Q In what connections did he speak about concentration camps at that time?
A I can't say this for a certainty.
Q You cannot say with certainty that you spoke to him about that at that time?
A It might have been Professor Heyde or Professor Nietsche
Q Well, I just wanted to establish that, and that makes it necessary for a number of further questions. I want to establish that brack did not speak to you about any of your activities in the concentration camps.
A activity in the concentration camps was discussed with me by Professor Heyde, Professor Nietsche and Brack.
Q Well, now, you say again that you did speak to him about it.
A Yes, but I don't know in which case one person discussed it, or in which case another person, and in which case the third person.
Q And what was said with reference to your activity very generally? What activity were you to exercise in the concentration camp?
A Filling out the questionnaires.
Q Witness, up to that time you were merely an expert with reference to Euthanasia of the insane persons?
A. Yes.
Q Now, if suddenly you are approached and asked to go to a concentration camp and there exercise some sort of an activity, you would have asked, "Why? How come? Why choose no?" Didn't you ask about the reason?
A This morning I said that on our first visits to concentration camps it was the quest on if there were psychotic or psychopathic disturbances. Only at a later time did our activity in the concentration camps go beyond these questions to other persons.
Q Well, may I take it that your reply is that in the summer of 1940 you were given the order to examine inmates in the concentration camp on their mental state of mind as far as they were in certain psychopathic stages? That was completely in compliance with the field in which you had worked in preparation for Euthanasia.
A Yes.
Q - Did you have any misgivings about that, and did you have any thoughts about this being somewhat abnormal?
A No.
Q And you think you can remember on that occasion that Brack gave you some orders in that connection?
A Yes. Only I don't know in which case it was.
Q. Yes, very well. You already stated this morning that, with reference to the second action, you were concerned with the examination of Jews; you could not state, with certainty, whether any directives were given to you by Brack; is'nt that correct?
A. I cannot say with certainty. I cannot say it.
DR FROESCHMANN: I have no further questions.
BY DR. GAWLIK: (DEFENSE COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT HOVEN)
Q. Witness, in agreement with the Prosecutor, I understood you to say that in the winter of 1940, and the second time in 1941, in the concentration camp you saw the defendant, Hoven, there.
A. I must have -- I must base my evidence on my letter.
Q. The letter is dated November, 1941; I am going to show it to you later.
A. On that occasion I saw Dr. Hoven.
Q. Did you see him on the occasion of the preceding visit when you were back?
A. I don't remember.
Q. Would you recognize defendant Hoven again?
A. No.
Q. I am now submitting to you this letter of the 25th of November 1941. Mr. President, this is Document NO 907, on page 39 of the German Document Book and 45 of the English Document Book, Document Book No. 16. Can you find the name of SS-Obersturmfuehrer Dr. Hoven?
A. Yes.
Q. You say in that letter Camp Physician SS-Obersturmfuehrer Dr. Hoven -
A. Yes, Camp Physician.
Q. One moment please. I should like to put to you that at that time the Camp Physician was Dr. Blancke; the defendant, Hoven, was the second camp physician.
A. Then I was misinformed.
Q. So is there a possibility of an error?
A. An error on the part of some one else.
Q. Thank you. Now, you don't need the letter any longer. During the examination you said that you only met Dr. Hoven when you were introduced to him. What can you say, from your own knowledge, as to what extent Dr. Hoven assisted you in your activities. I only want facts which you can remember.
A. He did not help us at all.
Q. He did not assist you at all; thank you. It is correct that you filled out questionnaires for all Jews in the concentration camp at Buchenwald?
A. Those headings had already been filled out in the camp.
Q. I am submitting to you this document once more; you say in that letter that you filled out questionnaires for 1200 Jews.
A. 1200 Jews, yes.
Q. I now put to you that there were only 1200 Jews in the entire camp of Buchenwald. Therefore, you filled out questionnaires for all Jews?
A. That was how it was ordered then.
Q. Very well. You further made a -- you may put the document away -you further already stated that the question of health did not play any part in the case of the Jews.
A. That is right.
Q. Is it correct that only the reason for arrest played a part?
A The reasons for arrest were entered on the questionnaires.
