107 [t]hat the armed men were violent was not in doubt, a number of these witnesses were themselves threatened with death by the armed men as the men of the village were being taken away. Apart from that, their beating of the men from the village, in some cases beating them into insensibility, as they lay 296 on the road, is further evidence of their violence. Accordingly, the only possible inference to be drawn is that the Appellant had the intention to further the criminal purpose to rid the Prijedor region of the non-Serb population, by committing inhumane acts against them. That non-Serbs might be killed in the effecting of this common aim was, in the circumstances of the present case, foreseeable. The Appellant was aware that the actions of the group of which he was a member were likely to lead to such killings, but he nevertheless willingly took that risk. 3. The Finding of the Appeals Chamber 233. The Trial Chamber erred in holding that it could not, on the evidence before it, be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the Appellant had any part in the killing of the five men from the village of Jaski}i. The Appeals Chamber finds that the Appellant participated in the killings of the five men in Jaski}i, which were committed during an armed conflict as part of a widespread or systematic attack on a civilian population. The Appeals Chamber therefore holds that under the provisions of Article 7(1) of the Statute, the Trial Chamber should have found the Appellant guilty. 234. The Appeals Chamber finds that this ground of the Prosecution’s Cross-Appeal succeeds. 294 Judgement, para. 660. Ibid., para. 370. 296 Ibid. 295 Case No.: -94-1-A 15 July 1999