggest a possibility of different peri mortem
Science circumstances of buried, so we tested whether the “body fragmentation index” could assist in elucidating the
Anthropology manner of death. Unusually high levels of body fragmentation (FI value below 0.1) in some secondary sites may
Archeology indicate that body disarticulation was most likely caused peri-mortem by explosives, land mines, mortars or tank
Mass Fatalities fire, all suggesting a combat situation.

1. Introduction
The downfall of Yugoslavia and the ensuing military conflicts across
the region lasting from 1991 to 1999 resulted in the deaths of more
than 140,000 people [1] and in the creation of numerous mass graves.
The majority of mass graves identified by excavations, starting from the
late 1990 s to nowadays, have shown them to be of a secondary type,
i.e. that human remains from primary burial sites were translocated to
alternative, secondary locations. A significant issue with secondary
burial sites is the problem of superimposed taphonomic changes. For
example, body fragmentation has often occurred as a result of the use of
heavy machinery during exhumation of the primary burial sites (the so-
called “robbing process”), during transportation to secondary sites, and,
finally at the time of re-burial [2].
From the viewpoint of forensic field archaeology, excavation of
secondary mass graves is complex and challenging, as so many factors
have influenced the final status and condition of the burial site. All
presumed “episodes” that have occurred during the site’s history
(visible as different deposits, formation of internal vertical and/or
horizontal stratigraphy, final covering with soil, and additional tapho-
nomic processes) have a significant impact on the state of preservation
and general condition of the remains. Alternatively, during the process
of identifying, recording, and collecting remains from secondary mass
graves, archaeologists have to be extremely cautious as not only post-
mortem, but peri-mortem circumstances, could have had a significant
effect on the fragmentation and general state of preservation. Thus, if
the cause of death was connected, for example, to explosive weapons, a
considerably higher degree of fragmentation would be expected.
Anthropologically, the accuracy of estimations of the Minimum
Number of Individuals (MNI) in secondary graves may be seriously
compromised if the bodies are very fragmented and/or have been dis-
persed among different graves. This phenomenon was emphasised in a
previous study by our group [3]. It was then demonstrated how the
accuracy of MNI estimation could be compromised by fragmentation.

⁎
Corresponding author at: Dr Subotica 4/2, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia.
E-mail address: marijadjuric5@gmail.com (M. Djuric).
1
ORCID: 0000-0002-4900-3136.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2020.101766
Received 3 March 2020; Received in revised form 9 July 2020; Accepted 18 July 2020
Available online 23 July 2020
1344-6223/ © 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V.
I. Vaduveskovic, et al.
An index that more objectively assessed the nature of a mass grave
structure (i.e. specifically the proportions of complete bodies, body
parts and isolated bones), was developed to assist with MNI estimation.
The pathological assessment of remains from mass graves may be
similarly compromised by fragmentation and post mortem changes, and
this is particularly so for secondary burials. Determining whether a
particular injury has resulted from combat or execution may not,
therefore, be possible based purely on the pathological evaluation.
Given that secondary mass graves not only generally have a higher
degree of fragmentation, but also demonstrate variable levels of frag-
mentation among different sites we wanted to further test whether the
“body fragmentation index” could assist in elucidating the manner of
death and whether handling of the remains had occurred prior to
burial.
2. Materials and methods
Data from a series of 12 mass graves in the Srebrenica region of
eastern Bosnia were used in this study. All graves arose from the war in
Bosnia and Herzegovina during 1995, and the data were systematized
in databases at the Centre for Research of War, War Crimes and Tracing
of Missing Persons (Banja Luka, Republic of Srpska). Among other
useful information, the databases contain original forensic fieldwork
reports, with precise estimates of the number of bodies and body parts
excavated from each particular grave. The majority of the graves had
been excavated by the Missing Persons Institute of Bosnia and
Herzegovina (MPI), with technical and advisory assistance given by the
International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP). Before 2001, all
the fieldwork and excavations were performed by the International
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), which was mostly
concentrated on primary mass graves. Unfortunately, the accessible
ICTY reports on the small number of pre-2001 excavated secondary
mass graves do not meet methodological standards for the labelling of
human remains that were later introduced in the ICMP forensic
Fig. 1. Hybrid map of the east Bosnian Drina River Region, showing the distribution of 12 analysed mass grave sites (detail: Cancari Road, Liplje and Hodzici Road
mass graves – drawn and digitally processed by A. Starovic).
2
Legal Medicine 47 (2020) 101766
protocol. Thus, only 12 mass graves were analysed in the current study,
composed of two primary graves and 10 secondary (Fig. 1).
Mass grave sites included in the study (Table 1) are the following: (*)
(*)
B is used for “Body”, BP stands for “Body Part”, and GBP signifies
“General Body Part”.
1. Cerska (village in the municipality of Vlasenica, eastern Bosnia,
assigned as CSK, according to the investigation protocols) con-
tained 168 cases of human remains: 154B, 14 BP, and 0 GBP. In the
PHR excavation report W. Haglund [4] concluded that this mass
grave was primary and undisturbed.
2. Lazete 01 (village Gušteri in the municipality of Zvornik, eastern
Bosnia, assigned as LZ01) had 143 cases of human remains: 129B,
14 BP, and 0 GBP. As with CSK this mass grave was primary, but
partly disturbed, e.g. robbed [5].
3. Budak 01 (village Dugo Polje in the municipality of Srebrenica,
eastern Bosnia), assigned as SR-BUD-01, contained 269 cases of
human remains: 21B, 157 BP, 91 GBP, and, according to the ICMP
report for Budak 01 [6] it was a secondary mass grave.
4. Cancari Road 04 (village Gornja Kamenica in the municipality of
Zvornik, eastern Bosnia), assigned as KAM04ZVO and T-ZVO.CAN-
04, contained 393 cases of human remains: 145B, 218 BP, 30 GBP,
and, according to the ICMP related report [7] it was a secondary
mass grave.
5. Cancari Road 06 (village Gornja Kamenica in the municipality of
Zvornik, eastern Bosnia), assigned as KAM06ZVO and T-ZVO.CAN-
06), contained 1133 cases of human remains: 29B, 854 BP, 250
GBP, and, according to the related report [8] was a secondary mass
grave.
6. Cancari Road 08 (village Gornja Kamenica in the municipality of
Zvornik, eastern Bosnia), assigned as KAM08ZVO and T-ZVO.CAN-
08), contained 340 cases of human remains: 22B, 318 BP, 0 GBP,
and, according to the related report [9] was a secondary mass
grave.
I. Vaduveskovic, et al. Legal Medicine 47 (2020) 101766