Q. Is it correct that you found the reasons of the arrest in the criminal files?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know that the criminal files were in the political department of the concentration camp?
A. Yes. I don't know the organization of the concentration camp well enough to know the term political section; it doesn't mean much to me.
Q. In any case, it has nothing to do with criminal files?
A. No.
Q. It can, therefore, be seen therefrom that the camp physician played no part in that decision whatever?
A. What the duties of the camp physician were in these matters I cannot say; I don't know.
Q. Well, if you consider the fact that the physical state of the Jews played no part but the only thing that played a part was previous sentences - - from that it can easily be seen that it did not rest on the medical decision.
A. No.
Q. You further said during your examination that the camp physician had these inmates selected for you. Now, please consider what I just put to you. Wouldn't you have to correct your reply?
A. The persons concerned were presented to me by the camp physician, or he had them presented to me and at the same time the questionnaires, the question of data, had already been filed.
Q. Even in the concentration camp of Buchenwald in November 1941? Please differentiate between camps. We are not concerned now how it was in other concentration camps. I am only interested how it was in November 1941 in the concentration camp of Buchenwald.
A. The Jewish prisoners were presented to me and at the same time the records.
Q. Who presented them to you?
A. Well -
Q. Was it the camp physician, was it the labor detail leader, was it the political commissioner, or was it by the Gestapo?
A. It was not the camp physician. It was the SS men who were assigned to that duty. I don't know their rank.
Q. Then, I understood you correctly to say that you have no clues at all for the fact that the camp physician made the selection and under no circumstances can you say that the defendant Hoven was instrumental in this selection in November 1941, in any way whatsoever.
Is that correct?
A. If it's correct that in Buchenwald there were only 1200 Jews altogether, then it is difficult to say that any one had selected 1200.
Q. Yes.
A. But one can assume that it was ordered that the Jews in the concentration camp at Buchenwald all had to have questionnaires filled out and that the camp physicians cooperated in this, I don't believe. I am a physician myself and I know that there was nothing of a medical nature on these questionnaires.
Q. During your examination you further answered to a question of the prosecutor that you would not have been in a position to do your work if the inmates were not presented to you by the physician. Well, just think of what you told me before. Wouldn't you have to correct that answer too? I am referring to the concentration camp of Buchenwald in November 1941.
A. I did not understand the beginning of your question.
Q. When examined by the Prosecutor, you stated the following: That you would not have been in a position to do your work if the inmates had not been presented to you by the physician.
A. Now I can answer. I mean the following: In a concentration camp an indefinite number of prisoners are presented to me. If I had to select them myself, that would be impossible; and for that reason the group of prisoners concerned was set beforehand and were presented as a group and in the case of Buchenwald this consideration, strictly speaking, was the question of the 1200 Jews.
Q And, in other cases, as I said before, the reason for arrest only played a part, and you said, yourself, there was nothing medical to be filled out in the questionnaires, and naturally these questionnaires could be given to the camp leader without the knowledge of the camp physician. Is that not correct?
A Filling out the questionnaires?
Q Yes.
A It could have been done without any medical assistance, yes.
Q You further said that the list was made through official channels by order of the camp physician.
A What list?
Q The list that was given to you; that is what you said during your direct examination. The list of persons who were to be examined. Was such a list made?
A Lists were made on occasions, but not generally. It was different in different cases.
Q Could you say that in November 1941, in the Concentration Camp Buchenwald, that such a list was compiled?
A I believe that no list was made in Buchenwald at that time because it was a complete group of 1200 Jews. There was no doubt about the limits of the group.
Q Very well; now, I will read to you what the Prosecution said about the case of Buchenwald on the 9th of December 1946.
Mr. President, that is on page 107 of the German Transcript, and page 59 of the English Transcript.
"The defendant Hoven, as the Chief Physician of the Concentration Camp of Buchenwald, took part in the program and personally ordered the transfer of at least 300 to 400 Jewish inmates belonging to various nationalities to the Euthanasia Station in Bernburg."
I am submitting this transcript to you.
MR. McHANEY: May it please the Tribunal, I object to any question put to the witness or any excerpt, which is apparently from the opening statement of General Taylor's. It does not constitute proof in the record because it obviously calls for an expression of an opinion by the witness, and from all indications, the witness's knowledge is limited to two visits to Buchenwald, and which does not include any activities by the defendant Hoven on other occasions.
