Minutes JIT Leader meeting 15 April 2016
Australia/Belgium/Malaysia/Netherlands/Ukraine

Belgium (BEL): Lieve PellenslBeigian Prosecutor), Mr Wouter Waumans (BF?) and Christian Van Der
Aa (BFP) (via video conference)

Driebergen [NL) and (AUS): Mrs Maarije Nieuwenhuis (Chair. Dutch Prosecutor), Mr Gerrit Thiry
(SID, NPN). Mr Andrew Donoghoe (SiO, AFP), Dennis Spies (Project Leader, Forensics) and Miss Kim
Giles (Minutes. AFP)

Malaysia (MVS): Mr Amar Singh Mr Lawhongsoon, Data Mohamad Hanafiah Zakaria, (via video
conference]

Ukraine (UKR): Oleg Peresada (Ukrainian Prosecutor) (via video conference)

Meeting commences after several attempts to connect video conference with Ukraine. Dutch
members currently based in Kyiv will continue to attempt contact.

Action Points

A, Belgium — To continue to liaise and report progress Belgian calculations of the three
alternative launch sites and the missile debris field 'Action item is complete; the report has
been shared with the MT.

a. Australia — share Objective 3 81 4 report on 'Fragmentation pattern, comparisons of
apparent damage and best fit weapons investigations’ in the HT — This report is almost
complete

C. Netherlands -- Update the JIT on the requested 0W information and share the requested
OVV information with the HT partners e Radar data has been received and will be shared
with the JIT. Additional reports received from the Dutch Aviation Board were received last
week and will be shared soont

D. Australia/Malaysia - Report number 1239 includes the photographs of the pieces of
wreckage found in the personal belongings 0t victims. Australia has commenced checking
with members to determine whether anyone recalls the location where the pieces were
found at the crash site. This is important to establish continuity or chain ofcustody.

a. SIO NPN will send the photographs to Malaysia so they can conduct the same
enquiries,

Ukraine joins the meeting via video conference.

Prior to the meeting, AFP requested the proposal from the Ukrainian Forensics Institute (KFI) to
conduct Arena testing be included on the Agenda. This will be discussed after point 4.

1. Minutes meeting 12 February 2016

No further changes requested.

2.

Forensics Timeframe

The Forensics schedule will be attached to the minutes. Most of this work is on track and
planned for completion in April and May. The Forensics work regarding soil samples (point 3) is
overdue. Dutch Forensics will complete a summary report on all forensics work, anticipated to
be completed in June. Dutch Forensics and NFI will then require an additional 4 months to
complete the paperwork.

Forensics meets every month and the next meeting will be on 28 April 2016. An Evidence Matrix
is being completed; it is in Dutch at the moment due to the technical language used but will be
translated into other languages at a later date,

3. Forensics comparison of soil samples

Forensics is currently comparing soil samples that were collected from the most probable
launch site during the investigation mission conducted last year. Soil samples were also received
from a journalist who also reported where he got the samples from. The Ukraine has also
provided soil samples from Kramatorsk, known to have been the launch site of a separate BUK,
for comparison. These samples were collected almost a yearafter the launch.

NL: If no relevant material is found in these samples, how far should Forensics go with this
work?

Nothing of value was found in the soil samples from Kramatorsk that would lead to the
conclusion that going further with this work would produce relevant results. A report will be
written on these findings.

NL: We are of the opinion that this work should stop as it is not required to prove the location
of the launch site.
AUS: We agree.

BEL: According to the experts, should we be finding something in the soil to indicate a BUK
launch?

NL: That’s what the experts expected because of the force involved in launching a missile, but in
other situations, no one has ever collected soil samples aftera BUK launch before.

It is agreed upon that the work on the soil samples stops after the report is finished about

the work that has been done uptil now.

4.

List of approximately 25 priority items for Forensics evidence

This has not been translated from Dutch yet, although the images are more important for
today. The images are of items that arrived in The Netherlands where chain of custody is not as
clear as preferred because of how people had to work in the Ukraine right after the crash. We
are attempting to collect as much information as possible for the locations where these items
were found. This is a list of priority items (20-25) which contribute to Forensic evidence.