Table 1
Data on the human remains structure in the mass grave sites included in the study.
Site No. Site name Site code Total cases B BP GBP Grave type

1 Cerska CSK 168 154 14 0 Primary

2 Lazete 01 LZ01 143 129 14 0 Primary
3 Budak 01 SR-BUD-01 269 21 157 91 Secondary
4 Cancari Road 04 KAM04ZVO 393 145 218 30 Secondary
5 Cancari Road 06 KAM06ZVO 1133 29 854 250 Secondary
6 Cancari Road 08 KAM08ZVO 340 22 318 0 Secondary
7 Cancari Road 10 KAM10ZVO 1344 146 1012 186 Secondary
8 Hodzici Road 01 SNA04ZVO 156 92 64 0 Secondary
9 Hodzici Road 02 SNA03ZVO 160 95 65 0 Secondary
10 Liplje 02 LP-02 192 4 188 0 Secondary
11 Liplje 07 LP-07 681 7 472 202 Secondary
12 Zeleni Jadar 04 ZJA08 226 33 193 0 Secondary

7. Cancari Road 10 (village Gornja Kamenica in the municipality of complete bodies:

Zvornik, eastern Bosnia), assigned as KAM10ZVO and T-ZVO.CAN-
10), contained 1344 cases of human remains: 22B, 318 BP, 0 GBP,
and, according to the related report [10], was a secondary mass
grave.
8. Hodzici Road 01 (village Snagovo in the municipality of Zvornik,
eastern Bosnia), assigned as SNA04ZVO and HZ01, represented by
a total of 156 cases of human remains: 92B, 64 BP and 0 GBP.
According to the ICMP field team experts, this was a secondary
mass grave [11].
9. Hodzici Road 02 (village Snagovo in the municipality of Zvornik,
eastern Bosnia), assigned as SNA03ZVO and HZ02, contained 160
cases of human remains: 95B, 65 BP, and 0 GBP. This was a sec-
ondary mass grave according to the relevant report [12].
10. Liplje 02 (village Snagovo in the municipality of Zvornik, eastern
Bosnia), assigned as ZV.LIP-02, contained 192 cases of human re-
mains: 4B, 188 BP, and 0 GBP according to forensic pathologist
C.H. Lawrence [13]. This grave was characterised as secondary by
R. Wright [14].
11. Liplje 07 (village Snagovo in the municipality of Zvornik, eastern
Bosnia), assigned as ZV.LIP-07, contained 681 cases of human re-
mains: 7B, 472 BP, 202 GBP and was a secondary mass grave, ac-
cording to ICMP experts [15].
12. Zeleni Jadar 04 (village Zeleni Jadar in the municipality of
Srebrenica, eastern Bosnia), assigned as ZJA08, contained 226
cases of human remains: 33B, 193 BP and 0 GBP. This was a sec-
ondary mass grave according to the relevant report [16].
To quantify the ratio between virtually intact bodies (torsos with
attached heads and limbs) and body parts (isolated heads, limbs, hands,
feet and portions of torso) a fragmentation index (FI) was developed. It
represents the ratio of the total number of bodies identified at a parti-
cular mass burial site to the number of individual body parts. FI used in
the current study represents a minor modification of the bodies-to-
body-parts index developed recently by Vaduveskovic and Djuric [3].
In forensic archaeology protocols [17–19] fieldwork case numbers
for human remains are designated as B (body) if they represent a
complete corpse (or at least 75% of the body). BP (body part) stands for
all discovered parts of human corpses that represent upper body parts,
lower body parts and other articulated remains of one individual, while
the term GBP (general body part) is assigned for isolated smaller parts
of bodies (such as isolated bones) that are not articulated in situ with
any other remains in their immediate vicinity. It should be mentioned