JUDGE SEBRING: Hand it up Mr. McHaney, please.
(The document was given to the Tribunal.)
DR. GAWLIK: Page 50 of the English Transcript, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: The Counsel for the defendant Hoven is quoting from the opening statement of the Counsel for the Prosecution, and that is not a proper subject for the cross examination of this witness. The objection is sustained.
DR. GAWLIK: I then want permission to ask this witness if the defendant Hoven ever ordered the transport of the 300 to 400 Jews to Bernburg.
THE PRESIDENT: I did not hear the question. Will the question be repeated?
DR. GAWLIK: The question I want to put to the witness is: Did the defendant Hoven ever order the transport of the 300 to 400 Jews to Bernburg?
MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal pleases, I think the question will be proper if he sets some date or time, or simply asks the witness if he knows whether Hoven ever transferred, on his personal orders, 300 to 400 Jews. I do not want reference made to the opening statement to the Tribunal. If he will fix the time, I think the question is proper.
THE PRESIDENT: The Counsel for the defendant Hoven will fix some date concerning the incident which took place at Buchenwald which the witness might have some knowledge of, and the question will be proper.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Did the defendant Hoven, in connection with the Euthanasia Program, in November 1941, order the transfer of 300 to 400 Jews to Bernburg?
A I do not know.
Q Did the defendant Hoven have the possibility in the framework of the Euthanasia Program to get such an order?
A I do not consider it possible that Hoven could give such an order because in general the transfer of inmates of the institution or camp to the Euthanasia Institution was done on the basis of the lists from Berlin.
Q You were further speaking about sabotage, Witness, in stating that the defendant Hoven prevented the execution of the measure 14 f 13 by a counter action, 13 f 14. The 1200 Jews for whom you filled out the questionnaires, according to your own letters, were really not transported away from Buchenwald, And, I am now asking you what punishment would have been given for such a sabotage?
A I do not belong to the Penal Committee of the Sabotage Section, and never did. I cannot give the prognosis for such an action.
Q But you can, you, yourself, say what punishment would follow if there was a breach of security?
A If it had been me, I would have been afraid of being shot.
DR. GAWLIK: Mr. President, I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will take a recess.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Any further cross examination of this witness?
BY DR. VORWERK (Counsel for defendant Blome):
Q. Witness, do you know what position Dr. Conti held in the German medical service at the time of the execution of the "euthanasia" program?
A. Dr. Conti was in the Ministry and in charge of the medical service.
Q. And did he have another position besides that?
A. He was city physician of Berlin. I don't know...
Q. Do you know the name of the Reich Health Leader?
A. Yes.
Q. Who was that?
A. That was Wagner. I think Blome was the last one.
Q. No, I want to suggest to you that at first Wagner was the Reich Health Leader and his successor was then Conti. According to that, Conti held two positions. Now, if Conti was dealing with the "euthanasia" program, in what capacity did he act - meaning, referring to the two different situations that he held?
A. I am not informed about that. If I should express any opinion it would be merely an opinion.
Q. But you do know that the execution of the "euthanasia" program was a Reich matter and was dealt with in the Reich Ministry of the Interior?
A. Yes.
Q. And, therefore, if Conti had anything to do with that program it would be in his capacity as Under Secretary of State of the Ministry of the Interior and he wouldn't have dealt with it in a capacity of Reich Health Leader?
A. That is to be assumed.
Q. Do you know what position Blome at that time held in the Reich Health Ministry?
A. No, I don't know.
Q. Do you know whether Blome had anything to do with the entire program, and I mean the "euthanasia" program?
A. No, I don't know.
DR. VORWERK: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Any further cross examination of this witness by defense counsel?
(No response)
Any redirect examination by Counsel for the Prosecution?
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. McHANEY:
Q. Dr. Mennecke, you were put a number of questions by defense counsel for Hoven with respect to your visit to Buchenwald in November, 1941. As I recall, the record probably now shows that you stated that only Jews were selected on the occasion of that visit in November, 1941. Accordingly, I wish to put to you again your letter of November 25, 1941, written at Weimar, on page 45 of the English document book, Document NO 907, Prosecution Exhibit 412. It is on page 39 of your book, Dr. Mennecke.
