327 / 494
326
would definitively not be affected by a fragment is 550 metres from the point
where the round lands”.
“You would definitely be killed within 40 metres and injured
within 190 metres. But there are instances where people
have been much closer and not been injured.”
10.158.
Maj. Cobb-Smith agreed with Maj. Dixon that although a log should
be kept, in this case it was not reasonable to expect him as MFC in action, under
fire, “to be recording things in a notebook”.
10.159.
Maj. Cobb-Smith’s opinion is that there should have been
550 metres from the nearest civilian building. Having regard to the built-up
nature of Tivoli Gardens, Maj. Cobb-Smith said –
“In my opinion, this is not a correct use of this weapon
system. I believe it was irresponsible and reckless to use a
high explosive weapon system in a populated urban area
especially without going through any form of adjustment
procedures. But, of course, adjustment procedures would
have been impossible on these targets because they are
completely surrounded by dwellings.”
10.160.
Maj. Cobb-Smith said it would be unusual to see a mortar round
actually landing and it would be very difficult to observe it falling from the sky.
10.161.
With regard to the safety limit as represented in the Doctrine,
Maj. Cobb-Smith’s evidence is:
“The safety limit doctrine was disregarded to such a huge
extent, to such massive proportions. Again, I think that the
employment of indirect fire in the form of mortars was
disproportional, reckless and completely unreasonable in this
context.”
10.162.
Maj. Cobb-Smith’s measurements of the playing field near the
Community Centre were North to South 101 metres; East to West 90 metres,
giving “a radius of, at most, 50 metres away from #10 Chang Avenue”. He took
photographs of various properties thought to bear the markings of shrapnel from