that all investigated sites contained small amounts of small bones or
small bone fragments that were found isolated, out of context, and, of
course, disarticulated. These small fragments were collected in bags and
are not included in GBP labelling and are therefore not counted in this
study.
FI is calculated by dividing the number of complete bodies by the
sum of disarticulated and isolated elements from the same context plus
B
Frab.Index(FI) =
BP+ GBP+B
A smaller index value indicates more fragmented and disarticulated
body elements. Mass graves containing exclusively bodies or ex-
clusively body parts are self-explanatory so it is not necessary to per-
form a FI calculation.
Calculations were performed for two primary burial sites where
bodies were largely intact, and for 10 secondary burial sites where
fragmentation predominated. The results were tabulated and char-
acteristics of the sites analysed.
Additionally, by studying the set of available databases, we have
analysed corresponding official certificates of death for all of the
identified individuals from these 12 mass graves. Special attention was
paid to data on the impact of injuries produced by explosive weapons as
the cause/possible cause of death, in order to test whether blast injuries
could influence the fragmentation of bodies, prior to burial.
3. Results
Calculated body fragmentation indexes of investigated sites are
shown in Table 2.
Data show that the FI values for this series of sites varied from 0.01
to 0.92. Within a class of secondary sites, the fragmentation index
varied slightly less, from 0.01 to 0.59. Statistical summaries of FI for
secondary sites, calculated by Easy R software, offered the following
results (presented in the Graph 1): Min.: 0.01, 1st Qu.:0.04, Median:
0.10, Mean: 0.20, 3rd Qu.:0.32, Max.: 0.59.
An obvious result is that the secondary sites in this study are clus-
tered into two quite separate groups (Graph 1). Five sites have FI value
between 0.01 and 0.08 (cf. Graph 2), while the rest of distribution is
scattered between 0.10 and 0.59. A secondary mass grave with more
preserved (complete) bodies shows a higher FI value. FI threshold value
for secondary graves with a more complete body profile is determined
by the mean value of the data set which is 0.20 (FI values higher than
0.20 represents graves with more preserved bodies). In contrast, clus-
ters of graves where most of the remains were heavily fragmented show
FI index values lower than 0.10 (0.10 is threshold value for highly
fragmented bodies determined by the median value of the data set).
4. Discussion
Excavation of secondary mass graves is a complex process as dis-
articulated and commingled body parts make it difficult to recognize,
separate, and physically collect cases, without further disarticulation.
However, the application of a stratigraphic, unit-based method is
needed during the recovery process in order to strongly reduce the level
of additional disarticulation [20]. Nevertheless, despite the careful
application of archaeological methods, some secondary graves

3
I. Vaduveskovic, et al. Legal Medicine 47 (2020) 101766

Table 2
Summary data of investigated mass grave sites: number of collected bodies, body parts, general body parts, and calculated FI values.
Site No. Site name Site code Total cases B BP GBP Fragmentation Index (FI) Grave type