A. Yes.
Q. Now, towards the middle of the letter you state: "Afterwards we continued our examination until about sixteen o'clock and I myself examined 105 patients, Mueller 78 patients, so that finally a total of 183 reports were ready as a first portion. As second portion a total of 1200 Jews followed, all of whom do not need to be examined, etc."
A. Yes.
Q. And down a little lower - down near the bottom of this excerpt it says: "After the Jews, another 300 Aryans as a third portion, who again will have to be examined." Now, after reading that, Dr. Mennecke, don't you want to correct the record so that it shows that you did examine persons other than Jews in Buchenwald in November, 1941?
In other words, Dr., you did in fact select some Aryans in November 1941, at Buchenwald, did you not? Examine some?
A. Yes.
Q. Another question - did you send the questionnaires filled out on Jewish inmates to the same office as questionnaires filled out on Aryans?
A. Yes.
Q. And that was the office for the Reich Association Hospital and Nursing Establishments?
A. The Reich Foundation for Mental Institutions.
Q. Yes.
A. Tiergartenstrasse 4.
Q. You sent the questionnaires there?
A. Yes.
Q. The last question Dr. Mennecke. Would you be willing to tell the Tribunal how you now feel of about your participation in the "euthanasia" program?
A. Yes, I am willing to express myself on that subject.
I deeply regret the fact that in 1940 I was drawn into this program. But when, after the collapse, the whole extent of the extermination of human beings became public knowledge of which I had known nothing up to that date, I was ashamed that I had ever had any part in this program, even if in a subordinate position, and I am still ashamed today. That is what I have to say.
MR. McHANEY: Thank you, Dr. Mennecke.
I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Has defense counsel any further questions regarding the last portion of the testimony of this witness?
For the record, during the afternoon recess the defendant Herta Oberheuser informed the Tribunal that she was ill and asked that she be excused from further presence in court this afternoon. The request was granted, Defendant Oberheuser not being charged under the euthanasia count. So she is absent from court for the balance of this afternoon. The Secretary General will note that fact for the record. It will also be included in the transcript.
The Prosecution may proceed. The witness is excused.
MR. MC HANEY: It has been called to my attention that on the 16th of January, on Page 1,787 of the English transcript a mistake was made, in that Document NO 752 was not given an exhibit number. In fact, it was admitted as Prosecution Exhibit 424.
JUDGE SEBRING: It appear from my document book that it was admitted as Prosecution Exhibit 424.
MR. MC HANEY: Yes, sir, it undoubtedly appears in your document book. The mistake was made by the persons transcribing the record, so that as it now reads, it says: "The next document on Page 105 of the document book is NO 752, which will be Prosecution Exhibit from the Hadamar case." It should read, "Will be Prosecution Exhibit 424, also from the Hadamar case." I just want than to appear in the record.
THE PRESIDENT: The record may be corrected to show the fact that the exhibit referred to is numbered Prosecution Exhibit 424.
MR. MC HANEY: At this time the Prosecution would like to submit to the Tribunal the certificate made by Gen. Taylor with respect to the right of certain employees of the Office Of Chief of Counsel for War Crimes to administer an oath. The certificate reads as follows:
"Pursuant to Executive Orders 9,547 and 9,679, and to order of the Military Governor of 24 October 1946, General Order No. 301, I am authorized to prepare and prosecute charges of atrocities and war crimes against leaders of the European axis powers and their accessories.
In the discharge of the responsibilities conferred on my by the above mentioned orders, I have authorized and detailed members of my staff who are engaged with me in the preparation and prosecution of cases, including attorneys, interrogators, and other investigators and agents of the Office of Chief of Counsel for War Crimes to conduct interrogations and investigations, and in the course of such interrogations and investigations to administer oaths. A list marked "Schedule A" of the names of the attorneys, interrogators, and other investigators and agents of the Office of Chief of Counsel for War Crimes who have been authorized to administer oaths is attached hereto. As additional persons are authorized to administer oaths, their names will be submitted to the Secretary General for the information of the Tribunal. Signed, Telford Taylor, Brig. Gen. USA, Chief of Counsel for War Crimes."