NL: Please show to all your colleagues and see if anyone has photographs or notes or recalls the
wreckage to provide to us. This is only for those items we don’t have locations for. If we get
locations for most of the items then it will be simpler for the rest of the items which we don’t
have locations for.

NL: Does anyone know where the Boeing logbook was found?

MYS: Clarification sought that Netherlands wants to know where items were found at the crash
site.

Proposal from KFI re Arena testing

A couple of weeks ago, KFI advised they wish to perform an Arena test to get information from
that test on what happens to a weapon when it explodes, and provides us the possibility of
obtaining more and other reference material. KFI have made a plan on how they wish to do it
and have sent the plan to JIT parties for peer review. This peer review has been received.

NL: This plan has been sent to Malaysia, if Malaysia has any suggestions or comments to add
please provide quickly as the JIT are collecting all feedback and the appointment with KFI has
been made.

NL: The next step would be to discuss with KFI what this testing would mean for timefrarnes,
resources. budgets etc. Is this plan possible? We have to know the answers to these before we
make a decision if we want to do it. This should be decided together by the JIT parties as it
involves a lot of resources and costs. We also have to ask what we would do with the outcomes,
who will do the calculations with the data and who will write the reports to be used in court.

AUS: This will close some evidentiary gaps we have especially in regards to Forensics. But we
have to decide who does the data analysis as its important and how we get that information in
a report that is useful for court. The Netherlands has already covered all of the questions we
had.

BEL: We agree with Australia. it possible with our budgets, then we should do the Arena testing.
The JIT has been very thorough, but not doing this test would put the Prosecutors in a difficult
position to answer why we wouldn’t do it. The Belgian experts working on the weapons are
more than happy to analyse the results.

MVS: What would be the evidence of this Arena test, considering the costs?

NL: This testing gives us evidence of speed and angles of the missile, which will help to make
calculations and determine the launch site. The smaller the launch site parameters are gives us
stronger evidence. The CW report has narrowed the launch site to an area within 300 square
km; we want to narrow that as much as possible. The tests would also give us more information
on what happens to the missile once it explodes and gives us reference material for what pieces
we‘ve found.

UKR: We should do this testing because we cannot give any alternative forensic work to
disprove the Russian results. We will be asked why we could not do this experiment considering
the Russians did. Ukraine can provide a missile from the specific year we believe the BUK to be
from, and the results will be very important no matter the jurisdiction.

NL. In the end it should be a joint decision, and we should go stepeby~step and collect all
comments from the peer review within two weeks and get back to KFL
a) Plan KFI
b) Peer review of KFI plan
c) Update of KFi plan including the results of the peer review
d) Discuss the outcome of the peer review with the KFl including the possibilities, time
frame, costs etc
e) Decision on the joint plan and decision on who will do the calculation with the data
from the test
f) Reallsation of the plan (arena test)
g) Calculation
h) Delivery of the report

We will have to work on the questions we need answered regarding when, where, costings,
resources so we know what is involved and can make a decision.

6. Next of Kin

a. Evaluation, Next of Kin (NoK) meeting 8 March 2016
NL. The meeting was very successful and gave some peace and rest in Holland as there
were fewer questions from NoK and less buss in the media and in Parliament.

b. longreads, communication plan (Attachment 2)
NL: After the NoK meeting on 8 March, our communications people wrote a report on the
information shared and published it on the NoK website so that other NoK who could not
attend were able to read it. Australia has also had its own NoK meetings

AUS: Yes, people are still very upset and interested in what is happening with the
investigation. They are supportive otour actions as the .llT, pursuing the investigation.

NL: The NoK keep wanting more information, they want to know the investigation is
continuing and the website will be used to provide further information Our
Communications people have been asked to continue working on that. Attachment 2 has
been provided to give an outline of what they are planning, Specific subjects have been
suggested, such as:

- The Forensics investigation;

- The Ukraine Field Office;

- Weapons investigation;

- Cooperationin theJlT;

- investigation timeline; and

I Legal cooperation between countries including treaties and sovereignty.