1 Cerska CSK 168 154 14 0 0.92 Primary

2 Lazete 01 LZ01 143 129 14 0 0.90 Primary
3 Budak 01 SR-BUD-01 269 21 157 91 0.08 Secondary
4 Cancari Road 04 KAM04ZVO 393 145 218 30 0.37 Secondary
5 Cancari Road 06 KAM06ZVO 1133 29 854 250 0.03 Secondary
6 Cancari Road 08 KAM08ZVO 340 22 318 0 0.06 Secondary
7 Cancari Road 10 KAM10ZVO 1344 146 1012 186 0.11 Secondary
8 Hodzici Road 01 SNA04ZVO 156 92 64 0 0.59 Secondary
9 Hodzici Road 02 SNA03ZVO 160 95 65 0 0.59 Secondary
10 Liplje 02 LP-02 192 4 188 0 0.02 Secondary
11 Liplje 07 LP-07 681 7 472 202 0.01 Secondary
12 Zeleni Jadar 04 ZJA08 226 33 193 0 0.15 Secondary

demonstrate an unusually high level of body disarticulation and scat-
tering of body parts. To investigate this phenomenon, we have tested a
group of secondary mass graves, i.e. whether the taphonomic processes
exclusively have an effect on the graves that share similar character-
istics and histories. Specifically, they:
• are located in the same geographic area
• were created nearly simultaneously
• have similar sizes and shapes (access-ramp-mass graves)
• involved the use of heavy machinery for digging and robbing of
primary graves a few months only after the initial inhumation
• were dug out quickly and filled with bodies and soil
• had the excavations and exhumations performed using similar ar-
chaeological methods (stratigraphic approach), standards and pro-
tocols.
Based on these similarities one might expect a similar, uniform level
of body fragmentation in the investigated sites. However, the results
obtained in this study have demonstrated significant differences among
the graves. Firstly, the FI values quite clearly differentiate the primary
mass burial sites from the secondary graves. As shown above (Table 2),
primary sites such as Cerska and Lazete 01 with scores of 0.92 and 0.90
displayed notably higher fragmentation indexes than the closest sec-
ondary sites with a value of 0.59 (Hodzici Road 01 and 02). This is not
unexpected as intact primary burial sites should not have the same
degree of disruption of bodies as secondary mass graves, due to dif-
ferent formation processes and manipulation of the bodies.
Secondary graves (especially those from the Bosnian war) were
mostly created by robbing bodies from primary sites with heavy ma-
chinery, in order to re-deposit them at other locations. During this
process the bodies became fragmented, displaying a lower fragmenta-
tion index (signifying a higher level of disarticulation) compared to
those from primary sites.
However, secondary graves in the study are clustered into two se-
parate groups (cf. Graph 1) and one of them (comprising of Liplje 07
and 02, Cancari Road 06 and 08, as well as Budak 01) demonstrated an
extremely high rate of disarticulation, fragmentation and scattering of
body parts. The grave Cancari Road 06 with its 1,133 cases represents
one of the largest unique assemblages in the region. The other group
(from Cancari Road 10 and Zeleni Jadar 04, followed by Cancari Road
04 – all with “middle range” values, up to Hodzici Road 01 and 02, with
notably high FI values) signifies much less general disarticulation of
bodies, even though their history was similar.
Assuming similar taphonomic processes during the formation of
secondary sites in east Bosnia, significant differences in body frag-
mentation among some graves could indicate additional circumstances
and factors. Peri-mortem or post-mortem injuries before the final in-
humation might cause such differences. For example, deaths caused by
explosive weapons, such as grenades, mortars or tank fire and mine
fields could cause blast injuries leading to dismemberment of bodies. In
that case bodies would be initially fragmented resulting in further
fragmentation due to taphonomic processes. Disruption and fragmen-
tation of bodies during explosions results from a variety of different
mechanisms including the primary effects of the blast wave, damage
caused by shrapnel, secondary debris striking the body, propulsion of
the body into fixed objects, as well as crush injuries and burns [21,22].
We further analysed pathological reports from these sites and cer-
tificates of death for identified individuals buried in these mass graves.
In the majority of cases the cause of death was not determined. While
some were considered to have died from gunshot injuries, in many
others (from Cancari Road, Hodzici Road, Zeleni Jadar and Liplje) the
cause of death was injury due to “[…] explosive / likely explosive
weapons […]”. Based on this finding, we could assume that at least
some of the individuals buried in these secondary sites could have been
killed in combat. The causes of death were generally difficult to de-
termine because of the high rate of decomposition and lack of soft
tissues, and this difficulty presents a major limitation in the pathology
evidence in these type of deaths [23]. Even bone damage was difficult
to determine as being peri-mortem or after the primary burial. The
usually proposed scenario that these individuals were all victims of
mass execution cannot therefore be supported by forensic evidence
given the condition of the remains.
Spatial analysis of the distribution of secondary mass graves shows
that the major four clusters are: 1) beside the local asphalt road around
so-called Zeleni Jadar to the south of Srebrenica, 2) between the vil-
lages Snagovo and Hodzici, to the west of Zvornik; 3) in Liplje, south of
Zvornik; 4) beside the local road leading to the village Cancari, in the
valley of Kamenica. The total number of graves in those four areas
however exceeds 30, with MNI of more than 3,800. An accepted in-
terpretation [24], based on DNA connections between the body parts