I shall not read the attached schedule. It consists of a number of names of those persons who are authorized to administer oaths, and I would like to file the original certificate, together with a copy thereof, with the Secretary General for the information of the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you hand the certificates to the Tribunal, please?
DR. SERVATIUS (Counsel for Defendant Karl Brandt): Dr. Servatius for Karl Brandt.)
Mr. President, it cannot be seen from the document whether these persons were already authorized at the time they administered the oath. Neither do I know whether Gen. Taylor himself has the authorization to employ such persons and give them such qualifications which are needed in order to administer an oath. I think that a special qualification has to be proved. I don't know whether foreigners, neutral foreigners who can prove no special qualifications, can be employed by an American Tribunal, and I want the Tribunal to clarify these matters.
THE PRESIDENT: The position of defense counsel for Karl Brandt is certainly well taken, insofar as the certificate does not show the respective dates at which these persons were appointed. In order to validate an affidavit or statement taken at some prior date, it must appear that the person who took or certified the affidavit was then qualified to so act. It would seem also that certified copies of the orders referred to might well accompany the certificate.
MR. McHANEY: If I understand the Tribunal, they would like to have included information as to the date of employment of each of the individuals shown on there by the Office of Chief of Counsel.
THE PRESIDENT: That would not be necessary. But certain exhibits by the Prosecution were provisionally offered and received, subject to a later showing that at the time that particular affidavit or statement was sworn to or certified, the person who administered the oath or made the certificate was then qualified to so act. As to names on this list of persons who did not certify any of the affidavits or statements which have been offered, the dates of their appointment might well be immaterial, because this would show their appointment and service at this time. But as to those exhibits, offered exhibits which are still in suspension, it would certainly be necessary to show that at the time they were made the persons were then qualified to act on behalf of the Prosecution of the United States.
Just how many of those offered exhibits there were, I do not remember. There were not a great many.
MR. McHANEY: Relatively few.
THE PRESIDENT: Neither the Tribunal nor defense counsel will be interested in the dates the other persons were appointed. That statement will be subject to the exception that if affidavits are offered at a later date, then the same question would arise if they had been taken heretofore.
MR. McHANEY: Well, that question might arise in other cases. I don't think it will arise in this one. Since this certificate is designed to cover the whole complex of cases which will be presented here in Nurnberg, it affects cases other than our own.
We will undertake to rectify these deficiencies and submit additional evidence with this certificate at the time the court reconvenes Monday a week.
At this time I have four additional documents which the Prosecution would like to submit in evidence with respect to the Euthanasia Program, the first of which is Document NO 1430, which will be Prosecution Exhibit 429.
Defense counsel, I think, have not received this document within the prescribed twenty-four hours before its offer, and consequently we are now submitting it with the understanding that they can raise seasonable objections to the admission of the document.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be considered with that understanding.
MR. McHANEY: The first page of this document is a letter dated 15 August 1944 from the Reich Working Association, Mental Institutions and I would like to say that is the same organization shown on the chart as the Reich Association, Hospital and Nursing Establishment. It's to the Director Dr. Faltlhauser, the Kaufveuren Allgaeu Mental Institution:
"Dear Mr. Faltlhauser:
"With reference to my letter of 11 August 1944 I should be glad if you would also include the insane Eastern workers whose names appear on the attached list, and hand them over to the Head of the Transport on 5 September 1944. A question mark behind the name of the patient on the list indicates that their arrival is not certain.
With Kind regards and Heil Hitler (signature) Dr. Schw."
"The next second page of the same document is quite similar, dated 11 August 1944 from the Reich Working Association, Mental Institutions. Director Dr. Faltlhauser:
"Dear Mr. Faltlhauser:
"The Eastern workers, whose names appear on the attached list, will arrive at your Institution by 2 September 1944. Mr. Rohloff, our Head of this Transport, will transfer these patients from your Institution on 5 September 1944. Please send also all Eastern workers whom you already have in your Institution and whose names are entered on the list with his transport.
Heil Hitler Dr. Schw."