We will put up a timeline of the investigation and what has happened so everyone can see
it clearly. We may give additional explanations on legal cooperation. Some people ask us
why we don’t Just go over to Ukraine to deal with witnesses etc.

NL: Is everyone willing to cooperate in making this information for the NoK website, we
would like to show that all JlT countries are willing to work together in this way. Australia
has agreed to give an interview and provide photos. Are the other countries willing to do
the same?

MVS: 0k.

BEL: Yes of course. Lieve said she saw one of the latest documents with the pictures after
last NoK meeting and wanted to congratulate you on how professionally it was done; a
very good job being patient and thorough with NoK,

BEL: One question, which we have raised several times, is it possible to arrange for NoK to
visit where the bodies were found at the crash site at some point?

UKR: It is a very dangerous situation in this territory and there are heavy battles going on. It
will not happen In the near future.

NL: We have also given NoK the advice to not visit the crash site, especially not in an
organised group. The Netherlands and Australia have both had one NoK go by themselves,
We advise that it is not safe.

c. Next of Kin Summer meeting
NET: The communications people working on the NoK information have asked to join the
meeting in order to do some camera work, and take some photos as it is special that we
are meeting with people all over the world. i have denied this but do people agree that we
can arrange to take a picture with the set up before or after the meeting?
AUS: 0k.
MYS: 0k.
UKR: Pictures ok.
BEL: No objections.
NET: Ok, we will try to organise it soon.
The NoK have been promised that in summer more information on the weapon used and

the launch site would he provided We have to fulfil our promise to NoK. That information
should be provided in the week before 9 July (school holidays and Parliament break]; we

should try to set a date in the next two weeks. Malaysian NoK has asked we set a date soon
so they can make travel arrangements it they can.

NL: We must contact each other by email so we can draft content and possibly plan a
meeting in June so everyone can confirm what will be provided. People will ask us where
the weapon came from and who was in control of it at the time.

NL: Please let Maartje know ofany dates not possible for this meeting.

7. Radar imagery from the Ovv
We recently received the radar imagery the Russian Federation provided to the CW. This
imagery has a much larger scope than what we received from Russia directly. Aviation
police are writing a report on their findings. Aviation police have also seen small signals on
the radar imagery which may be a helicopter or a drone, which no one has mentioned
before.

NL: We think we should include it in discussions with NoK in summer to be frank. We will
share the Aviation Police report with everyone for coverage so everyone can see it.

8t Around the table on the subject of prosecution and changes in the political field

MVS: The last meeting on prosecution was held in Kuala Lumpur. We are still trying to get approval
from the minister regarding the sharing of the costs for a tribunal,

NL: The next meeting is due to be in May and June. Before that, the Ukraine and The Netherlands
will be meeting on 28 and 29 April 2016 to discuss legal matters on national prosecution in both
countries, difficulties if suspects have to be extradited and the possibility oftransferring the ability to
prosecute to another country. Experts in national law from each country would have to discuss this

BEL: There is no change in our position; we will continue to work on statutes.
AUS: Is the next meeting in Belgium?
UKR: Ukraine cannot extradite its own citizens for prosecution in another country‘

NL: We have received the minutes from the meeting in Kuala Lumpur. We will discuss with Ukraine
on 28 and 29 April.

9. Around the table:

a. New names for the JIT Agreement
As always, please provide these names to Maartje for inclusion on the HT Agreement.

b. Warning to Next of Kin on website concerning witness re satellite imagery and person who
sends tweets about the investigation
A female going by the name ’Stefanini/Belaerts’ contacted Dutch Police saying she had new
satellite imagery for us. When we received it, it was satellite imagery you could get off the
internet. This female has also been in contact with one of the NoK families and

6

accompanied them to the NoK meeting, she has also been in contact with Dutch
politicians. The names she has been using are all fake, and the NoK have been warned, If
she comes up as contacting someone, keep in mind that she is fake

10. General Business
BEL: We will email Euro Control to ask for an update, and will keep everyone updated,

NET: The next meeting is scheduled for 3 June. We propose to make it 10 June, one month before
the NoK briefing in summer.

End.