Graph 1. Dot plot showing the secondary mass

grave sites FI value distribution.

4
I. Vaduveskovic, et al.
Graph 2. A histogram of the secondary mass grave sites FI frequencies.
found in different graves, is that all of those graves contained the re-
mains of victims of executions by shooting, performed in five main
execution sites (Kravica, Branjevo, Kozluk, Orahovac, and Petkovci).
However, further analysis (Fig. 1) reveals that the majority of the
graves, and especially those at Cancari Road, Hodzici Road, and Liplje,
lays beside the line of the 28th Division military breakthrough in July
1995, in very close proximity to the combat zones [25–27]. Highly
fragmented remains, explosive injuries, and proximity to a combat zone
raises the possibility that at least some “secondary” graves are in fact
“hybrid” graves, containing both bodies from executions, and from
combat.
High FI values for secondary sites Hodzici Road 01 and 02 (both
0.59) could represent standard taphonomic changes produced by re-
location of bodies with heavy machinery, meaning that these two sites
are probably not hybrid graves, but rather secondary deposition from
systematic execution.
In conclusion, the development of a semi-quantitative method for
classifying the degree of body fragmentation identified in mass graves
in this region may be useful in helping to better understand the manner
of death and subsequent handling of the dead. Unusually high levels of
body fragmentation (FI value below 0.1) in some secondary sites may
indicate that body disarticulation was most likely caused peri-mortem
by explosives, land mines, mortars or tank fire, all suggesting a combat
situation. Alternatively, it may indicate execution by grenades or ex-
plosives. It is also theoretically possible that a high level of body
fragmentation was caused deliberately, post-mortem, in an attempt to
destroy human remains. Further analysis of material from these graves
may indicate that a certain number of these deaths have occurred due
to a variety of different circumstances beside executions.
5. Key Points
On the basis of available anthropological and archaeological data
5
Legal Medicine 47 (2020) 101766
from excavations related to two primary and 10 secondary mass graves,
we calculated fragmentation index (proportion of complete bodies and
body parts in the grave) for the purpose of quantifying fragmentation/
disarticulation of the bodies within graves. This quantification enables
us to measure differences in body fragmentation between secondary
graves of the same origin (context). High discrepancies in body frag-
mentations between sites of similar formation processes suggested a
possibility for the different peri mortem circumstances of buried.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by grants from the Ministry of Education
and Science of the Republic of Serbia; Grant number: III 45005.
References
[1] ICTJ 2009. Transitional Justice in the Former Yugoslavia. New York: International
Center for Transitional Justice. https://www.ictj.org/sites/default/files/ICTJ-
FormerYugoslavia-Justice-Facts-2009-English.pdf [last accessed on December 18,
2019].
[2] E. Jessee, M. Skinner, A typology of mass grave and mass grave-related sites,
Forensic Sci. Int. 152 (1) (2005) 55–59.
[3] I. Vaduveskovic, M. Djuric, Mass grave complexity effects on the minimum number
of individuals estimation, Forensic Sci. Med. Pathol. (2019) 1–8 ISSN: 1547–769X.
[4] Haglund, W. 1998. Forensic investigation of the Cerska grave site, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, made on June 1998 (expert report to ICTY), pp.
01493690–01493759. Source: Republic Center for Research of War, War Crimes
and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[5] Peccerelli, F. 2000. Excavation and exhumation report Lazete 1, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, made on October 2000 (expert report to ICTY), pp.X006 4000–X006
4032.Source: Republic Center for Research of War, War Crimes and Tracing of
Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[6] ICMP Summary Report 2005. Report on the archaeological findings relating to the
excavation of Budak 01, Bosnia and Herzegovina, made on July 2005 (technical
expert report to ICMP). Source: Republic Center for Research of War, War Crimes
and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[7] ICMP Summary Report 2008. Cancari Road 04, Bosnia and Hercegovina, made on