MR. McHANEY: The next four pages of the document are the attached lists of Eastern workers, there being a total -- well, it's impossible to give the total. There seems to be some duplication of names on one or two of the lists but this does list the names of Eastern workers who were being transported. The next document will be NO-1436 and Prosecution Exhibit 430.
This is dated 9 October 1944. The address from which the letter originates is Tiergarten in Strasse 4 and the Tribunal has just heard the witness Mennicke testify concerning that address. It's from the Chief of the Budge Office of the Mental Institutions.
"To the Mental Institution Kaufbeuren "Concerning Easter workers.
1. Assets:
"Underwear and clothing may be used by the institution. I should like you to keep valuables and souvenirs for a certain time as there is a possibility that relatives equally employed in the Reich might put in a Claim. Money, also foreign exchange, will have to be accounted for to this office.
"2. Cost of Transportation "New arrivals will mostly come from other institutions as it will hardly ever be possible to make direct delivery to the collecting centers.
I must ask you to advise the accompanying personnel of transports from other institutions that claims for cost of transport, etc., will have to be referred to me. As a matter of routine I must stress the fact that this does not apply if the patients are brought to the collecting centers straight from their place of work.
"3. Forms "Within a few days we will be sending you forms for arrivals and medical statements.
We are sorry that the printing of these forms has been slightly delayed."
The signature is apparently illegible. I come now to Document. NO-1427, which will be Prosecution Exhibit 431. This is an affidavit sworn to by Irmgard Huber. It's offered provisionally as it is sworn to before Fred Rodell, Interrogator of the Office of Chief of Counsel and his authority to administer an oath will have to be clarified by these certificates to be submitted to the Tribunal. The affidavit reads as follows:
"I, Irmgard Huber, swear, depose and state:
"1. I was born on 9 June 1901 in Reisach in the District of Wasserburg Inn and from 1914 to 1917, after leaving the Volksschule, attended the continuation school. From 1920 to 1925 I was apprentice nurse at the institution Gaversee and passed my state examination and was a state licensed nurse. From 1932 to 1945 I worked in the state institution Hadamar as nurse and after 1944 as head nurse.
"2. On the basis of my long years of service in mental institutions and my service as head nurse in the institution Hadamar, I am in a position to state the following:
"3. In May 1943 Mischlings, half Jews -- all children -- were brought to the institution Hadamar. I cannot give the exact number of children, but to the best of my knowledge there were 15 to 20 girls. Almost all these children were healthy. Several had skin eruptions. These children were all killed by injections. When I returned to Hadamar in October 1943 after a 24 day leave, I was told that all the children were gone.
"4. From July 1944 until the collapse of Germany four hundred Russians and Poles, men, women and children, all of whom ostensibly had tuberculosis, came to the mental institution Hadamar. These people were always killed by injections immediately after their arrival.
(signed) Irmhard Huber" If the Tribunal please, it occurs to me that this document dealing with half Jews ties up with the exhibit which we presented either yesterday or the day before.
It's the exhibit which we presented either yesterday or the day before. It's the exhibit I referred to which was an order dealing with half Jews but it did not show what happened to them. This affidavit shows us what the original order meant. We had submitted an affidavit or a statement taken before a public prosecutor which was not sworn to, which gave similar testimony but which was ruled out because of the fact that no oath had been administered. This affidavit, Prosecution Exhibit 431, ties up that bit of evidence. The next document is NO-1428 which will be Prosecution Exhibit 432. This also is offered provisionally subject to the acceptance of the certification by General Taylor as to the right of Mr. Rodell to administer the oath.
"I, Hermann Wesse, M. D. swear, depose and state:
"1. I was born on 22 January 1912 in Duesseldorf, Germany, studied at the Koeln University from 1931 to 1936 with an interruption from 1932 to 1934, and from 1936 to 1939 at the Medical Academy in Duesseldorf where I passed my state examination."
DR. SERVATIUS: Dr. Servatius, counsel for Karl Brandt. Mr. President, we have not yet received these documents. I am just receiving one document and my colleagues have not received any at all. We have to work on such an extensive amount of material that we could not really work if we have something in hand. I do not want to stop proceedings but I think too much is being demanded of us and this is why I have to object to further exhibits being offered.
THE PRESIDENT: I understand this is the last document to be offered this afternoon. Is that correct, counsel?