October 2008 (technical expert report to ICMP). Source: Republic Center
I. Vaduveskovic, et al.
for Research of War, War Crimes and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[8] ICMP Summary Report. 2008. Cancari Road 06, Bosnia and Hercegovina, made on
December 2008 (technical expert report to ICMP). Source: Republic Center
for Research of War, War Crimes and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[9] ICMP Summary Report. 2008. Cancari Road 08, Bosnia and Hercegovina, made on
November 2008 (technical expert report to ICMP). Source: Republic Center
for Research of War, War Crimes and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[10] ICMP Summary Report. 2008d. Cancari Road 10, Bosnia and Hercegovina, made on
April 2008 (technical expert report to ICMP). Source: Republic Center for Research
of War, War Crimes and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[11] ICMP Summary Report 2006. Report to ICMP – Snagovo 04 Excavations, made on
November 2006 (technical expert report to ICMP). Source: Republic Center
for Research of War, War Crimes and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[12] ICMP Summary Report 2008e. Hodzici Road 02, Bosnia and Hercegovina, made on
April 2008 (technical expert report to ICMP). Source: Republic Center for Research
of War, War Crimes and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[13] Lawrence, C.H. 1998. Report on human mortal remains autopsy from the site Liplje
2, made on June 1998 (formal expert report to OTP), pp. 00921322–00921361.
Source: Republic Center for Research of War, War Crimes and Tracing of Missing
Persons, Banja Luka.
[14] Wright, R. 1998. Exhumations in Eastern Bosnia in 1998, made on May 1999 (ex-
pert report to ICTY), pp. 00848214–00848395. Source: Republic Center
for Research of War, War Crimes and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[15] ICMP Summary Report 2005b. Report on the Archaeological Findings related to the
excavation of Liplje 07, made on September 2005 (technical expert report to ICMP).
Source: Republic Center for Research of War, War Crimes and Tracing of Missing
Persons, Banja Luka.
[16] ICMP Summary Report 2008f. Report to ICMP – Zeleni Jadar 04 Excavations, made
on April 2008 (technical expert report to ICMP). Source: Republic Center
Legal Medicine 47 (2020) 101766
for Research of War, War Crimes and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[17] CIFA, 2014. Standard and guidance for forensic archaeologists. Reading: The
Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. https://www.archaeologists.net/sites/de-
fault/files/CIfAS&GForensics_2.pdf [last accessed on December 17, 2019].
[18] W.D. Haglund, M. Connor, D.D. Scott, The archaeology of contemporary mass
graves, Historical Archaeol. 35 (1) (2001) 57–69.
[19] M.F. Skinner, R.H. Lazenby, Found! Human remains: a field manual for the recovery
of the recent human skeleton, Archaeology Press, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby
(BC), 1983.
[20] H. Tuller, Mass Graves and Human Rights: Latest Developments, Methods, and
Lessons Learned, in: D. Dirkmaat (Ed.), A Companion to Forensic Anthropology,
Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, 2012, pp. 157–174.
[21] J. Prahlow, R.W. Byard, Miscellaneous. Ch 21, An Atlas of Forensic Pathology,
Springer Publishers, New York, 2012, pp. 847–894.
[22] A. Edirisinghe, A. Samerasekara, Injury, fatal and nonfatal: explosive injuries, in:
J. Payne-James, R.W. Byard (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Forensic and Legal Medicine,
2nd ed., Academic Press, Oxford, 2016, pp. 182–192.
[23] Clark, J. 2001. ICTY operations in Bosnia – Herzegovina 2001 season. Report of the
chief pathologist, pp. 2–5. Source: Republic Center for Research of War, War Crimes
and Tracing of Missing Persons, Banja Luka.
[24] T.J. Parsons, R.M.L. Huel, Z. Bajunović, A. Rizvić, Large scale DNA identification:
The ICMP experiance, Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 38 (2019) (2019) 236–244.
[25] Rohde D. Endgame. The betrayal and fall of Srebrenica, Europe’s worst massacre
since World War II. New York, New York, Penguin Books, 2012.
[26] Honig JW, Both N. Srebrenica. Record of a War Crime. New York, New York,
Penguin Books, 1996.
[27] Srebrenica Report. The Netherlands Institute for War Documentation. https://www.
niod.nl/en/srebrenica-report/report (accessed 20 January 2020).